↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of Anti-HER2 Agents in Combination With Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Early and Locally Advanced HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Efficacy of Anti-HER2 Agents in Combination With Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Early and Locally Advanced HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00156
Pubmed ID
Authors

Márcio Debiasi, Carisi A. Polanczyk, Patrícia Ziegelmann, Carlos Barrios, Hongyuan Cao, James J. Dignam, Paul Goss, Brittany Bychkovsky, Dianne M. Finkelstein, Rodrigo S. Guindalini, Paulo Filho, Caroline Albuquerque, Tomás Reinert, Evandro de Azambuja, Olufunmilayo Olopade

Abstract

Several (neo)adjuvant treatments for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer have been compared in different randomized clinical trials. Since it is not feasible to conduct adequate pairwise comparative trials of all these therapeutic options, network meta-analysis offers an opportunity for more detailed inference for evidence-based therapy. Phase II/III randomized clinical trials comparing two or more different (neo)adjuvant treatments for HER2-positive breast cancer patients were included. Relative treatment effects were pooled in two separate network meta-analyses for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). 17 clinical trials met our eligibility criteria. Two different networks of trials were created based on the availability of the outcomes: OS network (15 trials: 37,837 patients); and DFS network (17 trials: 40,992 patients). Two studies-the ExteNET and the NeoSphere trials-were included only in this DFS network because OS data have not yet been reported. The concept of the dual anti-HER2 blockade proved to be the best option in terms of OS and DFS. Chemotherapy (CT) plus trastuzumab (T) and lapatinib (L) and CT + T + Pertuzumab (P) are probably the best treatment options in terms of OS, with 62.47% and 22.06%, respectively. In the DFS network, CT + T + Neratinib (N) was the best treatment option with 50.55%, followed by CT + T + P (26.59%) and CT + T + L (20.62%). This network meta-analysis suggests that dual anti-HER2 blockade with trastuzumab plus either lapatinib or pertuzumab are probably the best treatment options in the (neo)adjuvant setting for HER2-positive breast cancer patients in terms of OS gain. Mature OS results are still expected for the Aphinity trial and for the sequential use of trastuzumab followed by neratinib, the treatment that showed the best performance in terms of DFS in our analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 29 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 April 2022.
All research outputs
#6,307,490
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#2,019
of 22,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,286
of 344,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#33
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,741 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,491 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.