ArticleThoracic cancer2019
Comparison of Endostar continuous versus intermittent intravenous infusion in combination with first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Trial
- The efficacy and safety of continuous intravenous infusion of rh-endostatin combined with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.Investigational new drugs · 2024Article
- Rh-endostatin plus camrelizumab and chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter retrospective study.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Continuous intravenous infusion of recombinant human endostatin using infusion pump plus chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- Safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus recombinant human endostatin in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of recombinant human endostatin combined with radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntravenous infusion of Endostar for three to four hours per day for 14 days reduces patient compliance and affects quality of life. Continuous intravenous infusion (CI) represents a novel method of administration; however, it is unclear whether it is effective and safe when compared to the traditional method.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) administered CI (20 patients) or intermittent intravenous infusion (II, 49 patients) of Endostar combined with first-line chemotherapy. Three patients in the II group discontinued therapy because of adverse effects.
resultsMedian progression-free survival was 6.0 months in the CI group and 3.8 months in the II group, with no significant difference (P = 0.1). The objective response and disease control rates were also similar in the CI and II groups (40.0 vs. 32.6%, P = 0.562; 65 vs. 69.6%, P = 0.714, respectively).
conclusionCI of Endostar combined with first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC had similar progression-free survival, objective response, and overall response rates as II, with tolerable adverse effects.
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.