Trial reportJournal of gynecologic oncology2026
Lobaplatin versus cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for elderly cervical cancer: randomized controlled phase II study.
Trial report in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis phase II study compared the efficacy and safety of lobaplatin vs. cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for elderly cervical cancer patients.
methodsElderly cervical cancer patients aged ≥65 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to lobaplatin-based (2 cycles of lobaplatin 30 mg/m² every 3 weeks) or cisplatin-based (5 cycles of cisplatin 40 mg/m² every week) CCRT. Radiotherapy included external beam radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) and intracavitary brachytherapy (30 Gy in 5 fractions).
resultsFrom January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2023, 64 patients were enrolled: 31 were randomly assigned to the lobaplatin group and 33 to the cisplatin group. The lobaplatin group showed higher chemotherapy completion rates compared to the cisplatin group (83.9% vs. 54.5%, p=0.011). The objective response rate and disease control rate were comparable between 2 groups (93.5% vs. 93.9%, 96.8% vs. 97.0%). The 1- and 2-year overall survival rates of the lobaplatin group and the cisplatin group were 96.0% vs. 96.6%, 90.7% vs. 96.6%, respectively (p=0.558). The lobaplatin group had a lower incidence of nephrotoxicity (39.4% vs. 9.7%, p=0.006), and there was also a trend of lower grade 2-3 gastrointestinal toxicity (30.3% vs. 12.9%, p=0.059), although the incidence of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was higher (16.1% vs. 6.1%, p=0.295), the difference was not statistically significant.
conclusionLobaplatin-based CCRT demonstrates comparable efficacy to cisplatin in elderly cervical cancer patients, with superior renal safety and improved gastrointestinal tolerability, establishing it as a viable alternative for cisplatin-intolerant populations.
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.