ArticleJournal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer2014
Comparative effectiveness of adjunctive bevacizumab for advanced lung cancer: the cancer research network experience.
Article in Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Initial chemotherapy dose reductions and subsequent treatment delivery in stage I-IIIA breast cancer.Cancer · 2026Article
- Methodology for Using Real-World Data From Electronic Health Records to Assess Chemotherapy Administration in Women With Breast Cancer.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2024Article
- Collaborating on Data, Science, and Infrastructure: The 20-Year Journey of the Cancer Research Network.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2019Review
- Medical Care Costs for Recurrent versus De Novo Stage IV Cancer by Age at Diagnosis.Health services research · 2018Article
- Hospitalization and Survival of Medicare Patients Treated With Carboplatin Plus Paclitaxel or Pemetrexed for Metastatic, Nonsquamous, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.JAMA network open · 2018Article
- Effect of Angiotensin System Inhibitors on Survival in Patients Receiving Chemotherapy for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Clinical lung cancer · 2017Article
- Treatment Patterns and Overall Survival Associated with First-Line Systemic Therapy for Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2017Article
- The Cancer Research Network: a platform for epidemiologic and health services research on cancer prevention, care, and outcomes in large, stable populations.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2016Article
- Use of Bevacizumab in Community Settings: Toxicity Profile and Risk of Hospitalization in Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Journal of oncology practice · 2015Article
- (99m)Tc-3P-RGD2 SPECT to monitor early response to bevacizumab therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionBevacizumab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel (BCP) chemotherapy has Food and Drug Administration approval for advanced nonsquamous, non-small-cell lung cancer based upon improved survival in a clinical trial. However, subgroup analyses of this and other studies have suggested variable results by age and gender.
methodsUsing data from four health maintenance organizations (HMOs) belonging to the Cancer Research Network, 1605 HMO nonsquamous, non-small-cell lung cancer patients aged younger than 21 years, diagnosed 2002-2010, who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP), with and without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of stage IIIB/IV disease were identified. Patients were categorized into three groups based on year of diagnosis and regimen during 120 days postdiagnosis: (1) diagnosed 2005-2010 and received BCP; (2) 2005-2010, CP (CP2005), and (3) 2002-2004, CP (CP2002). Survival differences between groups were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models with several propensity score adjustments for demographic, comorbidity, and tumor characteristics. Multivariable subanalyses were also estimated.
resultsMedian survival was 12.3 months (interquartile range [IQR], 6.0-29.1) for BCP patients versus 8.8 months (IQR, 3.7-21.3) for CP2005 patients and 7.5 months (IQR, 3.8-15.6) for CP2002 patients. In the propensity score-adjusted models, BCP demonstrated a significant survival benefit with a hazard ratio of BCP relative to CP2005 and CP2002 patients of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-0.94) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.52-0.75), respectively. In the multivariable-adjusted subanalyses, relative to the CP2005 cohort, the BCP hazard ratios for patients age less than 65 years, age 65 years old or older, and females were 0.78 (95% CI, 0.62-1.00), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.54-1.00), and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.58-1.00).
conclusionsIn this community-based, comparative effectiveness analysis, we found an overall survival benefit for adults receiving BCP compared with CP.
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.