Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38466535›Full record

SynthesisTargeted oncology2024

Assessing Patient Risk, Benefit, and Outcomes in Drug Development: A Decade of Lenvatinib Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review.

Patrick Crotty, Karim Kari, Griffin K Hughes, Chase Ladd, Ryan McIntire, Brooke Gardner, Andriana M Peña, Sydney Ferrell, Jordan Tuia, Jacob Cohn and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Targeted oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Patrick CrottyOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA. patrick.crottyosu@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-7213-2737
Karim KariOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Griffin K HughesOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Chase LaddOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Ryan McIntireOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Brooke GardnerOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Andriana M PeñaOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Sydney FerrellDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, VT, USA.
Jordan TuiaDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Jacob CohnDepartment of Internal Medicine, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, OK, USA.
Alyson HaslamDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Vinay PrasadDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Matt VassarOffice of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, 1111 W 17th St., Tulsa, OK, 74107, USA.
Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Vermont Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceChemotherapy agents are typically initially tested in their most promising indications; however, following initial US FDA approval, new clinical trials are often initiated in less promising indications where patients experience a worse burden-benefit ratio. The current literature on the burden-benefit profile of lenvatinib in non-FDA-approved indications is lacking.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate published clinical trials of lenvatinib in order to determine the burden-benefit profile for patients over time. EVIDENCE REVIEW: On 25 May 2023, we searched the Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for clinical trials of lenvatinib used to treat solid cancers. Eligible articles were clinical trials, containing adult participants, published in English, and involving solid tumors. Screening and data collection took place in a masked, duplicate fashion. For each eligible study, we collected adverse event data, trial characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). Trials were classified as positive when meeting their primary endpoint and safety, negative (not meeting either criteria), or indeterminate (lacking prespecified primary endpoint).

findingsExpansion of clinical trial testing beyond lenvatinib's initial FDA indication demonstrated a consistent rise in cumulative adverse events, along with a decline in drug efficacy. Lenvatinib was tested in 16 cancer indications, receiving FDA approval in 4. A total of 5390 Grade 3-5 adverse events were experienced across 6225 clinical trial participants. Expanded indication testing further demonstrated widely variable ORR (11-69%), OS (6.2-32 months), and PFS (3.6-15.7 months) across all indications. After initial FDA approval, clinical trial results in expanded indications were less likely to meet their primary endpoints, particularly among non-randomized clinical trials. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Our paper evaluated the effectiveness of lenvatinib for its FDA-approved indications; however, expansion of clinical trials into novel indications was characterized by diminished efficacy, while patients experienced a high burden of adverse events consistent with lenvatinib's established safety profile. Furthermore, clinical trials testing in novel indications was marked by repeated phase I and II clinical trials along with a failure to progress to phase III clinical trials. Future clinical trials using lenvatinib as an intervention should carefully evaluate the potential benefits and burden patients may experience.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasmsQuinolinesClinical Trials as TopicHumansPhenylurea CompoundsAntineoplastic AgentslenvatinibPhenylurea CompoundsQuinolines

Identifiers

PMID38466535
OpenAlexW4392644040

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.