Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38302922›Full record

SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2024

Effectiveness of bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yu Song, Qianqian Mao, Manling Zhou, Cheng-Jiang Liu, Li Kong, Ting Hu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

6 authors.

Yu Song *Department of Intensive Care Unit, the First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong Traditional Medical University, 250000, Jinan, China.
Qianqian Mao *Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, No. 87 Dingjiaqiao Road, 210009, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Manling ZhouDepartment of Oncology, Shenzhen Longhua District Central Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Cheng-Jiang LiuDepartment of General Medicine, Affiliated Anqing First People's Hospital of Anhui Medical University, 246000, Anqing, AnHui, China. mrliu0420@foxmail.com.
Li KongDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, the First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong Traditional Medical University, 250000, Jinan, China. konglizy2@163.com.
Ting Hu *Department of General Practice, Anqing Municipal Hospital, 246000, Anqing, AnHui, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5629-5571

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the benefit of bevacizumab under the comprehensive treatment strategy and its advantages over other drugs, so as to provide reference for the formulation of clinical plans.

methodsAs of October 1, 2022, the randomized controlled clinical trials of bevacizumab in combination with metastatic colorectal cancer published in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Medline databases were searched. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the short-term disease control effect and long-term survival of the treatment strategy.

results21 RCTs (6665 patients; 3356 patients in the experimental group and 3309 patients in the control group; average age, 55-75 years) were treated with bevacizumab as the experimental group for metastatic colorectal cancer. BEV has stronger anti-tumor activity than the single treatment scheme (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.11-1.52). And Benefits of the BEV group were 0.73 (0.55, 0.96), 1.26 (0.71, 2.24), 1.63 (0.92, 2.87) and 0.07 (0.02, 0.25) compared with CET, VAN, CED and PAN respectively. The disease control of BEV combined therapy was better (OR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.78). The same as compared with cediranib (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.06-3.55). However, the long-term prognosis of BEV, including the overall survival (HRs = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84-1.15) and progression-free survival (HRs = 1.05,95% CI: 0.97-1.13) were not prolonged. The survival benefits of cetuximab and panitumumab were not reflected.

conclusionThe addition of BEV can enhance the anti-tumor ability and disease control, while cetuximab and panitumumab may have stronger ability. However, it did not effectively improve the survival of patients. A more reasonable and effective treatment plan needs more clinical experimental support.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsRectal NeoplasmsAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabCetuximabHumansMiddle AgedPanitumumabBevacizumabCetuximabPanitumumabBevacizumabColorectal cancerCombinationOdds ratio

Identifiers

PMID38302922
PMCPMC10832121

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.