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.
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.
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.
Phase 3 Study of Regimens Comparison for Breast Cancers of Positive Lymph Nodes
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Astragalus polysaccharides improve adjuvant chemotherapy-induced fatigue for patients with early breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Synergistic Effect of Paclitaxel and Epirubicin Coadministration─Insight into the Mechanisms of Interactions with Model Breast Cancer Cell Membranes.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2025Article
- Advances in research on malignant tumors and targeted agents for TOP2A (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2025Review
- Cluster analysis of hotspots and research trends of epirubicin-induced cardiotoxicity: a bibliometric study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel for taxane acute pain syndrome in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Balancing Fertility Preservation and Treatment Efficacy in (Neo)adjuvant Therapy for Adolescent and Young Adult Breast Cancer Patients: a Narrative Review.Current oncology reports · 2024Review
- Enhancement of paclitaxel production by Neopestalotiopsis vitis via optimization of growth conditions.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.