Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35882206›Full record

SynthesisOncology research and treatment2022

Efficacy and Safety of Bevacizumab in Pretreated Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Zhijun Li, Fengzhu Guo, Yiqun Han, Jiayu Wang, Binghe Xu

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oncology research and treatment, 2022. 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Zhijun LiDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China, 15222121700@163.com.
Fengzhu GuoDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yiqun HanDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jiayu WangDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Binghe XuDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of bevacizumab in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is controversial. This meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the regimen including bevacizumab among patients with pretreated MBC.

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for previously treated MBC patients. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). The secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the identified studies. This study was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.

resultsFour studies involving 1,640 individuals were included. Pooling results showed that the PFS of bevacizumab-containing groups (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73-0.93, p = 0.002) was significantly better than that of the control groups, especially when bevacizumab was administered as the second-line treatment for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative MBC (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.66-0.88, p = 0.0002). The ORR in the bevacizumab-containing group was superior to that in the control group, both in the general (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.18-1.78, p = 0.0004) and HER2-negative groups (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.03-1.63, p = 0.03). However, no significant effect on OS was demonstrated for the addition of bevacizumab to the second-line treatment for HER2-negative MBC (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.79-1.10, p = 0.39). Comparatively, proteinuria was more common in the bevacizumab-containing group. In addition, the application of bevacizumab tended to result in therapy discontinuation due to treatment-related toxicity.

conclusionsBevacizumab-containing chemotherapy, in light of its favorable effects on clinical outcomes, could be a preferred therapeutic option for patients with MBC, for whom the disease must be rapidly relieved. Further studies are warranted for exploring the advantageous patients with the receipt of bevacizumab in multiline treatment.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansBevacizumabBevacizumabChemotherapyMeta-analysisMetastatic breast cancerTargeted therapy

Identifiers

PMID35882206
PMCPMC9677857
OpenAlexW4288182089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.