↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy vs single-agent therapy in recurrent glioblastoma: evidence from randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Management and Research, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy vs single-agent therapy in recurrent glioblastoma: evidence from randomized controlled trials
Published in
Cancer Management and Research, July 2018
DOI 10.2147/cmar.s173323
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhouqing Chen, Na Xu, Chongshun Zhao, Tao Xue, Xin Wu, Zhong Wang

Abstract

Recent studies showed inconsistent results of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy vs single-agent therapy in terms of their safety and efficacy for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to explore the value of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy and single-agent therapy in recurrent glioblastoma treatment. Databases such as MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the topic of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy and single-agent therapy as treatments for recurrent glioblastoma from January 1980 to April 2018. Subsequent articles were then sorted, evaluated, and analyzed. We pooled 1,169 patient cases from seven RCTs. Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy showed a significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.65; 95% CI 0.57-0.74; P<0.001) compared to single-agent therapy. In addition, the overall survival (OS) rate showed insignificant differences between the two groups (HR=0.96; 95% CI 0.83-1.12; P=0.622). Simultaneously, we found that bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy had a higher objective response rate (ORR) (OR=2.10; 95% CI 1.32-3.33; P=0.002), but also higher incidence of adverse events (AEs) (OR=1.85; 95% CI 1.26-2.71; P=0.002). However, in subgroup analysis, we found that AEs showed insignificant differences between the two treatment methods when bevacizumab was used as the single-agent therapy subgroup (P=0.058). In addition, in the subgroup with low corticosteroid use rate at baseline (N<50%), ORR (P=0.108) and AEs (P=0.134) showed insignificant differences between the two groups. Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy can significantly improve PFS and ORR, but did not prolong OS in these studies, and can even lead to higher odds of AEs. In addition, bevacizumab may play a dominant role and corticosteroid may be an unfavorable factor in the combination therapy of recurrent glioblastoma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 25%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Researcher 3 19%
Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Unknown 5 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2018.
All research outputs
#18,646,262
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Management and Research
#1,057
of 2,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,366
of 328,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Management and Research
#45
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,019 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.