studies

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

OutcomeTE95% CInkI2ROBPub. bias deaths (OS)detailed resultsCTONG 0901, 2017 0.84 [0.63; 1.12] WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV) 0.96 [0.77; 1.20] 0.92[0.77; 1.09]CTONG 0901, 2017, WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV)20%815moderatenot evaluable progression or deaths (PFS)detailed resultsCTONG 0901, 2017 0.81 [0.62; 1.05] WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV) 0.89 [0.74; 1.06] 0.86[0.74; 1.00]CTONG 0901, 2017, WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV)20%815moderatenot evaluable DCRdetailed resultsWJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV) 0.98 [0.70; 1.38] 0.98[0.70; 1.38]WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV)10%559NAnot evaluable objective responses (ORR)detailed resultsCTONG 0901, 2017 1.33 [0.81; 2.18] WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV) 0.93 [0.65; 1.33] 1.07[0.76; 1.51]CTONG 0901, 2017, WJOG 5108L, 2016 (REV)224%727moderatenot evaluable0.52.01.0relative treatment effectwww.metaEvidence.org2024-06-29 15:13 +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: 430