ReviewDrugs2002
Treatment of breast cancer with chemotherapy in combination with filgrastim: approaches to improving therapeutic outcome.
Review in Drugs, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The safety of full-dose chemotherapy with secondary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) following a prior cycle with febrile neutropenia.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2005Trial
- The survival impact of palliative chemotherapy dose modifications on metastatic colon cancer.BMC cancer · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chemotherapy improves disease-free and overall survival in breast cancer, and its benefit is directly related to the percentage of the planned dose that is actually administered. In all current chemotherapeutic regimens, a substantial proportion of patients have reductions and/or delays in dosage due to side effects. In about half such cases, the delays or reductions are related to neutropenia. Overall, approximately 30% of patients have a reduction to less than 85% of the planned dosage. Women aged > or = 50 years are more likely to experience a reduction or delay in dose. Dose-intense regimens (excluding myeloablative high-dose chemotherapy) which increase the dose of chemotherapy or reduce the interval between cycles, or both, are a promising approach now under investigation. The human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor filgrastim reduces the incidence of neutropenia and facilitates adherence to full dose intensity in both standard and dose-intensified regimens. A model based on the first-cycle absolute neutrophil count nadir has been developed and validated to determine which patients should receive filgrastim. A cost benefit associated with the use of filgrastim in patients with breast cancer has been realised. This may lead to a re-evaluation of the current treatment guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.