ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2026
Real-world outcomes and safety of inetetamab plus pyrotinib and chemotherapy in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: A multicenter retrospective study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Inetetamab and pyrotinib have shown promising activity in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, real-world data on their combination with chemotherapy (IPyC) across different treatment lines remain limited. Objectives: This multicenter retrospective study aimed to describe the outcomes associated with a dual HER2-targeting strategy IPyC in HER2-positive MBC across treatment lines in real-world clinical practice. Design: Multicenter retrospective study. Methods: Between July 2020 and August 2024, 301 patients with HER2-positive MBC from five tertiary centers in China received IPyC until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Key outcome measures included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR). Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify potential prognostic factors. Results: The median IPyC associated PFS and OS for the entire cohort were 12.0 months (95% CI: 10-15) and 33.0 months (95% CI: 28-42), respectively, with an ORR of 50.2% and a CBR of 80.4%. The IPyC associated PFS varied significantly by treatment line (23.0, 17.0, and 6.0 months for first-line, second-line, and ≥third-line, respectively; p<0.001). In first-line setting, baseline lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and multiple metastases were independent prognostic factors, and trastuzumab-naïve patients had a numerically longer median PFS of 27.0 months than those with prior trastuzumab exposure. In second-line setting, patients with secondary resistance to trastuzumab achieved a median PFS of 24.0 months. A new central nervous system (CNS) metastasis incidence was observed in 6.6% (5/76) of patients without baseline CNS metastases in the first-line IPyC treatment setting. The IPyC regimen was associated with manageable toxicity, with grade 3-4 diarrhea (26.2%), neutropenia (16.6%), and leukopenia (12.6%) as the most common adverse events (AEs). Conclusion: As a retrospective descriptive study, our analysis describes the use and outcomes of the IPyC regimen across multiple lines of therapy in HER2-positive MBC, highlighting the need for and supporting the design of prospective studies to evaluate this regimen.
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.