Trial reportCurrent problems in cancer2026
Outcomes for females versus males treated with eribulin mesylate for advanced urothelial carcinoma.
Trial report in Current problems in cancer, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMultiple studies of bladder cancer noted worse outcomes in females compared to males. Few focused on prospective comparisons of sex regarding treatment response, survival, and toxicity. This phase 2 study compared outcomes of males and females with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with eribulin mesylate.
methodsPatients were treated with eribulin on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Primary endpoint was best observed response (ORR) per RECIST. Secondary endpoints included disease control (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were assessed in a subset of patients.
resultsFemales and males had similar ORR, DCR, PFS, OS, and toxicities. Thirty-one percent of females and 33% of males experienced a CR or PR (p=0.86); 57% females and 59% of males experienced disease control (p=0.86). There was a higher percentage of CRs amongst females (16% vs 4%). For females and males respectively, median PFS was 4.1 and 4.0 months, while median OS was 9.7 and 9.2 months. Forty-three percent of females and 35% of males experienced Grade 4+ hematologic toxicity (p=0.38). Females had more Grade 2+ nausea and vomiting than males. Females had lower AUCs (median: 913 vs. 1,129 µg/L·hr, p=0.023), but there was no difference in other PK parameters. There was a correlation of poorer baseline ECOG status with grade 3+ non-hematologic toxicity, but this was similar between sexes. Women with baseline grade 1+ anemia were more likely to develop grade 2+ anemia during therapy. Multivariate analysis of baseline characteristics relative to outcome measures did not demonstrate significant differences between females and males.
conclusionIn patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with eribulin, there were no significant differences in toxicity, ORR, DCR, PFS, or OS between males and females. Females receiving eribulin therapy may warrant use of standard antiemetic prophylaxis more than males. MICRO ABSTRACT: The study compared the outcomes of males and females with advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with eribulin mesylate. Male and females had similar observed response rates, disease control rates, progression free survival, overall survival (OS), and toxicity. There was a higher rate of complete responses (CR) observed amongst females compared to males, and this may warrant further study.
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.