Trial reportThoracic cancer2019
The efficacy of amrubicin third-line chemotherapy in patients with relapsed extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer: A retrospective and historical study in a single institute.
Trial report in Thoracic cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the second-line treatments for patients with small cell lung cancer sensitive to previous platinum-based chemotherapy: A systematic review and Bayesian network analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- A comparison of clinical guidelines, treatment characteristics and outcomes in small cell lung cancer between East Asia and Europe/North America.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Rare Combined Small Cell Lung Carcinoma and Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma Response to PD-1 Inhibitor as Third-Line Therapy: A Case Report.Cancer management and research · 2023Article
- Lung immune prognostic index as a prognostic factor in patients with small cell lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of amrubicin for relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has been reported in previous studies. Few reports, however, describe the efficacy and survival benefit of third-line amrubicin chemotherapy in patients with extensive disease (ED)-SCLC.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical records of ED-SCLC patients treated with amrubicin salvage chemotherapy as a third-line chemotherapy between January 2005 and July 2016 (salvage amrubicin group). The efficacy and toxicities of amrubicin were evaluated. Overall survival (OS) in the amrubicin salvage group was compared with OS among ED-SCLC patients treated with at least second-line chemotherapy between May 2000 and July 2016 and without subsequent amrubicin salvage chemotherapy.
resultsA total of 18 patients with a median age of 70 years were analyzed in the amrubicin salvage group. The median number of treatment cycles of amrubicin was four. The response rate was 27.8% (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.1%-48.5%), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 66.7% (95% CI, 44.9%-88.4%). Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months (95% CI, 1.0-4.9 months), and median OS after an initial chemotherapy was 18.1 months (95% CI, 10.2-26.0 months). OS in the amrubicin salvage group was significantly longer than in the no-amrubicin group (n = 19; 12.6 months, 95% CI, 11.5-13.8 months, P = 0.005). The frequency of neutropenia greater than grade 3 was 72.2%, with febrile neutropenia developing in 38.9% of patients in the amrubicin salvage group.
conclusionsDespite a high frequency of febrile neutropenia, amrubicin salvage chemotherapy may improve OS in patients with relapsed ED-SCLC.
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.