ArticleDisease markers2023
The Use of Cytotoxic Drugs as First Line Chemotherapy for EGFR (+) Nonsquamous NSCLC: A Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Disease markers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retracted: The Use of Cytotoxic Drugs as First Line Chemotherapy for EGFR (+) Nonsquamous NSCLC: A Network Meta-Analysis.Disease markers · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-11-29Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Paper Mill · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions · · See also: https://pubpeer.com/publications/50E49A1CD43E6FCDE939EBD58DB129
- Retracted
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the use of cytotoxic drugs as first-line chemotherapy for nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation. Method: This study uses the network meta-analysis (NMA) method, with the inclusion of prospective randomized control studies related to the treatment of EGFR-positive nonsquamous NSCLC, to compare the efficacy of various EGFR-TKIs. As of September 4, 2022, 16 studies on a total of 4180 patients were included. The retrieved literature was comprehensively evaluated as per the established inclusion and exclusion criteria, and valid data were extracted and included for analysis. Results: The 6 treatment regimens included cetuximab, CTX (cyclophosphamide), icotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, and erlotinib. All of the 16 studies reported their findings about overall survival (OS), and 15 of them also reported findings about progression-free survival (PFS). The NMA results showed that there was no significant difference in OS among the 6 treatment regimens. It was observed that erlotinib had the highest likelihood of obtaining the best OS, followed by afatinib, gefitinib, icotinib, CTX, and cetuximab, in descending order. This indicates that the highest possibility of achieving the best OS was with erlotinib, while the lowest was with cetuximab. The NMA results also showed that the PFS achieved with treatment using afatinib, erlotinib, and gefitinib were all higher than that with treatment using CTX, with statistically significant differences. The results showed that there was no significant difference in PFS among erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, cetuximab, and icotinib. CTX, cetuximab, icotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, and erlotinib were ranked in descending order based on the PFS indicator SUCRA values, which implied that erlotinib had the highest possibility in achieving the best PFS, while CTX had the lowest.
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.