ArticleBiomedical reports2025
Role of dasatinib in the management of lung cancer: A meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Article in Biomedical reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of ICAM and VCAM as biomarkers in serum and bronchoscopic lavage samples of lung cancer patients.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Senescence-associated gene signatures predict survival in lung cancer: a multi-cohort analysis.GeroScience · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, has prompted extensive research into innovative treatments, including targeted therapies. The present meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of dasatinib, both as monotherapy and in combination with other therapies, for the treatment of lung cancer. Adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, a meticulous, thorough review of clinical trials was conducted across reputable databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed/MEDLINE, and EMBASE, focusing on studies published in English up to May 5th, 2024. Inclusion criteria were restricted to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of dasatinib, either as a standalone therapy or in combination with other treatments. The search identified 55 studies, of which nine RCTs met the inclusion criteria: four phase II, three phase I, and two phase I/II. A total of 234 patients participated, with 107 receiving dasatinib alone and 127 undergoing combination therapy. Histological analyses revealed that 79.1% of patients had non-small cell lung cancer, with adenocarcinoma being the predominant subtype (63.8%), followed by squamous cell carcinoma (22.1%). Treatment responses varied, with 52.4% of the patients in the dasatinib alone group experiencing progressive disease, while 38.3% achieved stable disease; by contrast, 29.6% of patients in the combination therapy showed progressive disease. Adverse events, including anemia and fatigue, were more prevalent with combination therapies. Dasatinib treatment shows potential for improving overall survival with fewer adverse events compared with combination therapies in patients with lung cancer; however, large-scale clinical trials are essential to confirm its efficacy as a standalone treatment.
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.