SynthesisPloS one2016
Role of Gemcitabine and Pemetrexed as Maintenance Therapy in Advanced NSCLC: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Doublet vs Single-Agent Maintenance Therapy in the Treatment of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Drug design, development and therapy · 2020Pooled it
- Efficacy and toxicities of combination maintenance therapy in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an up-to-date meta-analysis.Bioscience reports · 2019Pooled it
- The role of maintenance therapy in the treatment of elderly non-small-cell lung cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Drug design, development and therapy · 2017Pooled it
- Gemcitabine as maintenance treatment of diffuse pleural mesothelioma: randomized phase II study.BMC cancer · 2026Trial
- Long-term survival with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy in a patient with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma of unclear primary origin harboring MTHFR C677T(T/T) mutation: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Comprehensive analyses of one-carbon metabolism related genes and their association with prognosis, tumor microenvironment, chemotherapy resistance and immunotherapy in lung adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Different Doses of Bevacizumab Combined With Pemetrexed and Platinum in First-Line Treatment of Advanced NSCLC: A Retrospective-Real World Study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Efficacy and safety of S-1 maintenance therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Maintenance Chemotherapy With Chinese Herb Medicine Formulas vs. With Placebo in Patients With Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer After First-Line Chemotherapy: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Article
- Maintenance treatment with gemcitabine have a promising activity on metastatic bladder cancer survival.Turkish journal of urology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGemcitabine and pemetrexed have been used as maintenance therapy. However, few systematic reviews and meta-analyses have assessed their effects in the newest studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the role of gemcitabine and pemetrexed in the maintenance treatment of non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC).
methodsWe performed a literature search using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases from their inceptions to September 16, 2015. We also searched the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) databases from 2008 to 2015. Two authors independently extracted the data. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias graph was used to assess the risk of bias. The GRADE system was used to assess the grading of evidence, and a meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 11.0 software.
resultsEleven randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies were collected. Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis and divided into the following 4 groups: gemcitabine vs. best supportive care (BSC)/observation, pemetrexed vs. BSC/placebo, pemetrexed + bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab and pemetrexed vs. bevacizumab. Gemcitabine exhibited significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with BSC (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62, p = 0.000). Pemetrexed exhibited significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.54, p = 0.000) and OS (HR = 0.75, p = 0.000) compared with BSC. Pemetrexed + bevacizumab almost exhibited significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.71, p = 0.051) compared with bevacizumab. Pemetrexed exhibited no improvement in PFS or overall survival (OS) compared with bevacizumab. Regarding the grade, the GRADE system indicated that the gemcitabine group was "MODERATE", the pemetrexed group was "HIGH", and both the pemetrexed + bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab groups and pemetrexed vs. B groups were "LOW".
conclusionsGemcitabine or pemetrexed compared with BSC/observation/placebo significantly improved PFS or OS. Whether pemetrexed + bevacizumab compared with bevacizumab alone significantly improves PFS requires further investigation.
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.