Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36824127›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023

Effectiveness and safety of pembrolizumab for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer in real-world studies and randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Beibei Yang, Bing Wang, Yongbang Chen, Ning Wan, Fei Xie, Ning Yang, Liqing Lu, Weibin Xiao, Jin Yuan, Jian Li and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Beibei YangDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Baoji Central Hospital, Baoji, Shaanxi, China.
Bing WangDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Yongbang ChenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Ning WanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Fei XieDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Ning YangDepartment of Oncology, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Liqing LuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Weibin XiaoDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Jin YuanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Jian LiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Bo XieDepartment of Oncology, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
Bo JiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Southern Theater Command, Guangzhou, China.
General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command · CNChinese PLA General Hospital · CNSouthern Medical University · CNBaoji City Central Hospital · CNJinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have confirmed the favorable clinical benefit of pembrolizumab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, considering the strict inclusion and exclusion criteria in clinical research, there are certain differences between patients in the real-world, it is unclear whether the findings of clinical trials are fully representative of the treatment efficacy in patients who will eventually use it. Therefore, to further comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in NSCLC, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the latest RCTs and real-world studies (RWSs). Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, The Web of Science, and clinical trials.gov as of December 2021. RCTs and RWSs of patients receiving pembrolizumab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC were included. Results: The meta-analysis ultimately included 11 RCTs and 26 RWSs with a total of 10,695 patients. The primary outcomes of this study were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), serious adverse events (SAEs), the incidence of severe pneumonia reactions, and drug-related mortality. Direct meta-analysis results showed that in RCTs, pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy was superior to chemotherapy in terms of OS (HR=0.60, 95%CI:0.50-0.73), PFS (HR=0.47, 95%CI:0.38-0.58) and ORR (OR=3.22, 95%CI:2.57-4.03); pembrolizumab monotherapy was superior to chemotherapy in terms of OS (HR=0.73, 95%CI:0.66-0.80) and ORR (OR=1.90, 95%CI:1.17-3.09), but comparable to chemotherapy in terms of PFS (HR=0.83, 95%CI:0.66-1.04). The ORR values in retrospective single-arm studies were 45% (40%-51%). Conclusion: In RCTs, pembrolizumab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy is more effective and safer than chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC. In RWSs, ECOG PS 0-1 was shown to correlate with PFS and OS for patients with NSCLC.

Indexed as

meta-analysisnon-small cell lung cancerpembrolizumabrandomized controlled trialsreal-world studies

Identifiers

PMID36824127
PMCPMC9942927
OpenAlexW4319440702

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.