ArticleCancer research and treatment2018
Safety Results and Analysis of Eribulin Efficacy according to Previous Microtubules-Inhibitors Sensitivity in the French Prospective Expanded Access Program for Heavily Pre-treated Metastatic Breast Cancer.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2018. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emerging treatment approaches for triple-negative breast cancer.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2023Review
- Eribulin Efficacy on Brain Metastases in Heavily Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Second-line Eribulin in Triple Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer patients. Multicentre Retrospective Study: The TETRIS Trial.International journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
- Eribulin in Triple Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: Critic Interpretation of Current Evidence and Projection for Future Scenarios.Journal of Cancer · 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
13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEribulin is approved for advanced breast cancers refractory to anthracyclines and taxanes. Efficacy according to sensitivity to previous therapies has been poorly explored. MATERIALS AND
methodsSafety data were collected prospectively and we retrospectively collected efficacy data from the five French centres that participated in the Eribulin E7389-G000-398 expanded access program. Our main objectiveswere exploration of safety and analysis of eribulin efficacy (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) according to sensitivity to the last microtubule-inhibiting agent administered.
resultsMedian eribulin treatment duration was 3.3 months for the 250 patients included in this prospective single-arm study. Two hundreds and thirty-nine patients (95.6%) experienced an adverse event (AE) related to treatment including 129 (51.6%) with grade ≥ 3 AEs. The most frequently observed toxicities were cytopenias (59.6% of included patients), gastrointestinal disorders (59.2%), and asthenia (56.4%). The most frequent grade 3-4 AE was neutropenia (37.2% with 4.8% febrile neutropenia). Median PFS and OS were 4.6 and 11.8 months, respectively. Patients classified as responders to the last microtubule-inhibiting therapy had a longer OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.94; p=0.017), and tended to display a better PFS (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.04; p=0.086). OS improvement was still significant in multivariate analysis (adjusted HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.79; p=0.002).
conclusionThis work based on a prospective study suggests that identification of patients likely to be more sensitive to eribulin could be based on their previous response to microtubules inhibitors.
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.