studies

non squamous - mNSCLC - L1 - Wild Type (WT), atezolizumab based treatment vs. all, meta-analysis of study results

OutcomeTE95% CInkI2ROBPub. bias deaths (OS)detailed resultsIMpower-130 (WT), 2019 0.79 [0.64; 0.98] IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC WT), 2018 0.78 [0.64; 0.96] 0.78[0.68; 0.91]IMpower-130 (WT), 2019, IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC WT), 201820%1,375moderatenot evaluable progression or deaths (PFS)detailed resultsIMpower-130 (WT), 2019 0.64 [0.54; 0.76] IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC ; WT-Teff high), 2018 0.51 [0.38; 0.68] IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC WT), 2018 0.62 [0.52; 0.74] 0.61[0.54; 0.68]IMpower-130 (WT), 2019, IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC ; WT-Teff high), 2018, IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC WT), 201830%1,655moderatenot evaluable DORdetailed resultsIMpower-130 (WT), 2019 2.41 [1.27; 4.60] 2.41[1.27; 4.60]IMpower-130 (WT), 201910%292NAnot evaluable objective responses (ORR)detailed resultsIMpower-130 (WT), 2019 2.07 [1.48; 2.89] IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC ; WT-Teff high), 2018 1.96 [1.20; 3.19] IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC WT), 2018 1.88 [1.38; 2.55] 1.96[1.60; 2.41]IMpower-130 (WT), 2019, IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC ; WT-Teff high), 2018, IMpower-150 (ABCP vs BPC WT), 201830%1,637moderatenot evaluable0.25.01.0relative treatment effectwww.metaEvidence.org2024-06-03 07:06 +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: 176 - treatments: 851,361,602,1070,671,865,744,696,1083,1281,1282,1283,1082,866