Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24402830›Full record

Trial reportBreast cancer research and treatment2014

A phase II, randomized, multicenter study evaluating the combination of lapatinib and vinorelbine in women with ErbB2 overexpressing metastatic breast cancer.

Wolfgang Janni, Tomasz Sarosiek, Boguslawa Karaszewska, Joanna Pikiel, Elzbieta Staroslawska, Piotr Potemski, Christoph Salat, Etienne Brain, Christian Caglevic, Kathryn Briggs and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. EGFR and HER2 signaling in breast cancer brain metastasis.Frontiers in bioscience (Elite edition) · 2016
    Article
  12. 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

13 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.

Wolfgang JanniDepartment Obstetrics and Gynecology, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Prittwitzstr. 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany, wolfgang.janni@uniklinik-ulm.de.
Tomasz Sarosiek
Boguslawa Karaszewska
Joanna Pikiel
Elzbieta Staroslawska
Piotr Potemski
Christoph Salat
Etienne Brain
Christian Caglevic
Kathryn Briggs
Michelle Desilvio
Luca Marini
Christos Papadimitriou
GlaxoSmithKline (United Kingdom) · GBAlexandra Hospital · GRCentrum Onkologii · PLFundación Arturo López Pérez · CLGlaxoSmithKline (United States) · USHôpital René Huguenin · FRLublin Oncology Center · PLMedical University of Lodz · PLNZOZ Centrum Alergologii · PLPraxis für Hämatologie und Onkologie · DEUniversity Hospital Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lapatinib is approved in combination with capecitabine for treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have progressed on prior trastuzumab in the metastatic setting. Vinorelbine is an important chemotherapy option for MBC. We evaluated efficacy and safety of lapatinib plus vinorelbine, compared with lapatinib plus capecitabine, in women with HER2-positive MBC. In this open-label, multicenter, phase II study, eligible patients (N = 112) were randomized 2:1 to lapatinib plus vinorelbine [(N = 75) 1,250 mg orally once daily (QD) continuously plus 20 mg/m(2)/day intravenously] or lapatinib plus capecitabine [(N = 37) 1,250 mg orally QD continuously plus 2,000 mg/m(2)/day orally, 2 doses]. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Other endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Patients progressing within the study were given the option of crossover to the other treatment arm; time to second progression was an exploratory endpoint. Patient demographics, stratification, and prognostic factors were well balanced between treatments. Median PFS in both arms was 6.2 months [95 % confidence interval (CI) 4.2, 8.8 (lapatinib plus vinorelbine); 4.4, 8.3 (lapatinib plus capecitabine)]. Median OS on lapatinib plus vinorelbine was 24.3 months (95 % CI 16.4, NE) and 19.4 months (95 % CI 16.4, 27.2) on lapatinib plus capecitabine. In total, 42 patients opted to cross over; median PFS was 3.2 months (95 % CI 1.7, 5.1) on lapatinib plus vinorelbine and 4.0 months (95 % CI 2.1, 5.8) on lapatinib plus capecitabine. Lapatinib plus vinorelbine offers an effective treatment option for patients with HER2-overexpressing MBC, having displayed comparable efficacy and tolerability rates to lapatinib plus capecitabine.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsCapecitabineDeoxycytidineDisease-Free SurvivalErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFluorouracilGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansLapatinibMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisQuinazolinesCapecitabineDeoxycytidineERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFluorouracilLapatinibQuinazolinesVinblastineVinorelbine

Identifiers

PMID24402830
PMCPMC3907671
OpenAlexW2045288005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.