ArticleThoracic cancer2023
Savolitinib versus crizotinib for treating MET positive non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive characterization of MET exon 14 skipping mutations in non-small cell lung cancer.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Discovery of Novel 2-Substituted Aniline Pyrimidine Based Derivatives as Potent Mer/c-Met Dual Inhibitors with Improvement Bioavailability.Biomolecules · 2025Article
- De Novo MET-amplified NSCLC treated with savolitinib achieved remarkable tumor regression: a case report and review of literature.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Exploring practical experience with different treatments in NSCLC patients with MET-deregulated: a retrospective analysis from the real world.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Design, Synthesis, and Biological Evaluation of 2-Substituted Aniline Pyrimidine Derivatives as Potent Dual Mer/c-Met Inhibitors.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Savolitinib versus crizotinib for treating MET positive non-small cell lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe c-MET protein, encoded by the mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) gene, can regulate cell proliferation, migration and invasion. Studies have shown that it is one of the essential driver genes for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Currently, several clinical studies have carried out objective assessments on the efficacy and safety of different types of MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, direct cross-sectional comparisons between different agents are still not available.
methodsOur study was a single-center retrospective clinical study, which collected the data from MET positive NSCLC patients treated with MET TKIs at the Lung Cancer Center of Peking Union Medical College Hospital. We explored the efficacy and safety of crizotinib versus savolitinib in patients with METex14 skipping and MET amplification, separately.
resultsPatients with METex14 skipping (median PFS = 10.7 months) had a better clinical response to MET TKIs than MET amplification patients (median PFS = 4.1 months). In the METex14 skipping subgroup, savolitinib did not show better survival benefit with significance than crizotinib (p > 0.05). In the MET amplification subgroup, savolitinib (median PFS = 7.1 months) demonstrated a better progression-free survival benefit than crizotinib (median PFS = 1.4 months), p = 0.05. The most common adverse effects of both MET TKIs were peripheral edema (41.2%), gastrointestinal reactions (23.5%), and liver injury (14.7%). The incidence rate of peripheral edema was higher in savolitinib than crizotinib.
conclusionIn METex14 skipping NSCLC patients, the efficacy of savolitinib and crizotinib did not show significant difference. In MET amplification patients, savolitinib showed better efficacy than crizotinib.
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.