ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2026
Long-term comparative effectiveness of tepotinib versus standard of care for MET exon 14 skipping-mutated non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tepotinib received Food and Drug Administration approval for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) with MET exon 14 skipping mutation (METex14m) based on a single-arm trial. However, the comparative effectiveness between tepotinib and standard of care (SoC) remains unclear. Objectives: We aim to assess the long-term comparative effectiveness between first-line tepotinib and SoC. Design: This retrospective comparative effectiveness study was conducted based on a matching-adjusted indirect comparison using aggregate data for Asian patients of the VISION trial for the tepotinib arm, and data of patients with METex14m who received SoC from Samsung Medical Center data in January 2008 and February 2024 for the SoC arm. Methods: Hazard ratio (HR) and its confidence intervals (CIs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed through a Cox proportional hazards model. A partitioned survival model was run for a lifetime using four different scenarios to estimate long-term quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), which reflect patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Results: In the SoC arm ( Conclusion: The significant PFS benefit of first-line tepotinib over SoC extended to long-term HRQoL gains, indicating tepotinib is considered one of the first-line treatment options. Future studies based on multicenter data or head-to-head trials would be able to verify the efficacy.
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.