ArticleProstate international2021
Efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel therapy in elderly (≥75 years) patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: A multiinstitutional study.
Article in Prostate international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Testing for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Advanced Elderly Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.The Prostate · 2025Article
- Current Evidence on Cabazitaxel for Prostate Cancer Therapy: A Narrative Review.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Review
- A novel biguanide derivative, IM176, induces prostate cancer cell death by modulating the AMPK-mTOR and androgen receptor signaling pathways.Prostate international · 2023Article
- HOW TO OPTIMALLY SEQUENCE AVAILABLE THERAPY LINES IN ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER.Acta clinica Croatica · 2022Review
- Risk Factors and Clinical Significance of Grade ≥3 Neutropenia During the First Cycle of Cabazitaxel Therapy With Primary Pegfilgrastim Prophylaxis in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is little data on the outcome of cabazitaxel (CBZ) treatment of elderly patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of CBZ chemotherapy in patients with CRPC aged 75 years or older in a multiinstitutional study.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the 74 patients with CRPC treated with CBZ enrolled in 10 institutions. Clinicopathological backgrounds, prognosis including prostate-specific antigen decline, time to treatment failure, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety profiles were compared between younger (<75 years) and elder (≥75 years) patients.
resultsIn total, 74 patients were enrolled; 50 patients were younger than 75 years and 24 were ≥75 years. Clinicopathological characteristics were comparable between younger and elder patients, with the exception of serum albumin values at the time of CBZ treatment. The median prostate-specific antigen decline in younger and elder men was -8.8% and -32.3% from baseline, respectively. The median time to treatment failure, progression-free survival, and overall survival for younger and elder men were 0.24 and 0.33 years, 0.23 and 0.43 years, and 0.69 and 1.17 years, respectively. In addition, safety profiles were comparable between younger and elder patients.
conclusionsThis multiinstitutional study suggests that patients with CRPC aged 75 years or older eligible for CBZ treatment can be treated safely and with noninferior efficacy compared with those younger than 75 years.
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.