ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2025
Efficacy and safety of vascular-targeting agents in advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 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.
- Research progress on the regulation of ferroptosis in NPC (Review).Oncology reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare, heterogeneous tumors with poor prognosis, often characterized by high recurrence rates and limited response to conventional chemotherapy in advanced stages. Vascular-targeting agents (VTA) have shown promising efficacy for STS in numerous clinical trials; however, the optimal agent and combination strategies remain undetermined. Objectives: This work aims to compare the clinical efficacy and adverse events of different VTA-containing regimens for patients with STS. Design: This study is a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources and methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible randomized clinical trials. All trials with VTA as monotherapy or VTA-included regimens in the experimental or control groups were selected, except for some specific histological subtypes. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for survival data and odds ratios for objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and treatment-related adverse events with credible intervals were generated using R software. A Bayesian random-effects model was applied to rank different treatments based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values. Results: Seventeen articles covering 15 studies were included. Pairwise comparisons demonstrated prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) for tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) versus placebo (HR 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.83) and prolonged overall survival (OS) for monoclonal antibody plus chemotherapy versus placebo (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19-0.89). Vascular-disrupting agents (VDA) plus chemotherapy were ranked highest for OS (87.05%) and ORR (89.66%). TKI plus chemotherapy and TKI plus immunotherapy had higher SUCRA values for PFS (68.21%) and DCR (82.29%). TKI-based regimens were associated with higher incidences of hypertension, diarrhea, and elevated transaminase levels, whereas chemotherapy-based strategies resulted in higher incidences of hematological toxicity and constipation. Conclusion: VTA-containing regimens showed promising activity and tolerability in patients with advanced STS. Combination regimens with TKI showed better efficacy for PFS and DCR. Novel VDA combined with chemotherapy showed potential to prolong OS and improve ORR. Trial registration: PROSPERO website (registration number: CRD42024588134).
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.