↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of platinum-based and non-platinum-based drugs on triple-negative breast cancer: meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Research, October 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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 platinum-based and non-platinum-based drugs on triple-negative breast cancer: meta-analysis
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research, October 2022
DOI 10.1186/s40001-022-00839-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Canling Lin, Jiajun Cui, Zhen Peng, Kai Qian, Runwen Wu, Yimin Cheng, Weihua Yin

Abstract

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), the subtype of breast cancer with the highest mortality rate, shows clinical characteristics of high heterogeneity, aggressiveness, easy recurrence, and poor prognosis, which is due to lack of expression of estrogen, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. Currently, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) is still the major clinical treatment for triple-negative breast cancer. Chemotherapy drugs can be divided into platinum and non-platinum according to the presence of metal platinum ions in the structure. However, which kind is more suitable for treating TNBC remains to be determined. The relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that explore the effectiveness of chemotherapy regimens containing platinum-based drugs (PB) or platinum-free drugs (PF) in treating TNBC patients were retrieved through PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and other literature platforms, above research findings, were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of overall remission rate (ORR), pathological complete remission rate (pCR), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AE) were compared between the two groups. In this study, 12 clinical trials with a total of 4580 patients were included in the analysis. First, the ORR in 4 RCTs was, PB vs PF = 52% vs 48% (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.91-1.21, P = 0.48); the pCR in 5 RCTs was, PB vs PF = 48% vs 41% (RR = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.88-2.16, P = 0.17). CI: 0.88-2.16, P = 0.17; the other 2 RCTs reported significantly higher DFS and OS rates in the PB group compared with the PF group, with the combined risk ratio for DFS in the PB group RR = 0.22 (95% CI:0.06-0.82, P = 0.015); the combined risk ratio for DFS in the PF group RR = 0.15 (95% CI. 0.04-0.61, P = 0.008); OS rate: PB vs PF = 0.046 vs 0.003; secondly, 2 RCTs showed that for patients with BRCA-mutated TNBC, the pCR rate in the PB and PF groups was 18% vs 26%, 95% CI: 2.4-4.2 vs 4.1-5.1; meanwhile, the median subject in the PB group The median PFS was 3.1 months (95% CI: 2.4-4.2) in the PB group and 4.4 months (95% CI: 4.1-5.1) in the PC group; finally, the results of the clinical adverse effects analysis showed that platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens significantly increased the incidence of adverse effects such as thrombocytopenia and diarrhea compared with non-platinum regimens, while the incidence of adverse effects such as vomiting, nausea, and neutropenia was reduced. The incidence of adverse reactions was reduced. Compared with non-platinum drugs, platinum drugs significantly improved clinical treatment effective indexes, such as PCR, ORR, PFS, DFS, and OS rate in the treatment of TNBC patients without BRCA mutant may cause more serious hematological adverse reactions. Accordingly, platinum-based chemotherapy should be provided for TNBC patients according to the patient's special details.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 25%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 6 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 04 May 2023.
All research outputs
#3,225,356
of 25,392,582 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Research
#83
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,130
of 439,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Research
#6
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,582 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 439,255 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.