ArticleBrazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica2013
Capecitabine maintenance therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.
Article in Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metastasizing to the colon from triple-negative breast cancer: A case report and review of literature.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Paclitaxel's Mechanistic and Clinical Effects on Breast Cancer.Biomolecules · 2019Review
- Hormonal therapy might be a better choice as maintenance treatment than capecitabine after response to first-line capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy for patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer.Chinese journal of cancer · 2016Article
- Docetaxel/S-1 Versus Docetaxel/Capecitabine as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study.Medicine · 2015Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine maintenance therapy (CMT) after capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The clinical data of 139 metastatic breast cancer patients treated from March 2008 to May 2012 with capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. When initial disease control was achieved by the combination chemotherapy, we used CMT for 50 patients, while 37 patients were treated with a different (non-CMT) maintenance therapy. We compared time to progression (TTP), objective response rate, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, and safety of the two groups, and a sub-group analysis was performed according to pathological characteristics. Sixty-four percent of the patients received a median of six cycles of a docetaxel+capecitabine combination chemotherapy regimen (range 1-45); the median TTP (MTTP) for the complete treatment was 9.43 months (95%CI=8.38-10.48 months) for the CMT group and 4.5 months (95%CI=4.22-4.78 months; P=0.004) for the non-CMT group. The MTTPs for the maintenance therapies administered after the initial capecitabine combined chemotherapy were 4.11 months (95%CI=3.34-4.87 months) for the CMT group and 2.0 months (95%CI=1.63-2.38 months) for the non-CMT group. Gastrointestinal side effects, decreased white blood cells and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia were the main adverse reactions experienced with the combination chemotherapies, CMT and non-CMT treatments. No significant differences in the incidence of adverse reactions were detected in the CMT and non-CMT patients. After initial disease control was achieved with the capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy, CMT can significantly prolong TTP rates with a favorable safety profile.
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.