ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2017
Efficacy and safety of antitumor agents plus radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone for brain metastases from lung cancer.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful treatment of brain radiation necrosis resulting from triple-negative breast cancer with Endostar and short-term hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a case report.OncoTargets and therapy · 2019Article
- Acquired resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors may be linked with the decreased sensitivity to X-ray irradiation.Oncotarget · 2018Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of different therapeutic regimens for brain metastases (BMs) from lung cancer (LC). A total of 13 controlled trials (1,783 cases) involving chemotherapy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors or endostatin plus radiotherapy (combination group) vs. radiotherapy alone group were identified from PubMed. Compared with the radiotherapy alone group, the combination group resulted in a significant benefit for objective response rate (ORR) [risk ratio (RR), 1.38; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-1.60; P<0.0001], notably prolonged the time to central nervous system progression [CNS-TTP; hazard ratio (HR), 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.90; P=0.004] and progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44-0.83; P=0.002); however, failed in prolonging the overall survival (OS; HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-1.05; P=0.11) with a higher overall severe adverse events (AEs, Grade ≥3; RR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.24-5.35; P=0.01). Notably, subgroup analysis demonstrated that targeted therapy plus radiotherapy possessed a superior OS compared with radiotherapy alone (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.90; P=0.01) with mild non-hematological toxicity and without severe hematotoxicity. The present study demonstrated that targeted agents plus radiotherapy possessed desirable effects with mild adverse events. Secondary to best, chemoradiotherapy is an alternative option for patients without suitable molecular targets.
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.