Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The optimal positioning of eribulin treatment remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of eribulin administration as first- and second-line chemotherapy in patients with endocrine-resistant advanced or metastatic breast cancer (AMBC) in the real-world clinical setting.
Methods: This multi-institutional prospective cohort study enrolled patients with triple-negative AMBC or estrogen receptor-positive AMBC refractory to at least one previous endocrine therapy. The overall survival (OS) from the start of first-line (OS1) and second-line chemotherapy (OS2) was assessed. Data analysis included real-world chemotherapy sequences of first- to third-line chemotherapy regimens. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for treatment regimen comparison was calculated using a stratified proportional hazards model.
Results: Among 201 patients enrolled, 180 were included in the final analysis. Eribulin was administered as first- and second-line chemotherapy to 46 (26.6%) and 70 (47.9%) patients, respectively. Median OS1 and OS2 were 2.25 (95% CI 1.07-2.68) and 1.75 (95% CI, 1.28-2.45) years for first- and second-line eribulin, respectively. Oral 5-FU followed by eribulin had a numerically longer OS1 (2.84 years) than the other sequences. Among patients who proceeded to second-line or later chemotherapy, the median OS1 for those treated with anthracycline or taxane as first- or second-line (n = 98) was 2.56 years (95% CI 2.27-2.74), while it was 2.87 years (95% CI 2.20-4.32) for those who avoided anthracycline and taxane as first- and second-line (n = 48) (adjusted HR, 1.20; 95% CI 0.70-2.06). In the exploratory analysis, OS1 was 2.55 (95% CI 2.14-2.75) and 2.91 years (95% CI 2.61-4.32) for those aged < 65 and ≥ 65 years, respectively (adjusted HR of ≥ 65, 0.91; 95% CI 0.56-1.46).
Conclusions: Eribulin or oral 5-FU administration in first- and second-line chemotherapy without anthracycline/taxane was acceptable in the real-world setting.
Trial Registration: This study is registered with Clinical Trials.gov (NCT 02,551,263).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12282-022-01357-x | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!