Trial reportBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2018
Bi-weekly eribulin therapy for metastatic breast cancer: a multicenter phase II prospective study (JUST-STUDY).
Trial report in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A phase Ib/II study of eribulin in combination with cyclophosphamide in patients with advanced breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Trial
- Phase II trial of biweekly administration with eribulin after three cycles of induction therapy in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (JACCRO BC-03).Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Trial
- Identifying immune-related predictive factors for post-eribulin therapy in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer- a multicenter retrospective study.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of Eribulin-based chemotherapy in HER2 negative advanced breast cancer patients: a real-world study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Novel RAF/MEK inhibitor CH5126766/VS-6766 has efficacy in combination with eribulin for the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer.Cancer science · 2021Article
- Effect of renal function on neutrophil decreases following eribulin administration.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2020Article
- Chemotherapy Options beyond the First Line in HER-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.Journal of oncology · 2020Review
- Interim results of a real-world observational study of eribulin in soft tissue sarcoma including rare subtypes.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2019Observational
- Pharmacodynamic analysis of eribulin safety in breast cancer patients using real-world postmarketing surveillance data.Cancer science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate whether schedule modification is safe and effective in patients intolerant to the standard eribulin dose and schedule.
methodsPatients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treated with both anthracycline and taxane and ≤ 3 prior regimens of chemotherapy for MBC received eribulin at the standard dose and schedule (1.4 mg/m
resultsOf the 88 patients who were enrolled and received standard eribulin therapy in the first cycle, 42 patients were moved to the bi-weekly therapy group and 40 continued standard therapy. In the bi-weekly and standard therapy groups, mean relative dose intensity was 62.7 and 90.9%, CBR was 31.0 and 25.0%, median TTF was 81.5 and 75 days, and OS was 523 and 412 days, respectively. Neither group reported severe adverse events.
conclusionThis is the first study to show that a bi-weekly eribulin schedule is tolerable and has comparable efficacy in patients intolerant to the standard eribulin schedule. CLINICAL
trial registrationUniversity Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Center (ID: UMIN 000008491).
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.