Trial reportIntegrative cancer therapies
Multi-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Exploratory Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HAD-B1 for Dose-Finding in EGFR Mutation Positive and Locally Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC Subjects Who Need Afatinib Therapy.
Trial report in Integrative cancer therapies. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemical Constituents and Pharmacological Properties of Frankincense: Implications for Anticancer Therapy.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2024Pooled it
- A Randomized, Multi-Center, Open Label Study to Compare the Safety and Efficacy between Afatinib Monotherapy and Combination Therapy with HAD-B1 for the Locally Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC Patients with EGFR Mutations.Integrative cancer therapiesTrial
- Comparison of Plasma Metabolites From Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer by Erlotinib Treatment and Skin Rash.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Afatinib is a target anticancer drug of the second-generation EGFR TKI type, showing an advantage in treatment effect compared to conventional chemotherapy. However, patients on EGFR-TKI drugs also usually progress after 9 to 13 months according to secondary resistance. HAD-B1 is composed of drugs that are effective against lung cancer. This study is an exploratory study to evaluate the efficacy and safety between dosage groups by conducting a clinical trial in subjects requiring afatinib drug treatment in non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation positive to determine the optimal dosage for HAD-B1 administration. At the final visit compared to before administration, each change in the disease control rate was measured according to the HAD-B1 doses of the test group 1 (972 mg), the test group 2 (1944 mg), and the control group. The efficacy and safety of HAD-B1 were compared and evaluated through sub-evaluation variables. As a result of the study, there was no statistically significant difference in the disease control rate at 12 weeks after dosing, but complete and partial remission were evaluated as 1 patient each in the test group 1, and none in the other groups. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in the sub-evaluation variable. In addition, there was no problem of safety from taking the test drug. However, the initially planned number of subjects was 66, but the number of enrolled subjects was only 14, which may limit the results of this study.
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.