ArticleCancer management and research2018
Comparative efficacy of different targeted therapies plus fulvestrant for advanced breast cancer following progression on prior endocrine therapy: a network meta-analysis.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Absolute lymphocyte count and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as predictors of CDK 4/6 inhibitor efficacy in advanced breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Economic Evaluation for Palbociclib Plus Fulvestrant vs Ribociclib Plus Fulvestrant and Abemaciclib Plus Fulvestrant in Endocrine-Resistant Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer in Italy.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2023Article
- Comparative review of pharmacological therapies in individuals with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer with focus on hormone receptor subgroups.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- A mutation-specific, single-arm, phase 2 study of dovitinib in patients with advanced malignancies.Oncotarget · 2020Article
- Approaches to interpret the outcomes of a network meta-analysis on comparative efficacy of different targeted therapies plus fulvestrant for advanced breast cancer following progression on prior endocrine therapy.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to indirectly compare the efficacy of different targeted agents with fulvestrant for patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) following progression on prior endocrine therapy.
methodsThe titles/abstracts were searched from the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases for RCTs to evaluate the efficacy of palbociclib plus fulvestrant vs alternative targeted therapies plus fulvestrant for postmenopausal HR+/HER2- ABC following progression on prior endocrine therapy. In addition, the primary measured outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) value of each treatment was calculated to achieve the best ranking for each treatment.
resultsA total of 11 studies, including 4,178 patients in the network meta-analysis, were included and analyzed. In terms of the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS, palbociclib plus fulvestrant was superior to other target agents plus fulvestrant (HR=0.62, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.40-0.96; HR=0.62, 95% CrI: 0.47-0.96; for pictilisib plus fulvestrant and buparlisib plus fulvestrant, respectively). Ribociclib plus fulvestrant has no difference in abemaciclib plus fulvestrant and palbociclib plus fulvestrant (HR =1.02, 95% CrI =0.72-1.45; HR =1.22, 95% CrI =0.84-1.78). In terms of objective response rate, compared with placebo plus fulvestrant, abemaciclib plus fulvestrant, dovitinib plus fulvestrant, buparlisib plus fulvestrant, and palbociclib plus fulvestrant had a significant difference (odds ratio [OR] =2.84, 95% CrI =1.91- 4.31; OR =3.62, 95% CrI =1.21-12.48; OR =1.80, 95% CrI =1.25-2.60; and OR =2.52, 95% CrI =1.43- 4.72, respectively).
conclusionAccording to the present study, palbociclib plus fulvestrant may be the optimal treatment for HR+/HER2- postmenopausal women with ABC after disease progression following endocrine therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.