Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31332100›Full record

SynthesisThe oncologist2019

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials Comparing Active Treatment with Placebo in Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Jaume Capdevila, Jorge Hernando, Santiago Perez-Hoyos, Alejandro Roman-Gonzalez, Enrique Grande

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The oncologist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jaume CapdevilaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain jacapdevila@vhebron.net.
Jorge HernandoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain.
Santiago Perez-HoyosBiostatistics and Bioinformatics Unit, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain.
Alejandro Roman-GonzalezDepartment of Endocrinology, San Vicente Fundacion University Hospital-Antioquia University, Medellin, Colombia.
Enrique GrandeDepartment of Medical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Madrid, Spain.
Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ESHospital Universitario de San Vicente Fundación · COMD Anderson Cancer Center Madrid · ESVall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost guidelines still recommend active surveillance for patients with asymptomatic, unresectable neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). However, recent findings from several randomized placebo-controlled trials suggest that most patients would benefit from active treatment. We conducted a meta-analysis of pooled outcomes from clinical trials in which an active treatment arm was compared with placebo to determine whether active treatment provides a survival advantage. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis meta-analysis evaluated six trials that compared a medication with placebo in patients with an asymptomatic, metastatic NET. The trials were heterogenous with regard to the active medication (octreotide, lanreotide, sunitinib, everolimus, Lu-Dotatate) and tumor localizations (gastrointestinal, pancreas, lung). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for the placebo and active treatment arms were obtained from individual trial data and combined to obtain pooled outcomes.

resultsThe individual trials all reported significantly better PFS outcomes for active treatment. The pooled data confirmed this advantage. At months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24, pooled PFS rates for the placebo and treatment arms, respectively, were 92.9% versus 96.9%; 54.3% versus 83.7%; 35.5% versus 68.5%; 25.1% versus 54.7%; and 17.7% versus 61.0%. OS was also higher in the active treatment groups. At months 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60, OS rates (placebo vs. active treatment), respectively, were 88.1% versus 93.4%; 84.1% versus 86.2%; 67.4% versus 76%; 56.6% versus 64.4%; 49.9% versus 61.0%; and 41.7% versus 45.9%.

conclusionThis meta-analysis confirms findings from recent clinical trials indicating that active treatment yields better survival outcomes than placebo. Importantly, these findings were obtained across a wide range of patient profiles and diverse medical treatments for metastatic NETs. Given the lack of reliable prognostic factors to determine a priori which patients are unlikely to benefit from active treatment, these findings support early treatment in most patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although most guidelines still recommend active surveillance for patients diagnosed with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors, the results of this meta-analysis, together with recent data from key clinical trials, suggest that most patients could benefit from upfront active treatment. However, more data are needed to confirm this.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm MetastasisNeuroendocrine TumorsPlacebosRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival AnalysisPlacebosMeta‐analysisNeuroendocrine tumorsPeptide receptor radionuclide therapyPlaceboSomatostatin analoguesTargeted agents

Identifiers

PMID31332100
PMCPMC6975960
OpenAlexW2962776796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.