ArticleClinical and translational science2024
Risk of artery dissection during systemic exposure to vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 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.
- Risk of artery dissection during systemic exposure to vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whether or not vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors (VPIs) increase the risk of artery dissection is still unknown. This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the possibility of artery dissection as a class effect of VPIs using nationwide real-world data. This cohort study was conducted based on the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups of Japan (NDB), which spans nearly the entire Japanese population of over 100 million individuals. We included the patients prescribed with 12 types of VPIs between 2012 and 2020. The incidence rate (IR) ratio of artery dissection for each VPI were estimated in comparison with bevacizumab, the only VPI in Japan with artery dissection listed in the package insert. Artery dissection as an outcome was targeted for acute artery dissection requiring hospitalization (including dissecting aneurysm). As a reference, a natural IR standardized by sex and age of bevacizumab-prescribed patients was also estimated using the direct method for the general population of NDB. Of 503,342 patients, the IR of artery dissection for bevacizumab was 44.4 (/100,000 person-years), and the adjusted IR ratios for each VPI compared with bevacizumab were consistently similar to or >1.0. The IRs for each VPI were also higher than the crude natural IR (1.66/100,000 person-years; 95% CI: 1.59-1.73) and the standardized natural IR (2.18/100,000 person-years; 95% CI: 1.86-2.50). Real-world evidence suggests the risk of artery dissection as a class effect of VPIs. More attention on this risk will be necessary when using VPIs in clinical practice.
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.