Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25563357›Full record

ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2014

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer beyond Biomarkers: The Evolving Landscape of Clinical Trial Design.

Anastasios Dimou, Vassiliki Papadimitrakopoulou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Value of serum marker HE4 in pulmonary carcinoma diagnosis.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Serum neuron specific enolase levels correlate with patient prognosis for advanced lung cancer.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Anastasios DimouDepartment of Medicine, Albert Einstein Medical Center, 5501 Old York Street, Philadelphia, PA 19141, USA. dimouana@einstein.edu.
Vassiliki PapadimitrakopoulouDepartment of Thoracic Head and Neck, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 432, Houston, TX 77030, USA. vpapadim@mdanderson.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The approval of EGFR and ALK directed tyrosine kinase inhibitors materialized the concept of tailoring therapy on the basis of specific biomarkers for treating patients with NSCLC. Research for other biologics, although demonstrating clinical benefit, has been less successful so far for producing biomarkers that predict response. Blocking angiogenesis is the prototype for the agents that belong in the latter group that target specific molecules, yet they are currently approved for relatively unselected groups of patients. In order to meet the goal of personalizing care in the various settings of NSCLC, a wealth of biologics and compounds are currently being tested in clinical trials in different phases of clinical development. In a subset of the relevant studies, a biomarker perspective is appreciated. This review summarizes the clinical rationale of the major ongoing phase II and III NSCLC studies that employ targeting specific molecules with novel agents, as well as innovative strategies, and includes a comparative discussion of the different designs.

Identifiers

PMID25563357
PMCPMC4263964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.