ReviewDrugs2007
Management options for malignant pleural mesothelioma: clinical and cost considerations.
Review in Drugs, 2007. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a resistant form of lung cancer that is often related to prior asbestos exposure. While surgical resection and radiotherapy techniques have been refined in recent years, neither has been proven to significantly extend patient survival compared with untreated controls. Until the release of pemetrexed in 2004, even combination chemotherapy regimens often resulted in a response rate of <20%. A recent phase III trial documented a 41.3% response rate for cisplatin plus pemetrexed. In the future, new multimodality regimens featuring novel targeted therapies directed against molecular targets, such as the vascular endothelial growth factor, hold the greatest promise for improved outcomes in MPM. The standard radiographic assessment of response to MPM therapy remains a poor surrogate for clinically relevant endpoints such as median survival. Furthermore, it is not currently known whether aggressive multimodality treatment for MPM will improve survival or quality of life above and beyond symptomatic care. Ongoing clinical trials are comparing chemotherapy and surgery with supportive care in an effort to define the role of different therapies in MPM. MPM treatment is a costly public health issue; after efficacy is proven, additional studies are needed to measure the cost effectiveness of MPM treatment regimens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.