phase 3 prospective nsabp b-40 trial (NSABP Foundation)
90
Structured Review
NSABP Foundation
phase 3 prospective nsabp b-40 trial
Phase 3 Prospective Nsabp B 40 Trial, supplied by NSABP Foundation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/nsabp-40/phase+3+prospective+nsabp+b+40+trial/pmc11526682-187-26-29
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
Phase 3 Prospective Nsabp B 40 Trial, supplied by NSABP Foundation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/nsabp-40/phase+3+prospective+nsabp+b+40+trial/pmc11526682-187-26-29
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
phase 3 prospective nsabp b-40 trial - by Bioz Stars,
2026-10
90/100 stars
Images
Related Articles
Adjuvant:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Comparison:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Selection:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Biomarker Discovery:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Sequencing:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Staining:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on In Situ:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Polymerase Chain Reaction:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Irradiation:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Infection:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Imaging:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Control:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on Magnetic Resonance Imaging:Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Background Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptornegative metastatic breast cancer.. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this diIerential activity extends to early breast cancer.. Objectives To assess eIects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic. Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Six included studies (31 records) referred to six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Given unblinded study, high risk due to difference in toxicity profile Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints; all randomised patients included in ITT analysis Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Adequate reporting of pre‐specified primary and secondary endpoints Other bias Low risk No other sources of bias detected Open in a Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: The six Article Title: Capecitabine for hormone receptor‐positive versus hormone receptor‐negative breast cancer Article Snippet: Open in a separate window 9.4 Analysis Comparison 9: Neoadjuvant: addition of capecitabine vs standard chemotherapy, Outcome 4: PCR triple‐negative (breast and nodes). . Disease‐free survival Four studies reported data on |