ArticleBMC cancer2020
Real-world efficacy and safety of two doses of cabazitaxel (20 or 25 mg/m
Article in BMC cancer, 2020. 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel versus other taxanes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- A real-world pharmacovigilance study of FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) events for cabazitaxel.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Current Evidence on Cabazitaxel for Prostate Cancer Therapy: A Narrative Review.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Review
- Baseline characteristics may impact treatment duration of cabazitaxel in patients with mCRPC: a subanalysis of data from a post-marketing surveillance.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe recommended starting dose of cabazitaxel for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is 25 mg/m
methodsWe compared the safety and efficacy of cabazitaxel between patients who received cabazitaxel at starting doses of 25 and 20 mg/m
resultsThe C20 and C25 groups comprised 190 and 159 patients without matching and 112 patients per group after matching. In unmatched patients, any-grade (C25 vs C20: 89.3% vs 78.4%, Fisher's p < 0.01) and grade ≥ 3 (81.1% vs 61.1%) ADRs were more frequent in the C25 group. Neutropenia (any grade: 61.6% vs 54.2%; grade ≥ 3: 55.3% vs 42.6%) and febrile neutropenia (grade ≥ 3: 30.2% vs 14.7%) were more frequent in the C25 group. In matched patients, the PSA response rate (reduction in PSA ≥30% from a baseline ≥5 ng/mL) was 26.4 and 32.0% in the C20 and C25 groups, respectively, median OS was 291 days (95% CI 230-not reached) versus not reached (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.08), and TTF favored C25 (hazard ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.99).
conclusionsClinicians should consider the patient's risk of clinically significant ADRs and prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor when selecting the starting dose of cabazitaxel for CRPC. Some patients at high risk of ADRs or unfit patients may benefit from a lower starting dose of 20 mg/m
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.