ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Real-world effectiveness and safety of Sacituzumab Govitecan in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: results from the multicenter retrospective observational SACISUR cohort in Southern Spain.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Toxicities of Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Breast Cancer: From Mechanistic Insights to Clinical Management.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) has demonstrated efficacy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in clinical trials, but real-world data from routine clinical practice remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of SG in mTNBC patients in Southern Spain. Methods: This observational, multicenter, retrospective study included 159 mTNBC patients who received at least one cycle of SG between January 2022 and December 2023. Primary endpoints included real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), overall survival (rwOS), and safety. Secondary endpoints explored treatment tolerability and management of adverse events. A pre-specified subset analysis focused on patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases. Results: The median age of patients at diagnosis was 50 years (46.5% premenopausal). Median rwPFS was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.7-6.3) and rwOS was 10.9 months (95% CI 7.6-14.2). The objective response rate was 31.2%, with a disease control rate of 68.9%. Patients with CNS metastases (13.8%) had a median rwPFS of 2.3 months (95% CI 1.3-3.2). The most common adverse events were neutropenia (59.4%, grade 3-4: 30.4%) and diarrhea (49%, grade 3-4: 8.2%). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was administered as primary prophylaxis in 29.6% of patients and as secondary prophylaxis in 17.6%. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 5.7% of patients, while 43.4% required at least one dose reduction. Conclusion: SG demonstrated effectiveness and tolerability in mTNBC patients treated in routine practice, including those with CNS metastases, consistent with ASCENT trial results. These findings support the use of SG in clinical practice for mTNBC patients and suggest clinically meaningful activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with CNS involvement, despite the clinical challenges presented by this subgroup.
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.