All patients
Age < 65y (younger) Age > 65y Asian type cell type, squamous cell ECOG 0 ECOG 1 EGFR mutation Ex19del EGFR mutation L858R Gender, female Gender, male smoker (current or former) smoker (never)
Top evidence (RCT only, high risk of bias excluded)
Best available evidence (possibly low or very low)
All RCTs
All studies (RCT+OBS)
lung cancer : non small cell (NSCLC), ... vs. all, meta-analysis of study results Outcome TE 95% CI n k I2 ROB Pub. bias deaths (OS)detailed results LUX-LUNG 3, 2013 1.12 [0.73; 1.72]
LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 0.95 [0.68; 1.33]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 0.81 [0.69; 0.95]
0.87 [0.74 ; 1.03 ] LUX-LUNG 3, 2013, LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3 14% 1,504 moderate not evaluable progression or deaths (PFS)detailed results LUX-LUNG 3, 2013 0.47 [0.34; 0.65]
LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 0.28 [0.20; 0.39]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 0.81 [0.69; 0.96]
0.48 [0.25 ; 0.92 ] LUX-LUNG 3, 2013, LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3 94% 1,504 moderate not evaluable DCRdetailed results LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 3.84 [2.04; 7.23]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1.56 [1.18; 2.07]
2.34 [0.97 ; 5.62 ] LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 2 85% 1,159 moderate not evaluable objective responses (ORR)detailed results LUX-LUNG 3, 2013 4.37 [2.63; 7.27]
LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 6.53 [4.02; 10.60]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 2.05 [0.98; 4.29]
4.11 [2.26 ; 7.45 ] LUX-LUNG 3, 2013, LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3 70% 1,504 moderate not evaluable AE (any grade)detailed results LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 5.06 [1.10; 23.27]
5.06 [1.10 ; 23.27 ] LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1 0% 787 NA not evaluable AE (grade 3-4)detailed results LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 0.98 [0.74; 1.29]
0.98 [0.74 ; 1.29 ] LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1 0% 787 NA not evaluable SAE (any grade)detailed results LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1.00 [0.76; 1.33]
1.00 [0.76 ; 1.33 ] LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1 0% 787 NA not evaluable STRAE (any grade)detailed results LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 2.31 [1.36; 3.91]
2.31 [1.36 ; 3.91 ] LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1 0% 787 NA not evaluable TRAE (any grade)detailed results LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 0.70 [0.07; 6.83]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3.25 [2.03; 5.20]
2.30 [0.66 ; 8.05 ] LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 2 40% 1,139 moderate not evaluable TRAE (grade 3-4)detailed results LUX-LUNG 3, 2013 0.98 [0.62; 1.54]
LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 0.38 [0.24; 0.60]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1.77 [1.25; 2.51]
0.88 [0.36 ; 2.15 ] LUX-LUNG 3, 2013, LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3 93% 1,487 moderate not evaluable TRAE leading to death (grade 5)detailed results LUX-LUNG 3, 2013 3.93 [0.21; 74.98]
LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 0.47 [0.03; 7.59]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1.21 [0.37; 4.01]
1.23 [0.44 ; 3.44 ] LUX-LUNG 3, 2013, LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3 0% 1,479 moderate not evaluable TRAE leading to discontinuation (any grade)detailed results LUX-LUNG 3, 2013 0.74 [0.36; 1.50]
LUX-LUNG 6, 2014 0.09 [0.05; 0.18]
LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 1.24 [0.86; 1.77]
0.45 [0.09 ; 2.12 ] LUX-LUNG 3, 2013, LUX-LUNG 6, 2014, LUX-LUNG 8, 2015 3 96% 1,479 moderate not evaluable 0.2 10.0 1.0 relative treatment effect www.metaEvidence.org 2024-07-05 21:58 +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
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: 472
