| Author | Type of study | Conclusion |
| Gradishar W, et al. (2006) [2] | Analysis: multiple prospective study | Sequential recommended: Tamoxifen & Anastozole Combo is better |
| Baum M, 1988 [3] | Global multi-centric prospective | Adjuvant Tamoxifen on pre & postmenopausal Advantage: No comment on CON V SEQ |
| Pritchard KI, 2008 [14] | Review & Reflective | Hormone with chemo; CON V SEQ: yet a matter of debate |
| Albain K, et al. 2002 [15] | Prospective & Randomized | Should be “sequenced not concurrent” |
| Pico C, et al. 2004 [16] | Trend in favor of sequential | Trend in favor of sequential |
| Bedgonetti D, et al. 2011 [17] | Prospective & Randomized | No diff: CON V SEQ: Poor statistical power |
| Del Mastro L, et al. 2008 [18] | Prospective & Randomized | OS, DFS, Toxicity score: CON V SEQ = no difference Decreasing hazard of death-SEQ-group |
| Sideras K, 2010 [19] | Prospective & Randomized | Post-menopausal node +, Oe + − > SEQ more effective |
| Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) 2005 [20] | Prospective & Randomized 145,000 pt―15 yr FU | CT + SEQ Tam significantly better than CT + No Tam CON V SEQ − not recorded |