ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2024
Real-world clinical efficacy of bevacizumab biosimilar in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bevacizumab is extensively used in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Numerous clinical trials have proven the clinical efficacies of bevacizumab biosimilars (BB). Objective: Our study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between bevacizumab reference product (RP) and BB among advanced NSCLC patients in a real-world setting. Design: We retrospectively analyzed stage IV metastatic NSCLC patients who were treated with bevacizumab as part of a combination therapy. Patients were categorized into chemotherapy (CT) and epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) groups. We compared the patients' characteristics, treatment efficacy, and adverse events between RP and BB in the two treatment groups. Methods: From January 2020 to July 2022, a total of 171 patients who underwent combination therapy with bevacizumab were screened. Seventy-nine of these patients met the study's inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the final analysis. We utilized the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and the log-rank test to compare PFS between groups. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of PFS. Results: Within the CT cohort, 34 patients were treated with RP in combination with platinum and pemetrexed, and 25 patients received a combination regimen with BB. The median PFS was 6.9 months in the RP group and 8.9 months in the BB group ( Conclusion: In our advanced NSCLC patients, we found no difference in clinical outcomes when receiving treatment with RP or BB. Given a combination regimen, BB was as effective as RP together with either CT or EGFR-TKIs.
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.