ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Efficacy and safety of antibody-drug conjugates in the treatment of advanced urological cancers: a systematic review and a meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) offer novel therapeutic options for advanced urological cancers, but their efficacy and safety vary across cancer types. Many non-urothelial cancer ADC trials are small, nonrandomized studies with limited validated evaluation indicators. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ADCs across various urological cancers. Methods: Relevant studies were identified through searches in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP database and WanFang dataset, including randomized controlled trials, single-arm studies, and retrospective analyses on ADCs for advanced urological cancers. RoB 2.0, MINORS, and NOS were used for quality assessment, with R 4.4.0 for data analysis. Results: This meta-analysis included 46 studies with 3,250 patients, covering urothelial cancer (29 studies), renal cell carcinoma (5 studies), testicular cancer (2 studies), and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (10 studies). Three ADCs for urothelial cancer have received approval, including enfortumab vedotin (EV), sacituzumab govitecan (SG), and the HER2-ADC vedicilizumab (RC-48)/disitamab vedotin (DV). For urothelial cancer, the pooled overall response rate (ORR) was 43% (95% CI: 39%-47%) and disease control rate (DCR) was 76% (95% CI: 71%-80%). Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 11.55 months (95% CI: 10.63-12.47) and 5.52 months (95% CI: 5.32-5.72) for enfortumab vedotin (EV), and 15.30 months (95% CI: 11.21-19.40) and 5.80 months (95% CI: 4.88-6.72) for DV. DV combined with immunotherapy achieved a pooled median PFS of 9.78 months (95% CI: 7.73-11.83). For renal cell carcinoma, the ORR was 6% (95% CI: 2%-10%) with median OS of 12.71 months (95% CI: 9.67-15.75). For metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, ADC efficacy was higher in chemotherapy-experienced patients (ORR: 17% vs. 5%). Conclusion: ADCs demonstrate efficacy and safety in treating urological cancers, but further clinical trials are needed, particularly for renal, testicular, and prostate cancers, to support personalized treatment strategies.
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.