STAT: Chemotherapy before breast cancer surgery might fuel metastasis
Rating: 4 Stars
- The headline is easy to understand and the article is well-written and well researched.
- However, the opening statement is somewhat misleading, readers may assume the results of the study were applicable to all breast cancer patients who get neoadjuvant chemotherapy will develop metastasis.
- Several independent opinions are presented.
- When the author mentions a prior study or source, she clearly links to that original quote or study.
- This article clearly describes what “neoadjuvant chemotherapy”, “TMEM” and “metastasis” mean.
- The article quotes one of the study authors cautioning jumping to conclusions based on this research and recommending further research to confirm the results.
- This article mentions new drug research that looks promising.
- Finally, the author quotes a researcher discussing a simple lab test that might determine who is at risk for metastases to occur; however, the actual lab test name is not mentioned and the quote from the researcher is incomplete.
Medical Xpress: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induces breast cancer metastasis through a TMEM-mediated mechanism
Rating: 3 Stars
- The headline matches what the article states; however, the wording is complicated and likely difficult for a lay person to understand.
- The article is rather brief and does not present any opposing or findings or research.
- The only sourcing is the original research article.
- The article is easy to read and does highlight the novelty of the findings.
Daily Mail UK: Chemotherapy could cause cancer to SPREAD and grow back even more aggressive, new study claims
Rating: 2.5 Stars
- The headline is alarmist with the word “SPREAD” in capital letters.
- While the headline does clearly match what the article claims, the sensationalistic way of writing can have the effect of exaggerating the claims.
- There is no research in the study that supports the claim in the headline that the metastasized cancer is more aggressive.
- Chemotherapy is portrayed in a very negative way - the side effects are listed in a sidebar.
- The article is difficult to read, with bullet points, and one sentence paragraphs.
- There are several sources listed and outside sources are referenced.
- The author defines terms and new research.
- Several supporting studies are referenced.