4.6 Article

Effect of Angiogenesis Inhibitor Bevacizumab on Survival in Patients with Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of the Published Literature

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035629

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars [30925032]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province, China [QJX2010-7]
  3. Health Department of Hubei Province [2009cdb399]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bevacizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor which has been used in conjunction with other anti-cancer agents in the treatment of patients with many cancers. It remains controversial whether bevacizumab can prolong survival in cancer patients. This meta-analysis was therefore performed to evaluate effect of bevacizumab on survival in cancer patients. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched for English-language studies of randomized controlled trials comparing bevacizumab with control therapy published through February 8, 2012. Progression-free survival, overall survival, and one-year survival rate were analyzed using random- or fixed-effects model. Thirty one assessable randomized controlled trials were identified. A significant improvement in progression-free survival in cancer patients was attributable to bevacizumab compared with control therapy (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.68 to 0.76; p<0.001). Overall survival was also significantly longer in patients were treated with bevacizumab (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 0.91; p<0.001). The significant benefit in one-year survival rate was further seen in cancer patients receiving bevacizumab (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.20 to 1.41; p<0.001). Current evidences showed that bevacizumab prolong progression-free survival and overall survival, and increase one-year survival rate in cancer patients as compared with control therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据