ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2021
Are all ALK variants created equal? Clinicopathologic features and outcomes: a propensity-matched study.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A meta-analysis of the impact of different ALK variants on targeted therapy efficacy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- "Variant matters": the impact of ALK fusion subtypes on progression and response in non-small-cell lung cancer-data from clinical practice from Polish centers.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- A Decade of Treating ALK-Rearranged Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in a Lower Middle-Income Country: Changing Patterns and Improving Survival.Oncology and therapy · 2025Article
- Treatment of metastatic ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer: real-world outcomes in a single center study.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Targeting ALK Rearrangements in NSCLC: Current State of the Art.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
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
Abstract
Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearranged NSCLC comprises a molecularly distinct subgroup occurring in 10% cases. Various EML4-ALK and non EML4 variants are known to occur which can be detected only on NGS and show differential TKI responses. 113 ALK-IHC positive cases were subjected to a custom panel-based NGS for detection of ALK variants. Clinicopathologic features and outcomes were studied and propensity-matched analysis was done. The median age of the overall cohort was 53 years. 91 (80.5%) cases were NGS positive, the most common being EML4-ALK (90, 98.9%) cases. The most common EML4 variant was Variant 1 (40, 35%) cases, Variant 3 (28, 25%) cases, and Variant 2 (17, 15%) cases. One novel EML4-ALK variant was also encountered which was found to be intrinsically resistant to crizotinib. On pre-weight-adjusted comparison, Variant 1 group had a higher occurrence of brain and extrathoracic metastases. The median OS was 44 months for the entire cohort. 49 patients received crizotinib as first-line TKI. Among these, the median OS for Variant 2 was not reached; it was 38 months and 24 months for Variant 1 and Variant 3, respectively. The median PFS for crizotinib treated patients was 8.3 months (Variant 2: 11 months, Variant 1: 8 months, and Variant 3: 9 months). On propensity-matched analyses, there was no difference in OS and PFS between Variant 1 and Variant 3, with higher HR for Variant 3. We present a large data set evaluating clinical and outcome differences between ALK variants. The unique standpoint of this study involves the propensity-weighted model to account for differences among the groups, with no prognostic differences between Variant 1 and Variant 3, which is distinct from literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33844110What 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.