Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41174820›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2025

Comparative efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel versus other taxanes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Salah Ameen Abdu, He Caiyun, Wafa Ali Asaad, Muhammad Tufail, Liao Yazhou, Sadam Ahmed Elayah, Rao Zhen, Siying Chen, Mohammad H Shubair, Ning Li

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Salah Ameen Abdu *Research Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
He Caiyun *Research Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Wafa Ali Asaad *School and Hospital of Stomatology, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, 650106, China.
Muhammad TufailResearch Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Liao YazhouResearch Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Sadam Ahmed ElayahDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Jiblah University for Medical and Health Sciences, Ibb, Yemen.
Rao ZhenResearch Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Siying ChenResearch Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Mohammad H ShubairDepartment of Stomatology, Yan'an Hospital Affiliated to Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Ning LiResearch Center of Oral and Maxillofacial Tumor, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China. liningoms@csu.edu.cn.

Funding

Central South University Research Program of Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies 2023QYJC038National Natural Sciences Foundation of China 82170974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThis systematic review addresses uncertainty around cabazitaxel's effectiveness, safety, and optimal dosing compared to other taxanes, aiming to guide personalized treatment and improve patient outcomes.

methodsA meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel, including tumor response, survival rates, and toxicity profiles. Trials were identified from several databases, and the bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Review Manager (RevMan 5.4) was used for heterogeneity testing, sensitivity analyses, pooling hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and publication bias assessment.

resultsThis meta-analysis included 10 trials with 3,377 patients. Cabazitaxel demonstrated no significant overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.92-1.14) or progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92-1.24) benefit over other taxanes but had higher grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (TEAEs) (RR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.16-2.42). Tumor responses showed slightly higher partial responses (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.97-1.45) and increased progressive disease response (PDR) (RR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.15-2.23), with nonsignificant complete responses and stable disease. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in OS or PFS for prostate and breast cancer. However, in head and neck cancer, cabazitaxel was associated with worse outcomes. 20 mg/m

conclusionsCabazitaxel shows no OS or PFS advantage over other taxanes and higher toxicity. 20 mg/m

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsProstatic NeoplasmsTaxoidsHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic AgentscabazitaxelTaxoidsCabazitaxelDocetaxelEfficacyMeta-analysisPaclitaxelSafetyTaxanes

Identifiers

PMID41174820
PMCPMC12577412

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.