Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026829›Full record

ArticleSurgery open science2023

Efficacy and safety of utidelone plus capecitabine in advanced first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer: A multicenter real-world study.

Pingping Bi, Xi Wang, Rui Liu, Xiuqin Li, Shanrong Wei, Jiawen Zhao, Xin Tan, Fan Zhang, Qing Mao, Ying Zhang and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

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

16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Pingping BiDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Xi WangDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Rui LiuDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Xiuqin LiDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Shanrong WeiDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Jiawen ZhaoDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Xin TanBreast Department, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, China.
Fan ZhangBreast Surgery B Dept, Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital, China.
Qing MaoDepartment of Breast Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, China.
Ying ZhangDepartment of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, The Third People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, China.
Baoyan TangBreast and Thyroid Surgery, People's Hospital of Wenshan Zhuang and Miao Autonomous Prefecture, Yunnan Province, China.
Xueqiong XunDepartment of breast Surgery, First People's Hospital of Qujing, Qujing, China.
Rong GuoDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Kai ZhengDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Shaoqiang ZhouDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Shicong TangDepartment of Breast Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, Kunming, China.
Kunming Medical University · CNChongqing Cancer Hospital · CNGuangxi Medical University · CNPeople’s Hospital of Wenshan Prefecture · CNQujing Normal University · CNThird People's Hospital of Yunnan Province · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of utidelone plus capecitabine for advanced first-line versus second-line or above therapy in metastatic breast cancer patients who had previously received anthracycline and taxane. At the same time, we compared the efficacy of utidelone plus capecitabine and vinorelbine plus cisplatin in advanced first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Patients and methods: A retrospective cohort of 11 patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracycline and taxane (including neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies) for advanced first-line with utidelone plus capecitabine, 32 patients treated with second-line or above, and 60 patients with vinorelbine plus cisplatin between October 2011 and August 2022 was collected. The first and second groups were treated with utidelone plus capecitabine, and the third group was treated with vinorelbine plus cisplatin. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment safety. Results: By 03/31/2023, median PFS reached 11.70 months (95 % CI 0.093-0.141) in utidelone plus capecitabine group in the advanced first-line therapy, compared to 5.60 months (95 % CI 0.025-0.079) in the second-line or above therapy [HR 0.42, (95 % CI 0.226-0.787), P = 0.0077]. In utidelone plus capecitabine, the median OS was not reached in the advanced first-line therapy, with a mean overall survival of 23.16 months (95 % CI 0.198-0.265); whereas the median OS in the second-line or above therapy was 19.50 months (95 % CI 0.083-0.307), with a mean overall survival of 16.89 months (95 % CI 0.136-0.202) [HR 0.26, (95 % CI 0.098-0.678), P = 0.0495]. The ORR for advanced first-line therapy was 27.27 % (95%CI 0.060, 0.610) compared with 15.63 % (95%CI 0.053, 0.328) for second-line or above. In advanced first-line therapy, utidelone plus capecitabine was superior to vinorelbine plus cisplatin with a median PFS of 6.12 months (95 % CI 0.051-0.072) [HR 0.49, (95 % CI 0.286-0.839), P = 0.0291]. Compared with utidelone plus capecitabine, the median OS in vinorelbine plus cisplatin advanced first-line therapy group was 35.37 months (95 % CI 0.258-0.449), and the mean overall survival was 40.79 months (95 % CI 0.315-0.501) [HR 0.54, (95 % CI 0.188-1.568), P = 0.2587]. The ORR for vinorelbine plus cisplatin was 18.33 % (95 % CI 0.095, 0.304). The most common adverse events in our study were neurological toxicity, hand-foot syndrome, hematological toxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, and hepatic and renal function abnormalities. There were no deaths due to adverse effects during the utidelone plus capecitabine treatment period. Conclusions: In MBC, advanced first-line therapy with utidelone plus capecitabine resulted in more favorable PFS, OS, and ORR than second-line or above therapy. In advanced first-line therapy, utidelone plus capecitabine had superior PFS, and ORR compared with vinorelbine plus cisplatin. This study concludes that utidelone plus capecitabine is a more valuable chemotherapy option in advanced first-line MBC.

Indexed as

CapecitabineFirst-line therapyMetastatic breast cancerUtideloneVinorelbine

Identifiers

PMID38026829
PMCPMC10665706
OpenAlexW4388076049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.