ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Comparative therapeutic efficacy and safety of first-line and second-line therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Treatment Patterns and Attrition in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is no cross-sectional comparison on therapeutic and adverse effects for treatments of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPCa). We aimed to horizontally compare them for all common first-line and second-line therapies. Methods: We conducted a network meta-analysis with a systematic review in four databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library) up to January 5th, 2025. All randomized controlled trials (RCT) related to mCRPCa treatments with a clear description in study design were included. Endpoints included the radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), time to PSA progression (TTPP), PSA progression rate (PSARR), and adverse events. All data was extracted by two researchers and analyzed with Gemtc package in R and Stata15. This NMA protocol was registered online (ID: CRD42025633178). Findings: After screening among 33,694 articles, 24 RCTs involving 13,059 cases were included. For first-line treatments, combination therapies with second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs) showed superior efficacies in OS [HR of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) + ARI: 0.63 (0.32,1.25)], TTPP [HR of Lu177 + ARI: 0.07 (0.01,0.87)] and PSARR [RR of Lu177 + ARI: 33.02 (15.56,71.62)] with the highest SUCRA (Surface under the Cumulative Ranking Curve) (72%, 91% and 97% respectively). PARPi + ARI also performed best for rPFS (SUCRA: 85%, with an insignificant HR [0.12 (0.02,2.35)]. For post-docetaxel second-line treatments, ARI also emerged as the preferred option. Efficacies of post-ARI second-line treatments were not evaluated due to the lack of related RCTs. No obvious heterogeneity and publication bias was detected during the therapeutic comparison. Interpretation: This study provided comparative evidence for first-line and post-chemotherapy second-line mCRPCa treatment options. Second-generation ARIs exhibited good efficacy, particularly when combined with other treatments. However, the safety analysis necessitated balance between benefits and adverse events, especially for combination therapies. Stronger evidence is needed through direct comparisons in future clinical trials. Funding: The study was supported by The National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82172568).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.