Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28005980›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

The Prognosis of Anti-Angiogenesis Treatments Combined with Standard Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Yuping Li, Mengzhuo Hou, Guangyu Lu, Natalia Ciccone, Xingdong Wang, Hengzhu Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

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 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Targeting NRASAmerican journal of cancer research · 2017
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yuping LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Clinical Medical College of Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Mengzhuo HouNeurosurgical Research, Department of Neurosurgery, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Guangyu LuDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Medical College of Yangzhou University, Yangzhou University, China.
Natalia CicconeNeurosurgical Research, Department of Neurosurgery, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Xingdong WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Clinical Medical College of Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Hengzhu ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Clinical Medical College of Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEYangzhou University · CNHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeAlthough bevacizumab (BV) has been approved as second-line therapy for recurrent glioblastoma (GB), the efficacy and safety of BV for patients with newly diagnosed GB remain unclear. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, etc.) to identify related studies published from January 1966 and August 2016. Eight randomized controlled trials including a total of 2,185 patients with GB were included. We found that the median progression-free survival (PFS) was higher in the BV group than in the standard therapy (ST) group (pooled hazard ratio, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.62-0.86; P = 0.0001). Compared with ST, BV improved the PFS rate at 6 months (OR 3.33, 95% CI 2.73-4.06, p<0.00001) and 12 months (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.74-2.54, p<0.00001). There were no significant differences in median overall survival between the BV and ST groups (OR, 1.01; 95%CI, 0.83-1.23; P = 0.95). The BV group had higher survival rates at 6 months (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.84; P = 0.01) and 12 months (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48; P = 0.03), but a low survival rate at the 36-month follow-up (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.32-0.98; P = 0.04). For the incidence of adverse events, three adverse outcomes were found to be significantly different between BV and ST groups, including hypertension (8.37% vs. 1.62%, p<0.000001), proteinuria (7.65% vs. 0%, p<0.001), and fatigue (14.54% vs. 9.01%, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study indicates that combination of BV with ST for newly diagnosed GB did not improve the median overall survival but result in longer median PFS, maintaining the quality of life and functional status. However, the long-term use of BV is associated with a higher incidence of adverse events and mortality. STUDY REGISTRATION: This research was registered at PROSPERO. (Registration Number: CRD42016038247).

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBrain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaHumansPrognosisAngiogenesis Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID28005980
PMCPMC5179058
OpenAlexW2569247365

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.