ArticleCancer medicine2024
Efficacy of first-line treatment options beyond RET-TKIs in advanced RET-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer: A multi-center real-world study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough RET-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (RET-TKIs) are the preferred first-line therapy for advanced RET-arranged NSCLC, most patients cannot afford them. In this population, bevacizumab, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy are the most commonly used regimens. However, the optimal scheme beyond RET-TKIs has not been defined in the first-line setting.
methodsThis retrospective study included 86 stage IV NSCLC patients harboring RET rearrangement from six cancer centers between May 2017 and October 2022. RET-TKIs, chemotherapy, or one of the combination therapies (including immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combined with chemotherapy (I + C), bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (B + C), ICI and bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (I + B + C)), were used as the first-line therapeutics. The clinical outcomes and safety were evaluated.
resultsFourteen of the 86 patients received RET-TKIs, 57 received combination therapies, and 15 received chemotherapy alone. Their medium PFS (mPFS) were 16.92 months (95% CI: 5.9-27.9 months), 8.7 months (95% CI: 6.5-11.0 months), and 5.55 months (95% CI: 2.4-8.7 months) respectively. Among all the combination schemes, B + C (p = 0.007) or I + B + C (p = 0.025) gave beneficial PFS compared with chemotherapy, while I + C treatment (p = 0.169) generated comparable PFS with chemotherapy. In addition, I + B + C treatment had a numerically longer mPFS (12.21 months) compared with B + C (8.74 months) or I + C (7.89 months) schemes. In terms of safety, I + B + C treatment led to the highest frequency of hematological toxicity (50%) and vomiting (75%), but no ≥G3 adverse effect was observed.
conclusionsI + B + C might be a preferred option beyond RET-TKIs in the first-line therapy of RET-arranged NSCLC. Combination with Bevacizumab rather than with ICIs offered favorable survival compared with chemotherapy alone.
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.