ArticleCancer medicine2024
Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus chemotherapy after progression on prior palbociclib in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: A single center real-world study in China.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Young-Onset Gastric Cancer: Clinical and Genetic Perspectives.Journal of gastric cancer · 2026Review
- CDK4/6 as a Therapeutic Target in HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer Cells-Current Treatment Status.Cancers · 2025Review
- Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus chemotherapy after progression on prior palbociclib in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: A single center real-world study in China.Cancer medicine · 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy (ET) become standard-of-care for patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the optimal therapeutic paradigm after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitor remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib with switching ET versus chemotherapy after progression on prior palbociclib-based ET in Chinese patients with HR+/HER2- MBC.
methodsFrom 414 consecutive patients with HR+/HER2- MBC who had been treated with palbociclib plus ET from September 2018 to May 2022 in Peking University Cancer Hospital, we identified 80 patients who received abemaciclib plus switching ET or chemotherapy after progression on palbociclib, matched for age, original stage at diagnosis, disease-free interval, and tumor burden at 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox proportional hazard model was performed to identify clinical factors associated with PFS in the abemaciclib group.
resultsThe median PFS was 6.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.94-8.06) in abemaciclib group and 4.0 months (95% CI, 2.52-5.49) in chemotherapy group (p = 0.667). And, there was no difference in median PFS between the sequential and nonsequential arm (6.0 vs. 6.0 months) in the abemaciclib group though fewer lines of prior systemic therapy and longer PFS from prior palbociclib in the sequential arm. However, patients with prior palbociclib as the first-line therapy had a significantly longer median PFS versus prior palbociclib as ≥2nd-line therapy (11.0 vs. 5.0 months, p = 0.043). Based on multivariable analysis, ER+/PR+ was an independent factor associated with longer PFS. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the abemaciclib and chemotherapy groups (p = 0.069).
conclusionOur findings indicate that abemaciclib plus switching ET might be one of feasible treatment options for Chinese patients with HR+/HER2- MBC after progression on prior palbociclib-based therapy in addition to chemotherapy.
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.