ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2015
Systemic treatment with capecitabine as maintenance therapy in patients with recurring or metastatic breast cancer: experience in the Oncology Hospital, National Medical Center Siglo XXI, Mexican Social Security Institute.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fulvestrant versus capecitabine as maintenance therapy in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer after first-line chemotherapy (FAMILY): a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Trial
- Metastasizing to the colon from triple-negative breast cancer: A case report and review of literature.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Maintenance Therapy in HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A New Approach for an Old Concept.Clinical drug investigation · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metastatic breast cancer as initial onset represents between 20 and 30 % of cases and is considered an incurable disease. The goal of its treatment is palliative, looking for increasing the survival while reducing the symptoms. Maintenance chemotherapy studies for metastatic breast cancer have demonstrated to prolong the progression-free survival, with unclear results in terms of overall survival. The main objectives of our study were the progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with recurring or metastatic breast cancer treated with capecitabine in the maintenance chemotherapy setting compared with patients not receiving maintenance chemotherapy. As secondary objectives, the frequency of dose-limiting toxicities and response rate were determined. A non-probabilistic sampling was used, through expert selection of patients from the recurring/metastatic breast cancer survey cared within the period from January 1, 2007, to December 21, 2012. A total of 77 patients were included. Clinical data of advanced/recurrent breast cancer patients that were treated with capecitabine were recorded. The study achieved its primary objective, since the progression-free survival was prolonged for the maintenance therapy group: 6.6 versus 18.1 months, p < 0.001. The absolute benefit was 11.5 months. Likewise, there was a benefit in the overall survival of 21.03 versus 29 months, p = 0.015, with an absolute benefit of 7.97 months. The toxicity profile was favorable in the maintenance group. The maintenance chemotherapy with capecitabine in patients treated at the National Medical Center Siglo XXI Oncology Hospital extends the overall survival and progression-free survival with a good toxicity profile.
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.