ArticleThoracic cancer2022
The exploration of three different treatment models of osimertinib plus antiangiogenic agents in non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world study.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers and immunotherapy in endometrial cancer: mechanisms and clinical applications.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Comparison of osimertinib plus bevacizumab against osimertinib alone in NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Article
- The exploration of three different treatment models of osimertinib plus antiangiogenic agents in non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world study.Thoracic cancer · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReal-world application of osimertinib with antiangiogenic agents in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is common, but the efficacy data are rarely reported.
methodsTo obtain an objective efficacy report of different real-world treatment models of osimertinib and antiangiogenic agents.
resultsA total of 54 patients with NSCLC were enrolled into the study. Twelve (22.2%) who received a combination of antiangiogenic agents, when there was a trend of osimertinib resistance but did not reach imageology progressive disease (PD), were assigned to Group A, with a median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of 48.0 (95% CI, not reached) and 21.0 (95% CI: 16.7-25.3) months, respectively. Thirty (55.6%) who received a combination of antiangiogenic agents when there was imageology PD during treatment with osimertinib were assigned to Group B, with a median OS and PFS of 31.8 (95% CI: 26.6-37.1) and 9.2 (95% CI: 5.9-12.6) months, respectively. Twelve (22.2%) who received a combination of antiangiogenic agents at the initial treatment with osimertinib were assigned to Group C, with a median OS and PFS of 28.5 (95% CI: 15.2-41.8) and 15.3 (95% CI: 7.9-22.7) months, respectively. Patients in Group A achieved a significant prolonged median PFS (p < 0.001) compared with Groups B and C. Absence of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutations (p = 0.043; hazard ratio [HR] = 2.124, 95% CI: 1.023-4.413) and no previous antiangiogenic agent application (p = 0.012; HR = 0.362, 95% CI: 0.163-0.863) were the independent prognostic factors of OS.
conclusionThe well-timed action to combine antiangiogenic agents was when there was a trend of osimertinib resistance. The absence of EGFR T790M mutations and previous use of antiangiogenic agents were poor prognostic factors.
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.