SynthesisCombinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening2025
Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Targeted Drugs in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) are becoming a new treatment approach for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, the results regarding its efficacy compared with the standard regimen of targeted therapy are not consistent.
aimsOur aim was to conduct a meta-analysis of existing studies to reveal the differences in the efficacy and safety of the two systems of treatment.
methodsThe related studies were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception to June 30th, 2022. Data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and rate of treatment- related adverse events (TrAEs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled and analyzed by Stata 12.0 software.
resultsA total of ten high-quality controlled clinical studies with 5,539 patients with uHCC were included. The hazard ratio (HR) of the OS and PFS were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74-0.86) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58-0.89), respectively. In addition, the odds ratio (OR) of the ORR and DCR were 3.39 (95% CI, 2.75-4.17) and 1.20 (95% CI, 0.84-1.73), respectively. The ORR of ICIs monotherapy, ICIs plus anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and ICIs plus ICIs were 16% (95% CI, 0.13-0.18), 17% (95% CI, 0.10-0.27), and 20% (95% CI, 0.16-0.24), respectively. For all included studies, the OR of the overall TrAEs was 0.51(95% CI, 0.22-1.18), and grade ≥ 3 TrAEs was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.53-1.14).
conclusionICIs were more effective than targeted drugs concerning survival periods and ORR in patients with uHCC while maintaining a stable safety profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38920069What 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.