Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2011
Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Platinum-containing regimens for triple-negative metastatic breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Platinum-containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- The prognostic values of CYP2B6 genetic polymorphisms and metastatic sites for advanced breast cancer patients treated with docetaxel and thiotepa.Scientific reports · 2015Trial
- A non-inferiority, phase III trial of gemcitabine plus capecitabineTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Article
- Drug repurposing for breast cancer therapy: Old weapon for new battle.Seminars in cancer biology · 2021Review
- Maintenance chemotherapy after 6 cycles of platinum-doublet regimen in anthracycline-and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2021Article
- Metastatic and triple-negative breast cancer: challenges and treatment options.Drug delivery and translational research · 2018Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Vinorelbine Plus Cisplatin vs. Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin for Treatment of Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer After Failure with Anthracyclines and Taxanes.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
- Targeting FOSB with a cationic antimicrobial peptide, TP4, for treatment of triple-negative breast cancer.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine (GemVin) Regimen.Hospital pharmacy · 2014Article
- Phase I and II Study of Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine in Heavily Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer and Review of the Literature.Journal of Cancer · 2014Article
- Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Combined With Systemic Chemotherapy for Patients With Liver Metastases From Breast Carcinoma.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn increasing proportion of patients are exposed to anthracyclines and/or taxanes in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Re-exposure in the metastatic stage is limited by drug resistance, thus evaluation of non-cross-resistant regimens is mandatory.
methodsAnthracycline-pretreated patients were randomly assigned to three gemcitabine-based regimens. Chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine 1.000 mg m(-2) plus vinorelbin 25 mg m(-2) on days 1+8 (GemVin), or plus cisplatin 30 mg m(-2) on days 1+8 (GemCis), or plus capecitabine 650 mg m(-2) b.i.d. orally days 1-14 (GemCap), q3w. The primary end point was response rate.
resultsA total of 141 patients were recruited on the trial. The overall response rates were 39.0% (GemVin), 47.7% (GemCis) and 34.7% (GemCap). Median progression-free survival was estimated with 5.7, 6.9 and 8.3 months, respectively. Corresponding median survival times were 17.5 (GemVin), 13.0 (GemCis) and 19.4 months (GemCap). Neutropenia ≥grade 3 occurred in 16.7% (Gem/Vin), 4.4% (GemCis) and 0% (Gem/Cap), whereas non-haematological toxicities were rarely severe except grade 3 hand-foot syndrome in 2.0% of the GemCap patients (per patient analysis).
conclusionsThis randomised phase II trial has revealed comparable results for three gemcitabine-based regimens regarding treatment efficacy and toxicity. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to be a worthwhile treatment option for pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.
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.