PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 22, 2026ESMO Open0 citationsOpen Access

A phase II randomized trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) as the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

View Full Paper
CGC. GongFudan UniversityYZY. ZhaoFudan UniversityLWL. WangFudan University

Key Points

  • To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.
  • Conducted a phase II randomized controlled trial with 150 untreated metastatic TNBC patients.
  • Participants randomized 1:1 to receive either gemcitabine plus cisplatin or gemcitabine plus carboplatin.
  • Primary endpoint focused on progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints included overall survival and objective response rate.
  • Median PFS was 7.8 months for gemcitabine plus cisplatin and 7.0 months for gemcitabine plus carboplatin.
  • Median overall survival was 20.3 months for the GP regimen and 19.3 months for the GC regimen.
  • The objective response rate for GP was higher at 49.3% compared to 41.3% for GC.
  • More grade 3-4 non-hematological adverse events occurred in the GP group, while GC had a slightly higher incidence of grade 3-4 hematological adverse events.

Abstract

Background: Platinum-based regimens play an essential role in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) treatment, with the CBCSG006 study establishing the position of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) as a first-line treatment of metastatic TNBC.Our study aims to further improve the efficacy of the first-line platinum-based chemotherapy for metastatic TNBC by optimizing the selection of platinum.Patients and methods: A prospective, randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of the GP regimen with those of the gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) regimen as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic TNBC.A total of 150 untreated metastatic TNBC patients were enrolled and randomized 1 : 1 to receive either the GP or GC regimen until disease progression or intolerable toxicity.The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), and safety.Results: After a median follow-up of 57.1 months (interquartile range 42.0-85.7 months), the median PFS for the GP and GC regimen was 7.8 months and 7.0 months, respectively (stratified hazard ratio 0.86; 95% confidence interval 0.59-1.25;P = 0.43); median overall survival was 20.3 months and 19.3 months, respectively (stratified hazard ratio of 1.05; 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.52;P = 0.79).The ORR of the GP regimen was higher than that of the GC regimen (49.3% versus 41.3%, P = 0.33).Grade 3-4 non-hematological adverse events (including nausea, vomiting, and hearing impairment) was more common in the GP group.The incidence of grade 3-4 hematological adverse events (including leukemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia) was slightly higher in the GC group.No treatment-related death was reported in this study.Conclusions: Cisplatin was not associated with a survival advantage over carboplatin when combined with gemcitabine as a first-line treatment of patients with metastatic TNBC, though numerically longer PFS and higher ORR were observed.Differences in safety profiles may help guide individualized treatment decisions.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gong et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69bf86ecf665edcd009e9121https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2026.106889
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper