SynthesisMedicine2020
A meta-analysis of the therapeutic effect of gefitinib combined with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone in treating non-small cell lung cancer.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- "What really works for us?" exploring therapeutic strategies for non-small cell lung cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy versus Gefitinib Alone for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Mutations in China.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhether the combination of gefitinib and chemotherapy is beneficial for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to summarize the currently available evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of gefitinib combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treating advanced NSCLC.
methodsLiterature on comparing the effects of gefitinib combined with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone in treating NSCLC was retrieved from the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Database. The primary outcome measures included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Revman 5.3 was used for data processing.
resultsSeven randomized controlled trials were included, involving a total of 1418 patients. There appeared a significant improvement in PFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.60 [95% CI 0.43, 0.82], P = .001) after treatment with gefitinib combined with chemotherapy when compared with chemotherapy alone. The subgroup analysis showed a significant advantage of sequential administration (HR = 0.67 [95% CI 0.57, 0.79], P < .00001). There was no significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.92 [95% CI 0.71, 1.20], P = .54), and no significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) (HR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.67, 1.44], P = .93). The risks of rash and diarrhea (odds ratios) were higher in gefitinib combined with chemotherapy group when compared with chemotherapy alone, and there were significant differences on grade 3/4 rash and thrombocytopenia between 2 groups.
conclusionGefitinib combined with chemotherapy is superior to chemotherapy alone in PFS, sequential administration prolongs the patients' PFS, however, a survival advantage is not shown in OS or ORR. Gefitinib combined with chemotherapy aggravates rash, diarrhea and thrombocytopenia.
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.