ArticleCancer medicine2021
First-line nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results of the NEPTUN study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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
backgroundPlatinum-based chemotherapy remains a first-line standard of care for approximately 30% of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) not harboring a druggable alteration. Favorable efficacy and safety of the nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin (nab-P/C) combination was shown in the pivotal phase 3 trial. However, information on effectiveness of nab-P/C in a real-world setting in Germany is missing. The NEPTUN study prospectively investigated the effectiveness and safety of nab-P/C in patients with advanced NSCLC in a real-world setting.
methodsPatients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC received first-line nab-P/C according to clinical routine. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6). Other endpoints included further effectiveness parameters, safety and quality of life. Data were analyzed descriptively.
results408 patients were enrolled. PFS6 was 40.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 35.3-46.2); median PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.5-5.7). overall response rate was 41.5% (95% CI, 36.3-46.8). Median overall survival (OS) was 10.5 months (95% CI, 9.2-11.6). Subgroup analyses revealed median OS for squamous versus non-squamous histology (11.8 months [95% CI, 9.2-13.8] vs. 9.6 months [95% CI, 7.7-11.2]) and age ≥70 versus <70 years (11.7 months [95% CI, 9.4-14.3] vs. 9.6 months [95% CI, 7.5-11.2]). Most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were anemia (26.5%), leukopenia (25.7%), and thrombocytopenia (16.6%). Mostly reported grade 3/4 TEAEs were leukopenia (10.2%), anemia (8.6%), and pneumonia (5.1%). nab-paclitaxel-related deaths as reported by the investigator occurred in 0.8% of patients.
conclusionThese real-world data support the effectiveness and safety of nab-P/C as first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC independent of tumor histology. The results are comparable with the pivotal phase 3 trial. No new safety signals emerged.
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.