Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36523992›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

Comparison of the efficacy and safety in the treatment strategies between chemotherapy combined with antiangiogenic and with immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with negative PD-L1 expression: A network meta-analysis.

Jiaqi Li, Yingjie Chen, Fan Hu, Huiping Qiang, Qing Chang, Jialin Qian, Yinchen Shen, Yong Cai, Tianqing Chu

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiaqi LiDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Yingjie ChenSchool of Public Health, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Fan HuSchool of Public Health, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Huiping QiangDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Qing ChangDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Jialin QianDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Yinchen ShenDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Yong CaiSchool of Public Health, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Tianqing ChuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Chest Hospital · CNShanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), for those patients with negative PD-L1 expression, which treatment strategy has the better efficacy and safety between chemotherapy combined with antiangiogenic and with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is still unclear due to the absence of head-to-head clinical trials. This study aims to answer the question by performing a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were systematically searched accordingly to extract eligible studies from inception to October 2022, as well as the abstracts from the most recent main oncology congresses (American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC), and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) of grades 3 to 5 were independently extracted and collected by two reviewers based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. We used Cochrane's risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials through RevMan 5.3 to ascertain the quality of the included studies. NMA with a Bayesian random-effects model was performed by R (version 4.0.4). Results: According to the ranking list from OS-NMA, pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy has the most effective ranking first (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) = 0.809844) (pooled HR = 0.65 [0.51-0.83]). On PFS, the triple combination of nivolumab/bevacizumab/chemotherapy ranks first (NMA estimate: HR = 0.35 [0.28-0.43]). On safety, in combination with chemotherapy, sintilimab has minimal toxicity, followed by pembrolizumab+chemo. Conclusions: In advanced NSCLC patients with negative PD-L1 expression, pembrolizumab+chemo ranks first in the efficacy of OS and does not apparently increase the incidence of any grade ≥ 3 AE as compared with chemo alone. On PFS, pembrolizumab also has advantages, but for patients with squamous cell carcinoma, camrelizumab+chemo seems to be a better choice. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021231441.

Indexed as

antiangiogenic therapycombinationimmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)negative PD-L1 expressionnetwork meta-analysis (NMA)non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1)survival analysis

Identifiers

PMID36523992
PMCPMC9746688
OpenAlexW4310289742

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.