ReviewCancers2025
A Meta-Analysis of First-Line Treatments for Unresectable Pleural Mesothelioma: Indirect Comparisons from Reconstructed Individual Patient Data of Six Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Five-Year Clinical Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Pleural Mesothelioma in CheckMate 743.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026Trial
- Pivotal role of long non-coding RNA in the development of new therapeutic approaches for plural mesothelioma.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- The Evolving Role of Chemotherapy in the Management of Pleural Malignancies: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Cancers · 2025Review
- Combining Chemotherapeutic Agents, Targeted Therapies, Vaccines and Natural Bioactive Compounds for Mesothelioma: Advances and Perspectives.Oncology research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn unresectable pleural mesothelioma, pemetrexed+cisplatin as first line is considered the standard of care, but novel treatments have been recently proposed.
methodsOur objective was to compare, albeit indirectly, the results of randomized controlled trials on overall survival (OS). The IPDfromKM method was employed for reconstruct individual patient data (IPD) from the graphs of Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox statistics was run to estimate hazard ratios (HRs).
resultsAfter a literature search on Medline (via PubMed) and Scopus databases, six randomized controlled trials were identified in which five new treatments (nivolumab plus ipilimumab, bevacizumab plus pemetrexed plus cisplatin, chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab, ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin and cediranib plus pemetrexed+cisplatin with maintenance with cediranib) were evaluated. In five trials, pemetrexed plus cisplatin was the standard of care given to the control arms. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab, bevacizumab plus pemetrexed plus cisplatin and chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab showed a significantly better OS compared with controls. ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin did not significantly improve OS. In contrast, OS worsened with cisplatin alone and with cediranib plus pemetrexed+cisplatin with maintenance with cediranib. DISCUSSION: Our analysis indicates that, in patients with unresectable pleural mesothelioma, three of the five novel treatments provided a significant survival benefit compared with the standard of care. Further research is needed to confirm the OS benefit found in our analysis with some treatments, whereas cisplatin alone and cediranib plus pemetrexed+cisplatin with maintenance with cediranib do not seem to deserve further research.
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.