ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022
Optimal Choice as First-Line Therapy for Patients with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
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
To identify the advantageous therapy as the first-line treatment for patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Randomized controlled trials were searched for on Medline, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library between January 2001 and December 2021. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). A Bayesian framework was applied to facilitate indirect comparisons, of which the outcomes were presented using cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values, synthesized hazard ratio, risk ratio, and 95% credible interval. A total of 3140 patients were identified. Pooled results of PFS revealed that chemotherapy plus AKT inhibitors (AKTi) was likely the most effective therapy among enrolled therapies (SUCRA = 91.6%), of which the result remained consistent in comparative analysis for OS. In addition, no significant difference was detected between PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies in patients, whereas the PD-1 inhibitors (PD-1i) regimen was advantageous over PD-L1 inhibitor (PD-L1i) therapy for PD-L1 positive TNBC. Concerning TRAEs, an apparent heterogeneity associated with safety profiles were denoted among enrolled agents. Chemotherapy plus AKTi was the most effective therapy with comparable safety profiles. Chemotherapy plus the anti-PD-1 regimen was advantageous over the combination therapy based on the PD-L1 blockade.
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.