ArticleThe oncologist2026
Clinical outcomes of sacituzumab govitecan in older patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a multinational real-world study.
Article in The oncologist, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOlder adults with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) remain underrepresented in clinical trials. Although sacituzumab govitecan (SG) improved outcomes in the phase III ASCENT trial, real-world data in older populations remain limited. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, multinational study across 18 oncology centers in Central Europe, including patients with mTNBC treated with SG between August 2021 and May 2025. Patients were stratified by age at SG initiation: <65 vs ≥65 years. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), treatment modifications, and safety.
resultsAmong 303 patients, 76 (25.1%) were aged ≥65 years. Older patients had more comorbidities, more prior palliative treatment lines, and more frequent ECOG performance status ≥1. In unadjusted analyses, patients aged ≥65 years had longer median OS (12.8 vs 10.9 months; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49-0.99; P = 0.045) and PFS (5.4 vs 4.1 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.97; P = 0.031). ORR, DCR, treatment modifications, and grade ≥3 neutropenia were comparable between groups. In multivariable analyses, age was not independently associated with OS or PFS.
conclusionIn this selected real-world cohort, patients aged ≥65 years who received SG had outcomes at least comparable to those of younger patients, without an apparent excess severe toxicity. Survival differences were likely influenced by baseline disease characteristics and patient selection rather than chronological age alone.
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.