Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16622454›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2006

Is epirubicin effective in first-line chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after an epirubicin-containing adjuvant treatment? A single centre phase III trial.

C Pacilio, A Morabito, F Nuzzo, A Gravina, V Labonia, G Landi, E Rossi, E De Maio, M Di Maio, G D'Aiuto and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Filling in the gaps: reporting of concurrent supportive care therapies in breast cancer chemotherapy trials.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2011
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

17 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

C PacilioMedical Oncology C, National Cancer Institute, Via Mariano Semmola, 80131 Naples, Italy.
A Morabito
F Nuzzo
A Gravina
V Labonia
G Landi
E Rossi
E De Maio
M Di Maio
G D'Aiuto
G Botti
N Normanno
P Chiodini
C Gallo
F Perrone
A de Matteis
NCI-Naples Breast Cancer Group
Tumour Institute of Tuscany · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to demonstrate the superiority of docetaxel and epirubicin vs docetaxel alone as first-line therapy in metastatic breast cancer patients pretreated with adjuvant or neoadjuvant epirubicin. We compared single agent docetaxel 100 mg m-2 (D) with the combination of docetaxel 80 mg m-2 and epirubicin 75 mg m-2 (ED). The response rate (72 vs 79%), the progression-free survival (median 9 vs 11 months) and the overall survival (median 18 vs 21 months) were not significantly different between the ED (n=26) and D arms (n=25), respectively. Leucopaenia, nausea and stomatitis were significantly worse with ED. In conclusion, epirubicin should not be administered in combination with taxanes in metastatic breast cancer patients relapsed after an anthracycline-based adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy.

Indexed as

AdultAntibiotics, AntineoplasticAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsDocetaxelEpirubicinFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalSurvival AnalysisTaxoidsAntibiotics, AntineoplasticDocetaxelEpirubicinTaxoids

Identifiers

PMID16622454
PMCPMC2361414
OpenAlexW1986016645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.