Trial reportAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2010
Docetaxel versus docetaxel alternating with gemcitabine as treatments of advanced breast cancer: final analysis of a randomised trial.
Trial report in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00191243 (A Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Single-Agent Docetaxel to Alternating Docetaxel-Gemcitabine as Primary Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Single-Agent Docetaxel to Alternating Docetaxel-Gemcitabine as Primary Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2014Guideline
- Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Distribution of blood eosinophil counts in the Chinese general population.The European respiratory journal · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of first-line treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: A network meta-analysis.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2024Review
- Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Palliative Chemotherapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Real-World Evidence Analysis.The oncologist · 2020Article
- Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as a viable option for treatment of advanced breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis and literature review.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- A Multicenter Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with Docetaxel and Gemcitabine in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer.Journal of breast cancer · 2017Article
- A systematic review of gemcitabine and taxanes combination therapy randomized trials for metastatic breast cancer.SpringerPlus · 2014Article
- Eribulin -- a review of preclinical and clinical studies.Critical reviews in oncology/hematology · 2012Review
- Myelosuppression of thrombocytes and monocytes is associated with a lack of synergy between chemotherapy and anti-VEGF treatment.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlternating administration of docetaxel and gemcitabine might result in improved time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and fewer adverse events compared with single-agent docetaxel as treatment of advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsWomen diagnosed with advanced breast cancer were randomly allocated to receive 3-weekly docetaxel (group D) or 3-weekly docetaxel alternating with 3-weekly gemcitabine (group D/G) until treatment failure as first-line chemotherapy. The primary end point was TTF.
resultsTwo hundred and thirty-seven subjects were assigned to treatment (group D, 115; group D/G, 122). The median TTF was 5.6 and 6.2 months in groups D and D/G, respectively (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.16; P = 0.31). There was no significant difference in time-to-disease progression, survival, and response rate between the groups. When adverse events were evaluated for the worst toxicity encountered during treatment, there was little difference between the groups, but when they were assessed per cycle, alternating treatment was associated with fewer severe (grade 3 or 4) adverse effects (P = 0.013), and the difference was highly significant for cycles when gemcitabine was administered in group D/G (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe alternating regimen was associated with a similar TTF as single-agent docetaxel but with fewer adverse effects during gemcitabine cycles.
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.