ArticleJournal of translational medicine2019
Clinical and genetic risk factors for Fulvestrant treatment in post-menopause ER-positive advanced breast cancer patients.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- New perspectives on endocrine therapy suitability for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in clinical practice.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Review
- Role of PRMT1 and PRMT5 in Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Treatment effects after maxillary expansion using invisalign first system vs. acrylic splint expander in mixed dentition: a prospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Cost-utility analysis of different venous access devices in breast cancer patients: a decision-based analysis model.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Discovery of Highly Functionalized 5-hydroxy-2Cancers · 2022Article
- A novel CD74-ROS1 gene fusion in a patient with inflammatory breast cancer: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2021Article
- Synthesis of Tamoxifen-Artemisinin and Estrogen-Artemisinin Hybrids Highly Potent Against Breast and Prostate Cancer.ChemMedChem · 2020Article
- Computer-Aided Ligand Discovery for Estrogen Receptor Alpha.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- lncRNA CYTOR promotes tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer cells via sponging miR‑125a‑5p.International journal of molecular medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- FOXO1 and hsa-microRNA-204-5p affect the biologic behavior of MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2020Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Fulvestrant 500mg in Hormone-receptor Positive Human Epidermal Receptor 2 Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: A Real-world Study in China.Journal of Cancer · 2020Article
- Detection ofFrontiers in oncology · 2020Review
- Inhibition of Histone Demethylases LSD1 and UTX Regulates ERα Signaling in Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2019Article
- Article
- Risk Factors for Totally Implantable Access Ports Associated Complications in Breast Cancer Patients.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAmong breast cancer (BC) patients, near 40% are post-menopause, and 70%-80% are hormone receptor (HR)-positive. About 30%-40% BC patients who are diagnosed as invasive carcinoma HR-positive BC would eventually develop metastatic breast cancers. In 2016, FALCON trial proves Fulvestrant as an effective first-line endocrine therapy for post-menopause HR-positive advanced BC (ABC) patients. But even after FALCON published, Fulvestrant is rarely used as first-line in real world ABC patients in China.
methodIn this study, 136 Fulvestrant users were enrolled from 2015. To investigate the clinical and genetic risk factors for Fulvestrant treatment response in real world data, biostatistic and bioinformatic analysis tools were adopted.
resultKM curves showed that Fulvestrant first-line users had a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 15.67 months, which was longer than the second-line users and third (or higher)-line users (mPFS = 7.47 and 5.43 months, respectively). 16 s (or higher)-line users were voluntarily received circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing after progression. ctDNA testing results showed that compared to patients with PFS longer than 6 months, Fulvestrant users with PFS less than 6 months had a significantly higher mutation rate of ESR1 or ERBB2 gene (0/6 vs 6/10, Fisher's Exact p-value = 0.03). Multivariate COX regression analysis showed that clinical features, including lymph node metastasis and HER-2 positive, were significant risk factors for poor PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.396 and 2.863, respectively]; high portion of estrogen receptor-positive cells was significant protective factor (HR = 0.663). Propensity-score matching (PMS) analysis suggested that visceral metastasis, prior palliative chemotherapy, and old age at Fulvestrant usage were not significant influential factor for PFS.
conclusionFirst-line Fulvestrant usage could guarantee a better prognosis than higher-line usage. ESR1 or ERBB2 mutation was found to be related to poor PFS in higher-line Fulvestrant users.
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.