Observational studyAdvances in therapy2026
A Retrospective Observational Study of Safety and Effectiveness of Abemaciclib in Chinese Patients with Breast Cancer.
Observational study in Advances in therapy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAbemaciclib is approved in China for treating hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) and early breast cancer (EBC). This retrospective, real-world observational study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of abemaciclib among Chinese patients with EBC/ABC.
methodsThe study included patients from the National Anti-Tumor Drug Surveillance System who initiated abemaciclib between April 2021 and December 2022, with ≥ 1 post-treatment visit by June 2023. Primary objectives were to describe patient characteristics and prevalence of adverse events (AEs) of interest. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with ABC were exploratory objectives.
resultsOverall, 3423 patients (EBC 619, ABC 2804) were included (3407 [99.5%] female and 16 [0.5%] male); most initiated abemaciclib at 150 mg twice daily (EBC 79.9%, ABC 68.9%). Among patients with EBC, 92.2% had positive lymph nodes. Among patients with ABC, 45.2%, 25.4%, and 29.3% received abemaciclib as first-line, second-line, and third-or-later-line therapy, respectively. Treatment discontinuation occurred in 5.2% of patients with EBC and 25.1% with ABC, and dose reduction in 21.2% and 20.1%, respectively. AEs of interest occurred in 60.7% of patients with EBC and 57.3% with ABC, mostly grades 1-2 in severity; the most common AE of interest was neutropenia (39.9% and 34.5% in patients with EBC and ABC, respectively). Discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 2.4% of patients with EBC and 4.1% with ABC. Among patients with ABC receiving abemaciclib as first-line, second-line, and third-or-later-line therapy, 12-month rwPFS rates were 80.5%, 72.7%, and 57.3%, and OS rates were 90.5%, 84.3%, and 73.0%, respectively. Effectiveness was consistent across menopausal status and endocrine therapy subgroups.
conclusionsIn this largest real-world study of abemaciclib in China to date, abemaciclib was well tolerated with no new safety signals, and its effectiveness was consistent with prior trials, confirming its positive benefit-risk profile in real-world settings.
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.