ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2025
Efficacy of sacituzumab govitecan versus treatment of physician's choice in previously treated HR+ and HER2- mBC: a meta-analysis of TROPiCS-02 and EVER-132-002 trials.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The efficacy and safety of sacituzumab govitecan in the treatment of breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis of emerging clinical data.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: TROPiCS-02 and EVER-132-002 are phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing sacituzumab govitecan (SG) to treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR+/HER2-) locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who have progressed after two to four prior chemotherapy regimens. TROPiCS-02 enrolled mainly non-Asian patients, whereas EVER-132-002 consisted of only Asian participants. In this study, we compared the efficacy outcomes for SG to TPC via a meta-analysis of the two trials. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data (PRISMA-IPD) guidelines were followed. IPD from the trials were assessed for integrity, consistency, imbalances, or missing values and were combined to estimate pooled and relative treatment effects for comparison of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), objective response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR) in the overall, cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) pre-treated, and fast-progressors population (defined as the subgroup of patients with duration of prior CDK4/6i ⩽12 months). Results: In general, TROPiCS-02 and EVER-132-002 had a similar distribution of baseline population characteristics except for prior CDK4/6i treatment and geography. In the overall meta-analytic model, SG showed a significant improvement over TPC in PFS (hazard ratio (HR), 0.62 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.77); Conclusion: In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirms that SG significantly improves clinical outcomes in patients with HR+/HER2- mBC, including those pre-treated with CDK4/6i and fast-progressors when compared to TPC. These findings extend previous research, supporting the integration of SG into clinical practice guidelines at a global level for treating the HR+/HER2- mBC population irrespective of status and duration of prior CDK4/6i exposure.
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.