ArticleTranslational cancer research2020
Efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenesis medicines for advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of vascular-targeting agents in advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Inhibition of anlotinib-induced autophagy attenuates invasion and migration by regulating epithelial-mesenchymal transition and cytoskeletal rearrangement through ATG5 in human osteosarcoma cells.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2024Article
- Comparison between trabectedin and doxorubicin in soft-tissue sarcomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgery-based treatment is the standard method for the early-stage soft tissue sarcoma (STS) with relatively good clinical outcome. However, the recurrence and metastasis decrease the survival of STS, regardless of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. On the other hand, anti-angiogenesis treatments for STS have been clinically applied in recent years. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of anti-angiogenesis medicines for the treatment of advanced STS, we conducted a meta-analysis.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from inception to September 5, 2019. And finally, nine studies with 1,230 patients were included after rigorous screening. The endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse reactions (AEs). And we analyzed them with the risk ratio (RR) or the hazard ratio (HR). Moreover, heterogeneity and sensitivity were also analyzed.
resultsThe pooled data showed that anti-angiogenesis medicines significantly benefited ORR [risk ratio (RR) =2.16, 95% CI: 1.47-3.17, P<0.001], and DCR (RR =1.68, 95% CI: 1.49-1.89, P<0.001), respectively, and improved the PFS (HR =0.50, 95% CI: 0.41-0.59, P<0.001), and OS (HR =0.77, 95% CI: 0.63-0.95, P<0.05), respectively. However, as for grade III or higher acute AEs, the antiangiogenic treatment increased morbidities of hypertension (RR =4.88, P<0.005), and diarrhea (RR =3.98, P=0.021) compared to the control group. And no significant difference was found in bone marrow inhibition, vomiting, anemia, and mucositis.
conclusionsAnti-angiogenesis treatments are beneficial in short-term efficacy and long-term survival for the recurrence and metastasis of STS, and the AEs are tolerable.
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.