Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35683354›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Brigatinib in First-Line Treatments for Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Indirect Treatment Comparison.

Yongfeng Yu, Fanfan Zhu, Wenxin Zhang, Shun Lu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [Recent Advances in the Treatment of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer with Brigatinib].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yongfeng YuShanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200052, China.
Fanfan ZhuTakeda (China) International Trading Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200124, China.
Wenxin ZhangTakeda (China) International Trading Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200124, China.
Shun LuShanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200052, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8833-7262
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China 2016YFC1303300 to S.LNational Natural Science Foundation of China 82030045 to S.LShanghai Chest Hospital Project of Collaborative Innovation YJXT20190105 to S.LShanghai Municipal Science & Technology Commission Research Project 19411950500 to S.LTakeda (China) International Trading Co., Ltd. an affiliation of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: The relative efficacy and safety of brigatinib compared with other next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors remains unclear, as first-line head-to-head trials have not been conducted. (2) Methods: Electronic databases were systematically searched for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCT) from January 2010 to October 2021. Outcomes evaluated by indirect treatment comparison (ITC) included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. (3) Results: Nine RCTs with 2484 patients assessing crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib, ensartinib, and lorlatinib were included. In intent-to-treat (ITT) patients, brigatinib significantly prolonged blinded independent review committee-assessed PFS compared with crizotinib (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.66) and ceritinib (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.23, 0.60) and had a comparable PFS with other 2nd-generation ALK inhibitors. Subgroup analyses of patients with baseline brain metastases and Asian patients yielded results similar to the base case. Brigatinib significantly reduced the risk of death compared with crizotinib (HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28, 0.87) after adjusting for treatment crossover in the crizotinib arm. No significant differences were observed in OS between brigatinib and other next-generation ALK inhibitors. Brigatinib had significantly superior effects in ORR and intracranial ORR compared to crizotinib. The incidence of grade ≥3 AEs was similar between brigatinib and other next-generation ALK inhibitors (except for alectinib), while brigatinib could significantly delay the time to worsening in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) vs. crizotinib (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.98). (4) Conclusions: Brigatinib had longer PFS compared to crizotinib and ceritinib and had comparable efficacy and safety profile with other 2nd-generation ALK inhibitors in first-line treatments for patients with

Indexed as

ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancerindirect treatment comparisonsystematic reviewtyrosine kinase inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID35683354
PMCPMC9181407
OpenAlexW4281556075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.