SynthesisInternational urology and nephrology2015
Therapeutic effects and associated adverse events of first-line treatments of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International urology and nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The negative effect of antibiotics on RCC patients with immunotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Balancing the Risk-Benefit Ratio of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor and Anti-VEGF Combination Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Cardiovascular Adverse Events in Patients With Cancer Treated With Bevacizumab: A Meta-Analysis of More Than 20 000 Patients.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Pooled it
- Cannabinoid receptor 2 as a novel target for promotion of renal cell carcinoma prognosis and progression.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2018Article
- RNA-binding protein QKI-5 inhibits the proliferation of clear cell renal cell carcinoma via post-transcriptional stabilization of RASA1 mRNA.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the therapeutic effects and adverse events (AE) of current first-line treatments of advanced RCC, including sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus, and the combination of bevacizumab and IFN-α.
methodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of the effectiveness of the five treatments among patients with advanced RCC. The data of progressive disease, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), grade 3/4 AE, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted to assess therapeutic effects, toxicity, and prognosis, respectively.
resultsTwo studies that assessed the combination of bevacizumab with IFN α (n = 1381), one sunitinib (n = 750), one sorafenib (n = 189) and one temsirolimus (n = 416) were included. Sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus (R = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.48, P < 0.01), and the combination of bevacizumab with IFN (R = 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.99, P = 0.04) were more effective in controlling tumor progression than IFN. Sorafenib, sunitinib, and temsirolimus do not own advantage in ORR compared with IFN (R = 2.06, 95% CI 0.53-7.95, P = 0.30), but combination of bevacizumab with IFN showed better results in ORR than IFN (R = 2.56, 95% CI 1.91-3.42, P < 0.01). Sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus (R = 2.90, 95% CI 2.23-3.78, P < 0.01), and combination of bevacizumab with IFN (R = 2.14, 95% CI 1.65-2.78, P < 0.01) were more effective than IFN in DCR. Sorafenib, sunitinib, and temsirolimus had similar rate of grade 3/4 AE as IFN (R = 1.21, 95% CI 0.96-1.51, P = 0.10). Combined use of bevacizumab and IFN is associated with higher frequency of the AE (R = 2.09, 95% CI 1.66-2.63, P < 0.01). Sorafenib and sunitinib had similar median PFS (R = 0.67, 95% CI 0.42-1.08, P = 0.10); temsirolimus had longer median OS (R = 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-1.00, P = 0.049) as IFN. Combined use of bevacizumab and IFN had longer median PFS (R = 0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.76, P < 0.01) and OS (R = 0.86, 95% CI 0.76-0.97, P = 0.01) than IFN.
conclusionSorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus, and the combination of bevacizumab with IFN are more effective in stabilizing disease. Combined use of bevacizumab and IFN is better than sorafenib, sunitinib, and temsirolimus in ORR, PFS, and OS, but associated with higher level of AE.
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.