ArticleDiscover oncology2025
Real-world comparison of doxorubicin-ifosfamide versus gemcitabine-docetaxel regimens in metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma: a multicenter retrospective study.
Article in Discover 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
51 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUterine leiomyosarcoma is a rare and aggressive malignancy with limited responsiveness to standard therapies. We conducted a real-world, multicenter study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of two commonly used first-line chemotherapy regimens-doxorubicin-ifosfamide and gemcitabine-docetaxel-in patients with metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma.
methodsThis retrospective cohort included 271 patients with advanced or metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma treated between 2010 and 2023 across 30 centers in Turkey. Patients received either doxorubicin-ifosfamide (n = 142) or gemcitabine-docetaxel (n = 129) as first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, and safety. Adverse events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0, while survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and further analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsMedian overall survival was 19.7 months with doxorubicin-ifosfamide and 20.2 months with gemcitabine-docetaxel (P = .26). Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months with doxorubicin-ifosfamide and 7.0 months with gemcitabine-docetaxel (P = .62). The objective response rate was numerically higher with gemcitabine-docetaxel (35% vs. 26%), although not statistically significant (P = .11). Grade 3-4 neutropenia (16% vs. 12%) and febrile neutropenia (7% vs. 6%) were more frequent with doxorubicin-ifosfamide.
conclusionsIn this largest-to-date real-world cohort of metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma, doxorubicin-ifosfamide and gemcitabine-docetaxel demonstrated comparable survival outcomes. Gemcitabine-docetaxel, however, was associated with a more favorable hematologic safety profile. These findings support the clinical utility of both regimens while underscoring the need for prospective, biomarker-driven studies to refine treatment selection and improve personalization in this rare malignancy.
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.