ArticleTargeted oncology2025
A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis of Systemic Treatments for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in First- and Subsequent Lines.
Article in Targeted oncology, 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.
- Clinico-genomic risk stratification for biomarker-enriched trial design in poor-prognosis metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).The journal of liquid biopsy · 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
Abstract
backgroundMetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) presents a challenge for clinicians in determining the optimal treatment sequence because of the lack of direct head-to-head comparisons, which is further complicated by the now-widespread use of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).
objectiveThis study is a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) intended to provide a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of the efficacy of mCRPC treatments across different treatment lines. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe performed a systematic search of ClinicalTrials.gov, extracted information, assessed the risk of bias, and reconstructed missing outcomes. We performed an NMA to evaluate treatment efficacy for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in first and subsequent lines. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) NMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024499607).
resultsThe NMA included 43 trials with 33,494 patients. ARPI-based therapies, particularly in combination with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, demonstrated the most significant benefits for OS and PFS in first-line mCRPC treatment, followed by chemotherapy regimens. However, ARPI re-treatment showed limited effectiveness in subsequent lines, leading to weaker OS and PFS benefits.
conclusionsThis NMA highlights the superiority of ARPI-based therapies and chemotherapies as first-line options for mCRPC while emphasizing the need for treatment class switching after ARPI failure. To refine treatment sequencing and enable precision care, future research should integrate individual participant data to better address patient-level heterogeneity and identify biomarkers for personalized therapy.
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.