Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36826820›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2023

Effect of Epirubicin Plus Paclitaxel vs Epirubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Paclitaxel on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Operable ERBB2-Negative and Lymph Node-Positive Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Peng Yuan, Yikun Kang, Fei Ma, Ying Fan, Jiayu Wang, Xue Wang, Jian Yue, Yang Luo, Pin Zhang, Qing Li and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase IIIEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01134523 (Phase 3 Study of Regimens Comparison for Breast Cancers of Positive Lymph Nodes), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

NCT01134523 phase3unknown statusnot on this map

Phase 3 Study of Regimens Comparison for Breast Cancers of Positive Lymph Nodes

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese Academy of Medical SciencesRan2010 to 2020Enrolled1,000ConditionsBreast CancerArmsEpirubicin, CTX, Paclitaxel, Epirubicin, Paclitaxel
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peng YuanDepartment of VIP Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yikun KangDepartment of VIP Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Fei MaDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ying FanDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jiayu WangDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xue WangDepartment of VIP Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jian YueDepartment of VIP Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yang LuoDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Pin ZhangDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Qing LiDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Binghe XuDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Adjuvant therapy is an important and effective treatment for breast cancer. However, there is a lack of head-to-head clinical trials comparing the regimens epirubicin plus paclitaxel (EP) vs epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel (EC-P) in breast cancer. Objective: To evaluate the noninferiority of a cyclophosphamide-free (EP) regimen compared with the standard EC-P regimen for patients with operable hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative, lymph node-positive breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, open-label, phase 3, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from June 1, 2010, to June 30, 2016, in the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing. Patients with hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative, lymph node-positive operable breast cancer were included and randomized into 2 treatment groups. Data were analyzed from June 30, 2016, to November 1, 2022. Interventions: Patients received adjuvant epirubicin (75 mg/m2) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) every 3 weeks for 6 cycles (EP regimen) or epirubicin (90 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles (EC-P regimen) as the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), distant DFS, and safety. Results: A total of 900 patients were registered, and 813 eligible patients (median age, 48 [IQR, 41-56] years) were randomly assigned to the EP group (n = 407) or the EC-P group (n = 406) after the surgical procedure. Through a median follow-up of 93.6 (IQR, 60.9-114.1) months, the hazard ratio (HR) of DFS for EP vs EC-P was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.62-1.10; 5-year DFS, 86.0% vs 80.6%; noninferior P = .001). The 5-year OS for the ITT population treated with the EP or the EC-P regimen was 94.7% vs 95.0%, respectively (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.61-1.49]). Patients in the EP group had more frequent toxic effect events than those in the EC-P group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective, open-label, phase 3, randomized clinical trial, the EP regimen was noninferior to the EC-P regimen. These findings supported that the EP regimen could be an effective adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for women with ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01134523.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCyclophosphamideDisease-Free SurvivalEpirubicinErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFluorouracilHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMiddle AgedPaclitaxelProspective StudiesCyclophosphamideEpirubicinERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFluorouracilPaclitaxel

Identifiers

PMID36826820
PMCPMC9958529
OpenAlexW4321749387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.