SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2024
Efficacy and safety of IDH inhibitors in IDH-mutated cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4 randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- State of the Art of IDH Inhibitors: Emerging Questions and Perspectives.Anti-cancer agents in medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- Biomarkers of Cancer Metabolism and Therapeutic Response.Cancer treatment and research · 2026Review
- Mitochondrial metabolism and cancer therapeutic innovation.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Impairment of Tricarboxylic Acid Cycle (TCA) Cycle in Alzheimer's Disease: Mechanisms, Implications, and Potential Therapies.Aging and disease · 2025Review
- Review
- Targeted mitochondrial therapy for pancreatic cancer.Translational oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIsocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) inhibitors have shown great promise in the treatment of cancers with IDH mutations. There have been numerous clinical trials conducted on IDH inhibitors, and to evaluate their efficacy and safety, we aim to perform a meta-analysis.
methodsTo gather data on the efficacy and safety of IDH inhibitors for IDH-mutated cancers, we systematically searched through databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Using RevMan5.4, we performed a meta-analysis and calculated the odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI). The parameters considered were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and TRAEs ≥ 3.
resultsThis meta-analysis included four studies, involving a total of 751 patients. According to the analysis, there was no significant difference in overall survival, treatment-related adverse events, and severe treatment-related adverse events between the experimental group (receiving IDH inhibitors) and the control group. However, the progression-free survival, objective response rate, and disease control rate in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group.
conclusionThe overall efficacy of IDH inhibitors in treating cancers with IDH mutations is superior to that of conventional medical therapy, potentially providing more clinical benefits to patients. The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different from conventional medical therapy. Therefore, IDH inhibitors should be considered as the preferred choice for treating cancers with IDH mutations. However, further randomized controlled clinical trials are still required for verification.
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.