ArticleCurrent cancer drug targets2025
Efficacy and Safety of PD-1/L1 Inhibitors Combined with Anlotinib versus PD-1/L1 Inhibitors Combined with Bevacizumab in Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Comparative Cohort Study.
Article in Current cancer drug targets, 2025. 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.
- Restoring osimertinib sensitivity in EGFR-mutant NSCLC: the role of anlotinib in modulating Wnt/β-catenin/YAP pathways.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of PD-1/L1 in-hibitors combined with anlotinib versus PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with bevacizumab as second-line treatments for advanced NSCLC patients Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out on data from advanced NSCLC patients who received either PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with anlotinib or PD-1/L1 inhibitors com-bined with bevacizumab as second-line therapy. Clinical outcomes, including Overall Sur-vival (OS), Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Objective Response Rate (ORR), Disease Con-trol Rate (DCR), and Adverse Events (AEs), were compared between the two treatment groups.
resultsThe results revealed that patients receiving PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with anlo-tinib exhibited better efficacy compared to patients receiving PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with bevacizumab (mPFS 5.0m vs. 4.0m, mOS 10.0m vs. 8.0m, ORR 31.25% vs. 17.14%, DCR 65.63% vs. 45.71%). Additionally, both treatment regimens were generally well-tolerated, with most adverse events being manageable and of mild to moderate severity. However, compared with patients receiving PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with bevaci-zumab, those receiving PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with anlotinib have higher incidence rates of certain adverse reactions (hypertension: 34.38% vs. 17.14%, proteinuria: 25% vs. 14.29%), implying that drug combinations of the same treatment modality may exhibit dif-ferences in efficacy and adverse reactions.
conclusionIn this comparative study, PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with anlotinib demon-strated superior efficacy compared to PD-1/L1 inhibitors combined with bevacizumab as second-line therapy for advanced NSCLC patients, with a manageable safety profile. These findings provide valuable clinical evidence for guiding treatment decisions in this patient population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39819544What 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.