ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
The Treatment Status of Patients in NSCLC With RET Fusion Under the Prelude of Selective RET-TKI Application in China: A Multicenter Retrospective Research.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy and safety of selective RET inhibitors in RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.Investigational new drugs · 2023Pooled it
- Previous treatment decreases efficacy of pralsetinib in RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Real-World Outcomes of SelectiveCancers · 2024Article
- Evolution of treatment strategies for solid tumors with RET rearrangement in China and real-world treatment status of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Diagnosis, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Real-World Patients with RET Fusion-Positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in China.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Review
- Efficacy of immunotherapy inHeliyon · 2024Article
- Article
- Efficacy of first-line treatment options beyond RET-TKIs in advanced RET-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer: A multi-center real-world study.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Case Report: Efficacy of anlotinib and sintilimab in treating lung adenocarcinoma with RET fusion and PD-L1 expression.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with RET Fusions: Reality and Hopes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Selpercatinib: A Review in Advanced RET Fusion-Positive NSCLC.Targeted oncology · 2023Review
- Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of a Driving Target: RET Rearrangements in non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Especially in China.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rearranged during transfection (RET) fusion is a kind of uncommon mutation (about 1%) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although selective tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) (selpercatinib and pralsetinib) have been available, there are no real-world data about the difference in the efficacy between RET-TKI and other regimens in China. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of 49 patients with RET-fusion-positive NSCLC. The characteristics and the clinical outcomes with RET-TKI, multi-kinase inhibitor (MKI), systematic chemotherapy, and immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based regimens were evaluated. Results: Of the 92 treatments in patients included, RET-TKI was administered 24 times (26.1%), systematic chemotherapy was 35 times (38.0%), ICI-based regimens was 26 times (28.3%), and MKI was 7 times (7.6%). RET-TKI had a higher objective response rate than the chemotherapy and ICI-based regimens (63.6% vs. 14.3% vs. 21.0%, p < 0.001). The median progress-free survival (mPFS) of RET-TKI, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and MKI was 16.9 (95% CI: 1.8-32.0) months, 11.9 (95% CI: 7.7-16.1) months, 6.7 (95% CI: 2.9-10.5) months, and 2.8 (95% CI: 1.1-4.4) months, respectively. The mPFS of RET-TKI was longer than MKI and immunotherapy (p < 0.001), while without difference with chemotherapy (p = 0.096). Moreover, chemotherapy had longer mPFS than MKI (p < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, patients with brain metastases in RET-TKI treatment had worse mPFS than the one of patients without brain metastases (6.1 (95% CI: 0.0-13.9) months and 8.5 (95% CI: 6.3-10.6) months, p = 0.012). For patients having chemotherapy with or without angiogenesis inhibitors, the mPFS was 12.0 (95% CI: 11.05-13.02) months and 9.1 (95% CI: 8.31-9.89) months (p = 0.468). In the group of ICI-based regimens, the expression level of PD-L1 did not affect the mPFS of ICI [PD-L1 (+) vs. PD-L1 (-): 4.7 (95% CI: 1.8-9.0) months vs. 7.6 (95% CI: 1.1-14.0) months, p = 0.910]. For overall patients, ECOG PS score, therapy lines, and therapeutic regimens were the independent factors affecting the prognosis. Conclusions: In RET-fusion-positive NSCLC, RET-TKI is the best choice for a better response rate and PFS. In addition, chemotherapy which may bring a good PFS, is still a good choice for this group of patients.
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.