Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11085347›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2000

Risks and benefits of taxanes in breast and ovarian cancer.

L B Michaud, V Valero, G Hortobagyi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Reduced-dose dexamethasone premedication for weekly paclitaxel: a retrospective cohort study of early hypersensitivity reactions and steroid-related toxicity.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Taxane acute pain syndrome (TAPS) in patients receiving chemotherapy for breast or prostate cancer: a prospective multi-center study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Clinical trials and progress with paclitaxel in ovarian cancer.International journal of women's health · 2010
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

L B MichaudBreast Oncology, Division of Pharmacy, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston 77030, Texas, USA.
V Valero
G Hortobagyi
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The taxanes are a unique class of agents with a broad spectrum of clinical activity. They act by binding to tubulin, producing unnaturally stable microtubules and subsequent cell death. The distribution and elimination of paclitaxel depend on dose and administration rate. This nonlinearity is much less evident at lower infusion rates (24-hour infusions) and more evident at high plasma concentrations (3-hour infusions). The pharmacokinetics of docetaxel also suggest the presence of nonlinear pathways, but these appear to be clinically insignificant at the current doses utilised (60 to 100 mg/m2). Both agents undergo hepatic metabolism and biliary excretion and require dose adjustment in the setting of liver dysfunction. Drug interactions are quite common with these agents, some of which are sequence-dependent and clinically significant. The optimal dose of paclitaxel is not known at this time, and controversy over possible dose- or schedule-related differences in efficacy still remain. Docetaxel is somewhat more consistent in its dose and scheduling information, but controversy remains regarding a dose-benefit relationship as well as scheduling differences (weekly vs every 3 weeks). Toxicity profiles for these agents are somewhat different. Paclitaxel is more likely to be associated with peripheral neuropathy and myalgias/arthralgias than docetaxel. Docetaxel is more likely to be associated with a cumulative fluid retention syndrome that can be dose limiting. Paclitaxel and docetaxel are both highly active agents against breast cancer, including tumours that are resistant to anthracyclines. Docetaxel tends to have higher response rates overall, but direct comparisons at maximally tolerated doses have not been completed. Combination regimens with many different agents are attempting to improve on the responses seen with single-agent taxanes. The combination of paclitaxel and a platinum compound should be utilised as first-line therapy of advanced ovarian cancer. Controversy lies in the choice of the platinum compound and the dose and administration schedule of paclitaxel. Substitution of docetaxel for paclitaxel in these platinum-containing regimens is also being investigated. The taxanes also exhibit activity against ovarian cancer in patients previously exposed to platinum agents. These agents may also be administered intraperitoneally for local therapy of metastatic ovarian cancer. Although docetaxel and paclitaxel are often considered similar in activity and tolerability, this review emphasises the fact that these agents are indeed different. Clinicians need to be familiar with the benefits and adverse events related to each agent in order to make informed, appropriate clinical decisions.

Indexed as

TaxoidsAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsClinical Trials as TopicDocetaxelDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHumansOvarian NeoplasmsPaclitaxelPremedicationAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicDocetaxelPaclitaxelTaxoids

Identifiers

PMID11085347
OpenAlexW1969409726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.