A dynamic portrait of adverse events for breast cancer patients: results from a phase II clinical trial of eribulin in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer

[1] Trotti A(2003)CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment Semin Radiat Oncol 13 176-181

[2] Colevas AD(2007)Patient-reported outcomes and the evolution of adverse event reporting in oncology J Clin Oncol 25 5121-5127

[3] Setser A(2016)Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial J Clin Oncol 34 557-565

[4] Rusch V(2017)Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment JAMA 318 197-198

[5] Jaques D(2014)Development of the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE) J Natl Cancer Inst 106 244-1059

[6] Budach V(2015)Validity and reliability of the US National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE) JAMA Oncol 1 1051-670

[7] Langer C(2016)Longitudinal adverse event assessment in oncology clinical trials: the toxicity over time (ToxT) analysis of alliance trials NCCTG N9741 and 979254 Lancet Oncol 17 663-923

[8] Murphy B(2011)Eribulin monotherapy versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with metastatic breast cancer (EMBRACE): a phase 3 open-label randomised study Lancet 377 914-601

[9] Cumberlin R(2015)Phase III open-label randomized study of eribulin mesylate versus capecitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane J Clin Oncol 33 594-328

[10] Coleman CN(2014)Phase 2 study of eribulin mesylate as first-line therapy for locally recurrent or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer Breast Cancer Res Treat 146 321-247

[1] Trotti A(2003)CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment Semin Radiat Oncol 13 176-181

[2] Colevas AD(2007)Patient-reported outcomes and the evolution of adverse event reporting in oncology J Clin Oncol 25 5121-5127

[3] Setser A(2016)Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial J Clin Oncol 34 557-565

[4] Rusch V(2017)Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment JAMA 318 197-198

[5] Jaques D(2014)Development of the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE) J Natl Cancer Inst 106 244-1059

[6] Budach V(2015)Validity and reliability of the US National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE) JAMA Oncol 1 1051-670

[7] Langer C(2016)Longitudinal adverse event assessment in oncology clinical trials: the toxicity over time (ToxT) analysis of alliance trials NCCTG N9741 and 979254 Lancet Oncol 17 663-923

[8] Murphy B(2011)Eribulin monotherapy versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with metastatic breast cancer (EMBRACE): a phase 3 open-label randomised study Lancet 377 914-601

[9] Cumberlin R(2015)Phase III open-label randomized study of eribulin mesylate versus capecitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane J Clin Oncol 33 594-328

[10] Coleman CN(2014)Phase 2 study of eribulin mesylate as first-line therapy for locally recurrent or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer Breast Cancer Res Treat 146 321-247