studies

mNSCLC - L2 - all population, ... vs. all, meta-analysis of study results

OutcomeTE95% CInkI2ROBPub. bias deaths (OS)detailed resultsLUX-Lung 1, 2012 1.08 [0.86; 1.35] 1.08[0.86; 1.35]LUX-Lung 1, 201210%585NAnot evaluable progression or deaths (PFS)detailed resultsLUX-Lung 1, 2012 0.38 [0.31; 0.47] 0.38[0.31; 0.47]LUX-Lung 1, 201210%585NAnot evaluable objective responses (ORR)detailed resultsLUX-Lung 1, 2012 15.58 [2.11; 115.28] 15.58[2.11; 115.28]LUX-Lung 1, 201210%585NAnot evaluable0.220.01.0relative treatment effectwww.metaEvidence.org2024-06-29 16:40 +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: 37 - treatments: 969