Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39528547›Full record

ArticleBJC reports2024

Efficacy and safety of sacituzumab govitecan Trop-2-targeted antibody-drug conjugate in solid tumors and UGT1A1*28 polymorphism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rehena Sultana, Sylvia Chen, Elaine Hsuen Lim, Rebecca Dent, Balram Chowbay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJC reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Impact ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
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

5 authors.

Rehena Sultana *Centre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
Sylvia Chen *Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Cellular & Molecular Research, National Cancer Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Elaine Hsuen LimDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Rebecca DentDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Balram ChowbayLaboratory of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Cellular & Molecular Research, National Cancer Centre, Singapore, Singapore. ctebal@nccs.com.sg.

Funding

National Medical Research Council MOH-000984
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSacituzumab govitecan (SG) is a promising Trop-2-targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) approved for the treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Early phase clinical trials have demonstrated good clinical activity and safety profile of SG in various tumor types, albeit with differing response rates and durations. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and toxicity of SG and the influence of UGT1A1*28 genotype in clinical trials involving solid tumors.

methodsA systematic review of the literature from publicly available databases was performed on February 15, 2024 whereby studies published till 15 February 2024 were retrieved according to PRISMA guidelines [PROSPERO #CRD42022359943]. Data extracted included tumor type, sample size, demographic information, SG dose, UGT1A1*28 status, toxicity events, duration of follow-up, response, and survival outcomes. Risks of bias analysis was refereed using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool for the cohort and RCT studies using 11 and 13 parameters, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed using the DerSimonian and Laird inverse variance methods. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I

resultsEleven eligible clinical trials comprised of 1578 patients harboring various tumor types including TNBC, lung, genitourinary and gastrointestinal malignancies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Pooled incidences of severe adverse events were minimal at <10%, with the exception of grade 3-4 neutropenia at 37.4%. The median PFS and OS across all studies were 4.9 (95%CI: 4.0-5.8) months and 9.6 (95%CI: 7.6-11.6) months, respectively. Objective response rate across all studies evaluated was 17.1% (95%CI: 12.0-22.1).

conclusionOur systematic review and meta-analysis confirmed that SG confers good clinical activity in certain solid tumor types and was tolerable with minimal adverse events. The potential utility of UGT1A1*28 genotyping in predicting clinical response and outcomes could not be determined due to the limited number of studies with available UGT1A1 genotype data.

Identifiers

PMID39528547
PMCPMC11554802

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.