Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37219679›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2023

Clinical Outcomes for Previously Treated Patients with Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

Lauren A Abderhalden, Ping Wu, Mayur M Amonkar, Brian M Lang, Sukrut Shah, Fan Jin, Andrew M Frederickson, Ali Mojebi

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lauren A AbderhaldenMSD, Zurich, Switzerland. lauren.abderhalden@msd.com.
Ping WuPRECISIONheor, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Mayur M AmonkarMerck & Co., Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4135-4211
Brian M LangMSD, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1121-5982
Sukrut ShahMerck & Co., Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Fan JinMerck & Co., Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Andrew M FredericksonPRECISIONheor, New York, NY, USA.
Ali MojebiPRECISIONheor, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2318-8627
Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) · USMSD (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAlthough second-line treatments improve survival compared to best supportive care in patients with advanced gastric cancer with disease progression on first-line therapy, prognosis remains poor. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to quantify the efficacy of second-or-later line systemic therapies in this target population.

methodsA systematic literature review (January 1, 2000 to July 6, 2021) of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL with additional searches of 2019-2021 annual ASCO and ESMO conferences was conducted to identify studies in the target population. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed among studies involving chemotherapies and targeted therapies relevant in treatment guidelines and HTA activities. Outcomes of interest were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) presented as Kaplan-Meier data. Randomized controlled trials reporting any of the outcomes of interest were included. For OS and PFS, individual patient-level data were reconstructed from published Kaplan-Meier curves.

resultsForty-four trials were eligible for the analysis. Pooled ORR (42 trials; 77 treatment arms; 7256 participants) was 15.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12.7-17.5%). Median OS from the pooled analysis (34 trials; 64 treatment arms; 60,350 person-months) was 7.9 months (95% CI 7.4-8.5). Median PFS from the pooled analysis (32 trials; 61 treatment arms; 28,860 person-months) was 3.5 months (95% CI 3.2-3.7).

conclusionOur study confirms poor prognosis among patients with advanced gastric cancer, following disease progression on first-line therapy. Despite the approved, recommended, and experimental systemic treatments available, there is still an unmet need for novel interventions for this indication.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsStomach NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsDisease ProgressionEsophagogastric JunctionHumansPrognosisChemotherapyMeta-analysisMetastatic gastric cancerPretreated gastric cancerSystematic literature reviewTargeted therapy

Identifiers

PMID37219679
PMCPMC10754747
OpenAlexW4377564857

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.