Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2016
Randomised phase III trial of FEC120 vs EC-docetaxel in patients with high-risk node-positive primary breast cancer: final survival analysis of the ADEBAR study.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of adverse event reporting in phase III randomized controlled trials of breast and colorectal cancer: A systematic review.Cancer medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Taxanes for adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Adjuvant Effect of Molecular Iodine in Conventional Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer. Randomized Pilot Study.Nutrients · 2019Trial
- Article
- Does chemotherapy improve survival in patients with nodal positive luminal A breast cancer? A retrospective Multicenter Study.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTaxane-containing adjuvant chemotherapy has been established as standard treatment in node-positive breast cancer. This study compared efficacy and tolerability of epirubicin (E)/cyclophosphamide (C) followed by docetaxel (Doc) with a dose-dense 5-fluorouracil (F)+E+ C regimen.
methodsThe ADEBAR study was a randomised phase III trial for women with primary invasive breast cancer and ⩾4 metastatic axillary lymph nodes (n=1364). Treatment consisted of four 21-day cycles of E plus C, followed by four 21-day cycles of Doc (EC-Doc), or six 28-day cycles of E plus F plus C (FEC120).
resultsDisease-free survival (DFS) was similar in the two treatment arms as shown by multivariate Cox regression adjusted for other prognostic factors (EC-Doc vs FEC120, hazard ratio (HR): 1.087; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.878-1.346, P=0.444). In addition, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups (HR: 0.974; 95% CI: 0.750-1.264, P=0.841). Haematologic toxicity was more common in FEC120 recipients; non-haematologic toxicities occurred more frequently in the EC-Doc arm. The serious adverse event rate was significantly higher in the FEC120 group (29.7% vs 22.5%).
conclusionsEC-Doc provides a feasible and effective alternative therapy option to FEC120 with a different safety profile in this high-risk breast cancer cohort.
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.