Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35218673›Full record

Trial reportCancer science2022

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Endometrial Cancer (ACE) trial: A randomized phase II study for advanced endometrial carcinoma.

Tomomi Egawa-Takata, Yutaka Ueda, Kimihiko Ito, Kensuke Hori, Shoji Tadahiro, Takayuki Nagasawa, Shin Nishio, Kimio Ushijima, Nishino Koji, Takayuki Enomoto and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

21 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Tomomi Egawa-TakataDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Amagasaki, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3088-1091
Yutaka UedaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8760-6379
Kimihiko ItoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Amagasaki, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3115-7997
Kensuke HoriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Amagasaki, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3146-4919
Shoji TadahiroDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University, Shiwa, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9022-3333
Takayuki NagasawaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University, Shiwa, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8279-4649
Shin NishioDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2526-630X
Kimio UshijimaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6087-8873
Nishino KojiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6218-8641
Takayuki EnomotoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4538-5541
Akira KikuchiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Niigata Cancer Center, Niigata, Japan.
Shigeru HonmaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Niigata Cancer Center, Niigata, Japan.
Tetsuro OishiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tottori University School of Medicine, Yonago, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9374-0101
Muneaki ShimadaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tottori University School of Medicine, Yonago, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1826-6723
Yuji TakeiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1744-5570
Hiroyuki FujiwaraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8888-9937
Hiroshi TanabeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1301-719X
Aikou OkamotoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5079-0464
Yukihiro NishioDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka Police Hospital, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3802-3518
Tomomi YamadaDepartment of Medical Innovation Data Coordinating Center, Osaka University Hospital, Suita, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5855-8897
Tadashi KimuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-9078
Iwate Medical University · JPJichi Medical University · JPJikei University School of Medicine · JPKansai Rosai Hospital · JPKurume University · JPNiigata Cancer Center Hospital · JPNiigata University · JPOsaka Gakuin University · JPOsaka Police Hospital · JPTottori University · JPOsaka University Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of three postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for endometrial cancer. Endometrioid cancer patients with intermediate-risk stage I and II or high-risk stage III and IV disease were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of either paclitaxel-epirubicin-carboplatin (TEC), paclitaxel-anthracycline (doxorubicin)-carboplatin (TAC), or dose-dense paclitaxel-carboplatin (ddTC). The primary end-point was the completion rate (CRate) of six cycles of treatment. The secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). One hundred and one patients were treated as follows: 33 received TEC, 33 TAC, and 35 ddTC. The CRates for TEC, TAC, and ddTC were 94%, 64%, and 69%, respectively (P = .005). The TEC CRate was significantly higher than for the other two groups. However, the PFS and OS outcomes were not statistically different between the three groups. The 2-year survival rates were 94%, 97%, and 97% for TEC, TAC, and ddTC, respectively. When compared to the current standard treatments for endometrial cancer, TEC is a promising candidate for a phase III trial based on its significantly superior CRate and equivalent PFS and OS. This study is registered with UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000008911).

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsEndometrial NeoplasmsCarboplatinChemotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleHumansNeoplasm StagingPaclitaxelCarboplatinPaclitaxelcarboplatindoxorubicinendometrial cancerepirubicinpaclitaxel

Identifiers

PMID35218673
PMCPMC9128191
OpenAlexW4214677931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.