Cited by 4Endometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerCervical Cancer and HPV Research

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Apatinib for the Treatment of Patients with Metastatic, Recurrent Cervical Cancer after Failure of Radiotherapy and First-Line Chemotherapy: A Prospective Study

Xia, Xiaoping, Jiang, Wenjing, Qi, Wencai, Hong, Baoli, Zhao, Weidong·2020·Oncology Research and Treatment

Abstract

Purpose: As a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2), apatinib has shown a survival benefit in multiple solid tumors. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib in patients with metastatic, recurrent cervical cancer after failure of radiotherapy and first-line chemotherapy. Methods: A total of 42 patients between June 2018 and March 2019 were involved in this study. All patients orally received apatinib once daily in a 4-week cycle until disease progression or adverse events that prohibit further therapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and adverse events. Results: During a median follow-up of 13 months, 8 patients achieved a partial response and 24 cases achieved stable disease. None of them reported a complete response. The ORR and DCR were 19.0 and 76.2%, respectively. The median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI 4.9–7.1), and the median OS was 12.0 months (95% CI 10.1–13.9). The global health score/HRQoL improved significantly following 3-cycle treatment (50.4 ± 12.5 vs. 60.1 ± 11.8; p < 0.01). The most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome, hypertension and fatigue. Conclusion: Apatinib should be an effective and tolerable treatment option for patients with metastatic, recurrent cervical cancer after failure of radiotherapy and first-line chemotherapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000510355

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xia, X., Jiang, W., Qi, W., Hong, B., & Zhao, W.
Affiliations
University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
Venue
Oncology Research and Treatment
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2020
Volume
43
Issue
12
Pages
649-655
ISSN
  • 2296-5262 (ISSN-L)
  • 2296-5270
OpenAlex
W3092546993
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oncology Research and Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Angiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
Keywords
apatinib, recurrent cervical cancer, metastatic cervical cancer, VEGFR-2 inhibitors, second-line therapy, radiotherapy failure, first-line chemotherapy failure, progression-free survival, overall survival, health-related quality of life, hand-foot syndrome, hypertension, fatigue
MeSH terms
Progression-Free Survival, Adenocarcinoma, Administration, Oral, Adult, Aged, Antineoplastic Agents, Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Prospective Studies, Pyridines, Quality of Life, Survival Rate, Treatment Outcome, Carcinoma, Adenosquamous, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Hand-Foot Syndrome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review