↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Clinical significance of locoregional and systemic treatment in operable high-risk breast cancer patients with more than four positive axillary lymph nodes

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Clinical significance of locoregional and systemic treatment in operable high-risk breast cancer patients with more than four positive axillary lymph nodes
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, September 2015
DOI 10.2147/ott.s88216
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kai Yin, Liheng Zhou, Zhimin Shao, Wenjin Yin, Jinsong Lu

Abstract

Breast cancer cases with four or more involved axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) feature an aggressive clinical history despite intensive treatment. However, therapies for improving the prognosis for these high-risk patients and the prognostic role of clinical characteristics have been little investigated. Therefore, we sought to assess potential prognostic factors for these patients in female Chinese patients and identify the treatment modalities they might benefit from, which offers implications for clinical practice. A total of 518 patients with four or more involved ALNs were retrospectively analyzed. Survival-curve analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard regression was applied to identify independent variables for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The patients were divided into groups depending on the number of ALNs, with 38.22% having four to six positive ALNs and 61.78% having seven or more ALNs. Compared with the seven or more-positive ALN subgroup, patients with four to six positive ALNs tended to have smaller tumors and were more likely to undergo modified radical mastectomy rather than radical mastectomy (both P<0.001). Univariate analysis revealed that a fluorouracil/doxorubicin (epirubicin)/cyclophosphamide (CA[E]F) regimen or a CA(E)F followed by docetaxel (CA[E] F > T) regimen conferred significantly better DFS (P=0.0075) and OS (P<0.0001) than those achieved from a cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/fluorouracil regimen, which was almost completely generated by the seven or more ALN subgroup (P=0.0088 and P=0.0001, respectively). Postoperative radiotherapy was associated with better DFS (P=0.0360), which was also generated by the seven or more ALN subgroup (P=0.0107). Subgroup analysis also clarified that the type of surgery conferred a modest effect on DFS in the seven or more ALN subgroup (P=0.0305). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that ALN status (hazard ratio [HR] 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-3.05; P=0.001), tumor size (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.08; P=0.022), and type of surgery (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.74; P=0.001) were independent prognostic factors for DFS. Meanwhile, ALN status (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.51-5.77; P=0.002), tumor size (HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.38-3.89; P=0.001), type of surgery (HR=0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.76; P=0.006), and regimen of chemotherapy (HR=0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.85; P=0.002) were identified as independent prognostic factors for OS. Besides the classical prognostic factors and the improvement of prognosis achieved from the anthracycline-based or anthracycline-taxane combination chemotherapy compared to cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/fluorouracil chemotherapy, our findings showed benefits on DFS and OS for appropriate local treatments, including radiotherapy and sufficient ALN dissection for high-risk breast cancer patients with four or more ALNs involved, which suggests that much importance should also be attached to local treatment besides adjuvant systemic therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 7%
Unknown 13 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Lecturer 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 3 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Decision Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 6 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,345,004
of 25,870,940 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,455
of 3,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,186
of 277,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#45
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,870,940 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,017 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 277,690 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.