Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32086783›Full record

SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2020

The efficacy and safety of immunotherapy targeting the PD-1 pathway for advanced urothelial carcinoma: a meta-analysis of published clinical trials.

F Zhang, Z Liu, J Liang, F Zhang, K Wu, C Zhou, Y Lu, X Wang

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

F ZhangDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Z LiuDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
J LiangDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
F ZhangDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
K WuDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
C ZhouDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Y LuDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
X WangDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. foolsoon.c@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0113-0395
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUrothelial carcinoma (UC) is an aggressive malignancy and has a poor prognosis in the metastatic state. Treatment of UC remains a challenge, and as a first-line regimen for advanced UC, standard platinum-based chemotherapy is unfit for many patients due to numerous comorbidities and poor performance status. Recently, five immune checkpoint inhibitors have been approved for the treatment of patients with advanced UC who were ineligible for platinum-based regimens or suffered tumor progression in post-platinum setting. However, not long ago, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration restricted the use of two common immune checkpoint blockades, atezolizumab and pembrolizumab, due to uncertain survival benefit as mono-therapy. In this scenario, we reviewed rapidly surfacing clinical trials to assess the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy targeting the PD-1 pathway for advanced UC.

methodsA comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for all clinical trials where the efficacy and safety were reported. Our primary outcome was efficacy evaluated by objective response rate (ORR), 1-year overall survival (OS) rate and 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate, and second outcome was safety assessed by any grade and grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). We chose percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the evaluation indexes and used a random-effects model to account for heterogeneity.

resultsWe included 14 clinical trials with 2674 total patients in this meta-analysis. After removing unqualified studies on the basis of sensitivity analyses, 13 studies were pooled to evaluate the overall ORR, 8 studies for the 1-year OS rate and 6 studies for the 1-year PFS rate. The pooled data of ORR, 1-year OS rate, and 1-year PFS rate were 0.20 (95% CI 0.18-0.22, I

conclusionThis study showed that the immunotherapy targeting the PD-1 pathway had durable efficacy and acceptable safety in patients with advanced UC. The comprehensive role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in comparison to other treatments needs further confirmation basing on RCTs.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsPublication BiasUrologic NeoplasmsUrotheliumImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsChemotherapyClinical trialsImmunotherapyMeta-analysisUrothelial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID32086783
OpenAlexW3007976935

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.