ArticleThoracic cancer2025
A Real-World Study: Therapeutic Outcomes of ROS1-Positive Advanced NSCLC.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundROS1 gene rearrangement is an important target for NSCLC treatment. There is not yet sufficient real-world data on ROS1 diagnostic methods, treatment selection, and clinical outcomes in the Chinese population.
methodsA single-center retrospective collection of patients with a diagnosis of ROS1-positive advanced NSCLC from July 2011 to November 2021 was performed to document the method of ROS1 testing, treatment options, efficacy, and resistance to ROS1 inhibitors in these patients.
resultsThe method of ROS1 testing and initial treatment selection were significantly correlated with time. ROS1 testing shifted from FISH (67% pre-2019) to NGS (96.3% post-2019; p < 0.001). First-line ROS1-TKI use increased from 60.0% to 92.0% (p = 0.041). The vast majority of patients (90.0%) chose crizotinib as the initial ROS1 inhibitor, with objective response rates (for patients with target lesions) and median progression-free survival of 82.8% (95% CI: 68.1%-97.9%) and 18.7 months (95% CI: 8.9-28.4 months), respectively. CNS was the most common site of progression for crizotinib (60%, 13/26, including 11 intracranial progressions alone). Compared to patients who received a chemotherapy-based regimen (n = 8) as first-line therapy, patients who received ROS1-TKI (n = 32) as first-line therapy had significantly longer median PFS (18.3 months vs. 3.7 months, p < 0.001). For ROS1 inhibitor-resistant patients, 48.3% of patients underwent rebiopsy throughout the course of their disease, with G2032R being the most common secondary ROS1 mutation (7/8).
conclusionWith the innovation of diagnostic and therapeutic methods and the expansion of the scope of the health insurance coverage, more and more patients are benefiting from new technologies and targeted drugs. Although crizotinib has brought excellent therapeutic data for ROS1-positive patients, better brain protection strategies should be explored for ROS1-positive patients in the future. In addition, the low rate of rebiopsy in real-world ROS1-positive patients should also be emphasized 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.