ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2025
Sacituzumab Govitecan initial dose reduction in polish patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: impact on efficacy and safety.
Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2025. 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.
- Primary G-CSF prophylaxis in sacituzumab govitecan-treated mTNBC: real-world evidence from a multinational CEBCC-102 cohort.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Observational
- Effectiveness of sacituzumab govitecan in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a real-world retrospective cohort study from Central Europe.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Impact of GermlineOncology research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSacituzumab govitecan (SG) is approved for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in ≥ 2 line setting at 10 mg/kg IV on Days 1 and 8 (21-day cycle). Trials confirmed its superiority over 8 mg/kg with manageable safety. In practice, precautionary dose reductions are used despite no formal guidance. In Poland, fixed 200 mg vials and unreimbursed drug waste lead to early dose adjustments.
methodsThis retrospective study evaluated the impact of initial SG dose reduction on treatment outcomes and tolerability in Polish patients. Medical records provided data on baseline features, treatment, survival, and safety. Kaplan-Meier and chi-square tests were used for survival and group comparisons. A multivariate Cox model assessed the independent effect of dose reduction on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsAmong 83 patients (median age 55, range 30-86), initial dose reductions ≥ 10% were observed in 16 patients (19.3%), including 9 (10.8%) with dose reduced ≥ 20%. Administrative adjustments (reductions > 10% to flat doses of 200 mg multiplications) accounted for 18.1% of the entire cohort. Grade ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 83.1% and 56.6%, respectively. In a multivariate analysis, a ≥ 20% initial dose reduction remained an independent predictor of shorter PFS (HR: 2.6; 95% CI: 1.1-6.6; p = 0.04) and OS (HR: 6; 95% CI: 2-17.5; p = 0.001). Initial dose reduction did not affect toxicity.
conclusionsIn this preliminary report initial dose reduction of SG negatively impacted PFS and OS without reducing toxicity, highlighting the need for further studies and dosing policy adjustments.
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.