Trial reportInternational journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association2026
Sequential Enzalutamide-Docetaxel Versus Abiraterone-Docetaxel Therapy in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Subanalysis of the ENABLE Study.
Trial report in International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association, 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDocetaxel (DTX) is commonly employed in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) following failure of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs). However, the impact of prior ARSI treatment on the efficacy of subsequent DTX therapy remains unclear. This study aimed to compare oncological outcomes between enzalutamide (ENZ)-DTX and abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (ABI)-DTX sequential treatment strategies in patients with CRPC.
methodsThe ENABLE study for PCa was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized controlled trial conducted in Japan to compare ENZ and ABI. This subanalysis evaluated the efficacy of subsequent DTX therapy in patients who had received either ENZ or ABI.
resultsBetween February 2015 and July 2019, 203 patients were enrolled, of whom 184 were randomized to receive ENZ or ABI (92 per arm). Among them, 20 and 21 patients subsequently initiated DTX therapy following ENZ and ABI, respectively. Median prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) in the ENZ-DTX and ABI-DTX groups was 22.7 and 32.1 months, respectively (p = 0.1724). Median PCSS from the initiation of DTX was 16.1 months in the ENZ-DTX group and 25.3 months in the ABI-DTX group (p = 0.0966). In the overall cohort (n = 41), patients who received additional ARSIs after ARSI-DTX therapy had significantly longer PCSS from the initiation of DTX compared with those who did not (median 21.6 vs. 13.8 months, p = 0.0157).
conclusionsENZ-DTX and ABI-DTX sequential therapies demonstrated comparable survival outcomes in patients with CRPC. Notably, the administration of additional ARSIs following ARSI-DTX therapy may confer a survival benefit, suggesting a potential role for continued ARSI use in this treatment sequence.
trial registrationThe trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Center under the identifier UMIN000015529 on November 1, 2014.
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.