Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34844978›Full record

Trial reportClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2022

A Randomized Trial of Fulvestrant, Everolimus, and Anastrozole for the Front-line Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hormone Receptor-positive Breast Cancer, SWOG S1222.

Halle C F Moore, William E Barlow, George Somlo, Julie R Gralow, Anne F Schott, Daniel F Hayes, Peter Kuhn, James B Hicks, Lisa Welter, Philip A Dy and 7 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 42% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Liquid biopsies in cancer.Molecular biomedicine · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 12 institutions in 2 countries.

Halle C F MooreCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.ORCID 0000-0002-7472-9350
William E BarlowSWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, Washington.
George SomloCity of Hope Medical Center, Duarte, California.
Julie R GralowUniversity of Washington School of Medicine/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0003-3837-9928
Anne F SchottUniversity of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Daniel F HayesUniversity of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0003-3620-7575
Peter KuhnUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0003-2629-4505
James B HicksUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0001-5353-4338
Lisa WelterUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0003-4597-4901
Philip A DyCrossroads Cancer Center (Cancer Care Specialists of Illinois), Heartland NCORP, Decatur, Illinois.
Christina H YeonCity of Hope, South Pasadena Cancer Center, South Pasadena, California.
Alison K ConlinPacific Cancer Research ConsortiumNCORP, Portland, Oregon.
Ernie BalcuevaMichigan CRC NCORP, St. Mary's of Michigan, Saginaw, Michigan.
Danika L LewSWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, Washington.
Debasish TripathyThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-5711-2404
Lajos PusztaiYale University, New Haven, Connecticut.ORCID 0000-0001-9632-6686
Gabriel N HortobagyiThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-4873-4412
University of Southern California · USData Management (Italy) · ITMichigan Medicine · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USCalifornia Institute of Technology · USCity Of Hope National Medical Center · USCleveland Clinic · USHeartland Cancer Research · USProvidence Portland Medical Center · USSeattle Cancer Care Alliance · USSt. Mary's Medical Center · USUniversity of New Haven · US

Funding

SWOG Network Group Operations Center of the NCTNU10CA180888 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI PRIMO N. LARA · 2014 to 2026
$152.1M
SWOG Statistics & Data Management Center complex - extension supplement for GY06U10CA180819 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Michael L. LeBlanc · 2014 to 2026
$115.2M
NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180819NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180888
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMetastatic hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer is an important cause of cancer mortality. Endocrine treatment with or without additional targeted therapies has been the mainstay of treatment. This trial was designed to evaluate the combination of fulvestrant plus everolimus versus fulvestrant, everolimus, and anastrozole compared with fulvestrant alone in the first-line treatment of advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis randomized placebo-controlled trial included postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had received no prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Participants were randomized to one of three treatment arms and the primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), comparing combinations of fulvestrant and everolimus with or without anastrozole with fulvestrant alone. Circulating tumor cells (CTC), as measured with two different methods, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were evaluated serially prior to treatment and the beginning of the second cycle of therapy.

resultsDue in part to changes in clinical practice, the study was closed after accruing only 37 participants. There was no evidence that everolimus-containing combination treatment improved PFS or overall survival relative to fulvestrant alone. When modeled continuously, an association was observed of baseline CTC and ctDNA with poorer survival.

conclusionsAlthough power of the study was limited, the findings were unable to support the routine use of everolimus combination endocrine therapy in the first-line treatment of advanced hormone-sensitive breast cancer. Prognostic impact of baseline ctDNA and copy-number variations in CTC was demonstrated.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEverolimusAnastrozoleAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFulvestrantHumansReceptors, EstrogenAnastrozoleErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesEverolimusFulvestrantReceptors, Estrogen

Identifiers

PMID34844978
PMCPMC9782801
OpenAlexW3216352272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.