ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2023
A meta-analysis of the incidence and risk of skin toxicity with nab-paclitaxel and paclitaxel in cancer treatment.
Review in American journal of translational research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel (SYHX2011) in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Identification of factors associated with rash during gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel treatment for pancreatic cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Not Just Neurons: Pain Is Orchestrated in Partnership with Many Non-neuronal Cells.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Review
- Biological Nanocarriers in Cancer Therapy: Cutting Edge Innovations in Precision Drug Delivery.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Incidence and prognosis of taxane-induced macular edema: a retrospective study from the Japan Clinical REtina Study Group (J-CREST).Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Proteomic Analysis of Dorsal Root Ganglia in a Mouse Model of Paclitaxel-Induced Neuropathic Pain.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Proteomic analysis of dorsal root ganglia in a mouse model of paclitaxel-induced neuropathic pain.PloS one · 2024Article
- Keratinocyte Piezo1 drives paclitaxel-induced mechanical hypersensitivity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSkin toxicity of varying severity occurs mostly during various courses of chemotherapy. In clinical trials and practice, we have found that both nab-paclitaxel and paclitaxel cause side effects such as rash and pruritus. To further clarify the incidence of rash and pruritus in both, we conducted the present study by a systematic evaluation, the results of which can be used to guide clinical dosing choices.
methodsAn electrical search was performed on randomized controlled research trials of nab-paclitaxel and paclitaxel for the treatment of malignancies. The necessary data were extracted, integrated, and analyzed from the included studies by systematic evaluation and meta-analysis, depending on the study design. Further subgroup analyses were performed to explore the incidence of rash and pruritus in nab-paclitaxel and paclitaxel.
resultsEleven studies with a total of 971 patients with malignancy were included. Four studies were application of single-agent nab-paclitaxel compared with paclitaxel, and seven studies were comparative chemotherapy drug combinations. The incidence of rash was higher in all grades of nab-paclitaxel than that in paclitaxel (OR=1.39, CI 95% [1.18-1.62]); the incidence of rash was higher in lower grades of paclitaxel than that in solvent-based paclitaxel (OR=1.31, CI 95% [1.11-1.53]); the incidence of rash was higher in all grades in the single-agent application comparison. The incidence of rash was higher in nab-paclitaxel than that in paclitaxel (OR=1.81, CI 95% [1.26-2.59]); there was no significant difference in the incidence of pruritus between nab-paclitaxel and paclitaxel (OR=1.19, CI 95% [0.88-1.61]).
conclusionIn comparison with paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel significantly increased the risk of a teething rash. There was a significant risk correlation between nab-paclitaxel and teething rash. Early prevention, identification, and treatment of rash could significantly improve patient's quality of life and optimize their clinical survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37434856PMC10331690W4383998747What 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.