ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2024
Comparative efficacy & safety of buparlisib plus fulvestrant, fulvestrant plus dalpiciclib, and ribociclib plus letrozole for postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive, and HER2-negative breast cancer.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of dalpiciclib combined with endocrine therapy in elderly patients with HRFrontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare progression-free survival, overall survival, clinical benefits, and adverse effects in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer who received buparlisib plus fulvestrant against those of women who received dalpiciclib plus fulvestrant, considering ribociclib plus letrozole treatment as the reference standard.
methodsWomen received buparlisib plus fulvestrant (BF cohort, n = 108), dalpiciclib plus fulvestrant (DF cohort, n = 132), or ribociclib plus letrozole (RL cohort, n = 150) until unacceptable toxicity was observed.
resultsA total of 117 (89 %), 80 (74 %), and 84 (56 %) women in the BF, DF, and RL cohorts, respectively, had clinical benefits. After treatment, the clinical benefits for women and after 42 months of follow-up progression-free survival and overall survival were higher in the DF cohort than in the BF and RL cohorts (p < 0.05 for all). Neutropenia, vomiting, constipation, nausea, diarrhea, and anorexia were reported higher in women of the DF and BF cohorts than in women of the RL cohort. Leukopenia and increased levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase were reported to be higher in women in the RL cohort than in women in the DF and BF cohorts. Depression, anxiety, and increased levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase were reported to be higher in women in the BF cohort than in women in the DF and RL cohorts.
conclusionsDalpiciclib plus fulvestrant is effective and comparatively safe in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancers. Dalpiciclib, buparlisib, fulvestrant, and ribociclib cause neutropenia, severe depression, adverse gastroenterological effects, and adverse hepatological effects, respectively.
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.