Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33180265›Full record

SynthesisDrug safety2021

Efficacy and Safety of Bevacizumab Plus Oxaliplatin- or Irinotecan-Based Doublet Backbone Chemotherapy as the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Tianshu Ren, Shu Wang, Zexu Shen, Chang Xu, Yingshi Zhang, Fuhai Hui, Xingshun Qi, Qingchun Zhao

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drug safety, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tianshu RenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China.
Shu WangDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China.
Zexu ShenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China.
Chang XuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China.
Yingshi ZhangDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China.
Fuhai HuiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China.
Xingshun QiDepartment of Gastroenterology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China.
Qingchun ZhaoDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang, 110016, Liaoning, China. zhaoqingchun1967@163.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9256-9971
Shenyang Pharmaceutical University · CNGeneral Hospital of Shenyang Military Region · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND

objectiveGuidelines recommend combined doublet backbone chemotherapy based on 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (OX) or irinotecan (IR) as the first-line treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, it is still unknown which is better when combined with bevacizumab (BEV). This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare BEV-IR with BEV-OX regimens in terms of efficacy and safety.

methodsWe searched studies from databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and conference papers. The outcomes were overall response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, and the incidence of the most common adverse events. The dichotomous data were reported as the risk ratio (RR) and the survival outcomes were extracted as the hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI).

resultsEleven studies including 5632 patients were identified. No difference was found in overall survival or overall response rate between BEV-IR and BEV-OX regimens. The pooled progression-free survival was significantly longer in the BEV-IR group than the BEV-OX group (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, p = 0.08). Compared with the BEV-OX group, the BEV-IR group was related to a higher risk of bleeding events (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.98, p = 0.03), venous thromboembolism (RR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.46-0.79, p = 0.0002), and diarrhea (RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.80, p < 0.00001). Conversely, the BEV-OX group was related to a higher risk of thrombocytopenia (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67-3.42, p < 0.00001) and neuropathy (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.90-7.64, p = 0.0002).

conclusionsThe BEV-IR regimen was superior in improving progression-free survival as the first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. The two different doublet regimens combined with BEV had their specific features of adverse events.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsBevacizumabFluorouracilHumansIrinotecanOxaliplatinBevacizumabFluorouracilIrinotecanOxaliplatin

Identifiers

PMID33180265
OpenAlexW3100195852

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.