ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2015
Pirarubicin versus doxorubicin in neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIB limb high-grade osteosarcoma: does the analog matter?
Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of combination-chemotherapy with pirarubicin, ifosfamide, and etoposide for soft tissue sarcoma: a single-institution retrospective analysis.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- Progress in the chemotherapeutic treatment of osteosarcoma.Oncology letters · 2018Review
- Treatment of osteosarcoma around the knee in skeletally immature patients.Oncology letters · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pirarubicin (THP), a novel anthracycline derivative of doxorubicin (ADM), is effective in treating patients with advanced, relapsed or recurrent high-grade osteosarcoma. But its role in neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy of osteosarcoma is still not defined. We conducted a retrospective evaluation of THP-containing chemotherapy for osteosarcoma in comparison with ADM-containing chemotherapy to determine differences in efficacy and toxicities between THP- and ADM-containing regimens. From January 2008 to May 2011, 112 stage IIB limb high-grade osteosarcoma patients were treated in our institute. Fifty-four patients received a median 6 cycles of neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of THP (pirarubicin), DDP (cisplatin), IFO (ifosfamide) and MTX (methotrexate), while 58 patients received a median 6 cycles of neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of ADM (doxorubicin), DDP (cisplatin), IFO (ifosfamide) and MTX (methotrexate). Efficacy and toxicity of the 2 anthracyclines given as combination chemotherapy were assessed in these patients. The limb salvage rate, histologic response rate, 2-year recurrence rate, 2-year metastasis rate, 2-year disease-free survival rate, 2-year overall survival rate, median disease-free survival time (DFS) and median overall survival time (OS) in THP-containing group were similar to that in ADM-containing group. Toxicities were well balanced in two groups. No death related to chemotherapy was observed. Left ventricular ejection fraction was unchanged 1 and 2 years after chemotherapy in two groups. Efficacy and toxicity of THP-containing combination are similar to those of ADM-containing combination in neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIB limb high-grade osteosarcoma.
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.