ArticleHeliyon2024
Comparative efficacy and safety of CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapies for HR+/HER2-breast cancer: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with fulvestrant for the treatment of HR+/HER2-advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors in the treatment of HR +/HER2 - advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Post-marketing safety surveillance and adverse event risk factors of abemaciclib: a pharmacoepidemiologic study.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative real-world progression free survival of CDK4/6 inhibitors in HR+/HER2- breast cancer patients with bone metastases.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Mechanisms of CDK4/6 Inhibitors in Breast Cancer: Advancing Targeted Therapeutic Strategies.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Article
- Safety and pharmacokinetics of FCN-437c, a novel cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, in Chinese patients with hepatic impairment.Investigational new drugs · 2025Article
- Article
- Case Report: Liver and bladder metastasis in a patient with HR-positive, HER2-low breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Real-world effectiveness of CDK4/6i in first-line treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer: updated systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In recent years, the combination of targeted drugs, such as Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, with endocrine therapy (ET), has emerged as a new research focus in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer. This network meta-analysis aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with ET for HR+/HER2-breast cancer. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and GeenMedical databases to identify randomized controlled trials investigating the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapy for the treatment of HR+/HER2-breast cancer. The search period spanned from the inception of each database up to February 29, 2024. Data analysis was conducted using Stata 14.0 and R 4.1.0 software. Results: A total of 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this study, investigating the effectiveness of four CDK4/6 inhibitors-Abemaciclib, Dalpiciclib, Ribociclib, and Palbociclib-when combined with ET for the treatment of HR+/HER2-breast cancer. The results indicated that Abemaciclib + ET, Dalpiciclib + ET, Palbociclib + ET, and Ribociclib + ET exhibited similar therapeutic effects in terms of improving objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and reducing the occurrence of fatigue, all of which were superior to ET alone. However, in terms of prolonging progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), Dalpiciclib + ET significantly improved PFS compared to Ribociclib + ET, Palbociclib + ET, Abemaciclib and Palbociclib. Ribociclib + ET significantly improved OS compared to Palbociclib + ET. Regarding overall adverse reaction events (AREs), Dalpiciclib + ET had a higher incidence compared to Ribociclib + ET. The incidence of neutropenia caused by Dalpiciclib + ET was significantly higher compared to Palbociclib + ET, Ribociclib + ET, Abemaciclib, and Palbociclib. Abemaciclib + ET demonstrated the worst safety profile concerning diarrhea. Conclusion: Abemaciclib + ET likely represents the most effective option in terms of therapeutic effects, but it is prone to causing diarrhea and fatigue. On the other hand, Dalpiciclib + ET likely demonstrates the best efficacy in terms of PFS but exhibits the poorest safety profile, particularly in relation to neutropenia. Therefore, clinicians should exercise increased vigilance in monitoring and managing adverse effects when prescribing Abemaciclib + ET and Dalpiciclib + ET.
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.