ReviewTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2025
Antibody-drug conjugates versus docetaxel for previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of antibody-drug conjugates in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer after tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Engineering the Future of ADCs in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Oncology research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Docetaxel, following progression on immunotherapy and platinum-based chemotherapy, remains the standard of care for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but offers limited promise. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) may improve outcomes in this population. Objectives: Data from the literature, mainly randomized controlled trials (RCTs), have shown discrepancies. This report evaluates the efficacy and safety of ADCs versus docetaxel in previously treated advanced NSCLC. Design: The systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted focusing on phase II/III RCTs to synthesize available evidence regarding efficacy outcomes and safety of ADCs compared to docetaxel. Data resources and methods: Databases (PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library), clinical trial registries, and proceedings of global oncology conferences from January 2015 to November 2024 were screened comparing ADC versus docetaxel. Two researchers independently completed data retrieval and screening work using Covidence. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2.0) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included RCTs. The primary outcomes include progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), while the secondary outcomes include objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs). The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were meta-analyzed using the appropriate generic variance and Mantel-Haenszel methods. Random-effect models were used to compute pooled estimates. Results: Of the 212 records screened, three RCTs involving 1597 patients were included. ADCs did not significantly improve PFS (pooled HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.73-1.13). For OS, the pooled HR was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78-1.00, Conclusion: Overall, there was no difference between the docetaxel and the ADC treatment arms; however, our findings report a significant survival benefit in the subgroup of patients with nonsquamous NSCLC pathology treated with ADCs compared to docetaxel with a manageable safety profile. Further research is needed to address heterogeneity, refine patient selection, and obtain more mature survival data with predictive biomarkers.
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.