ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2016
Efficacy and safety of axitinib in elderly patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2016. 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.
- Development and validation of a nomogram to evaluate the therapeutic effects of second-line axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Second line therapy with axitinib after only prior sunitinib in metastatic renal cell cancer: Italian multicenter real world SAX study final results.Journal of translational medicine · 2019Article
- Evaluation of efficacy and safety of sorafenib in kidney cancer patients aged 75 years and older: a propensity score-matched analysis.British journal of cancer · 2018Article
- Axitinib in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma: design, development, and place in therapy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of age on clinical outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving axitinib. This study included 144 consecutive mRCC patients who received axitinib for at least 12 weeks as second-line therapy in a routine clinical setting. The efficacy, safety and quality of life (QOL) were compared between patients aged <75 (n = 116) and ≥75 (n = 28) years. No significant differences in the clinicopathological characteristics were noted between younger and older patients. There was no significant difference in the response rate, clinical benefit rate or proportion of patients going on to receive third-line therapy between these two groups. In addition, the progression-free and overall survivals in older patients were similar to those in younger patients. There were no significant differences in the incidences of adverse events between these two groups, except for that of fatigue, which was significantly more frequent in older than younger patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of the discontinuation of axitinib due to adverse events between the two groups. QOL assessment at 12 weeks after the introduction of axitinib using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form showed no significant differences in any of the eight scale scores between the two groups. Taken together, it might be possible to achieve clinical outcomes in older patients receiving axitinib comparable to those in younger patients, suggesting that advanced age should not be a contraindication to treatment with axitinib as a second-line setting in mRCC patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27444960What 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.