ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2025
Comparative effectiveness and safety of enzalutamide versus abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a nationwide registry-based cohort study from Taiwan.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe real-world effectiveness and safety of abiraterone or enzalutamide in the Asian population with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains unclear.
methodsUsing the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified a cohort of 3056 patients diagnosed with mCRPC receiving abiraterone or enzalutamide from January 1, 2017 through April 30, 2020, followed until December 31, 2021. We applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to balance the treatment groups and compare outcomes between the two treatment groups. Effectiveness outcomes included all-cause death, prostate cancer-related death, and treatment failure. Safety outcomes included major adverse CV events (MACE), fractures, and venous thromboembolism (VTE).
resultsEnzalutamide use was associated with superior overall survival (hazard ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.96) compared with abiraterone use, which was majorly contributed from pre-docetaxel use (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.98) but not post-docetaxel use (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.80-1.07). The median overall survival of pre-docetaxel abiraterone and enzalutamide was 36.1 and 39.9 months, respectively. In contrast, the median overall survival of post-docetaxel abiraterone and enzalutamide was 22.5 and 24.2 months, respectively. In terms of safety outcomes, enzalutamide use was significantly associated with lower VTE events compared with abiraterone use, but there was no difference in MACE or fracture risk between enzalutamide and abiraterone.
conclusionsWe demonstrated the survival of enzalutamide and abiraterone use in Taiwanese patients with mCRPC is consistent with pivotal trials. The higher VTE risk with abiraterone use should be monitored.
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.