studies

lung cancer : non small cell (NSCLC), ... vs. all, meta-analysis of study results

OutcomeTE95% CInkI2ROBPub. bias deaths (OS)detailed resultsTALENT, 2007 1.06 [0.91; 1.24] 1.06[0.91; 1.24]TALENT, 200710%1,159NAnot evaluable objective responses (ORR)detailed resultsTALENT, 2007 1.08 [0.84; 1.39] 1.08[0.84; 1.39]TALENT, 200710%1,159NAnot evaluable AE leading to death (grade 5)detailed resultsTALENT, 2007 8.08 [1.01; 64.84] 8.08[1.01; 64.84]TALENT, 200710%1,159NAnot evaluable0.520.01.0relative treatment effectwww.metaEvidence.org2024-07-01 18:07 +02:00

TE: relative treatment effect (measured by a risk ratio, an odds ratio or an hazard ratio depending on what is reported in the papers); k: number of studies; n: total number of patients; ROB: risk of bias (ROB 2.0); Pub. bias: publication bias; OBS: observational studies; RCT: randomized clinical trials
studied treatment is better when TE > 1; studied treatment is better when TE < 1;

pathologies: 161,226,41,225,182,198,179,200,195,254,242,243,199,190,229,266,191,196,36,228,174,171,173,307,165,163,176,308,164,166,220,197,255,37,245,204,244,241,227,217,177,279,167,1,170,261,280,168,169,335,334 - treatments: 917