ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2026
Adjuvant alectinib versus crizotinib in completely resected
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Following the phase III ALINA trial, adjuvant alectinib has become an important option for completely resected anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included 48 patients with R0-resected stage IA-IIIB Results: At a median follow-up of 84.6 months, alectinib was associated with longer DFS than crizotinib, with median DFS not reached versus 28.23 months, a 3-year DFS rate of 91.4% versus 41.4%, and an unadjusted HR of 0.20 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.08-0.47]. Brain metastasis-free survival (BMFS) also favored alectinib, with 3-year BMFS rates of 95.2% versus 74.8% and an HR of 0.16 (95% CI: 0.05-0.56). Most adverse events were grade 1-2; no grade ≥3 adverse events occurred with alectinib, compared with 27.3% with crizotinib. Conclusions: In this real-world cohort of patients with completely resected
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.