ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Second-Line Treatment Options for Advanced Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding Small Cell Lung Cancer: Molecular Subtypes, Surface Antigens, and the Target-Modality Problem.Cancers · 2026Review
- Current and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for Limited- and Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Real-World Outcomes with Lurbinectedin in Second Line and Beyond for Extensive Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer in Korea.Lung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAs monotherapy such as topotecan has reached a plateau of effectiveness, new second-line treatments based on experience have been used in clinical application. This study compared the efficacy and safety of different second-line treatments for advanced small-cell lung cancer (SCLC).
methodsA total of 380 patients with advanced SCLC were screened selectively in the retrospective study. Adverse events and patient responses were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 and Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors v1.1. The progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method or Cox survival regression model and compared using the log-rank test.
resultsIn the platinum-resistant group, disease control rate (DCR) and median PFS (mPFS) were prolonged in the combination group versus single-agent group (DCR: 49.24% vs 24.39%,
conclusionsFor patients with platinum-resistant SCLC, combination therapy has shown better efficacy and acceptable toxicity profile than monotherapy. Among combination therapies, irinotecan-platinum has shown better efficacy than taxol-platinum. For patients with platinum-sensitive SCLC, the efficacy of different single-agent or combination therapies was similar.
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.