Anti‐angiogenic therapy vs no anti‐angiogenic therapy: Progression‐free survival
Anti‐angiogenic therapy leads to lower progression‐free survival ( compared with no anti‐angiogenic therapy (high certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Anti‐angiogenic therapy vs no anti‐angiogenic therapy Progression‐free survival ( · people with HGG Anti‐angiogenic therapy leads to lower progression‐free survival ( compared with no anti‐angiogenic therapy (high certainty). Anti‐angiogenic therapy for high‐grade glioma (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | HR 0.73 [0.68, 0.79] | 10 studies · 3595 participants | High |
Anti‐angiogenic therapy vs no anti‐angiogenic therapy Progression‐free survival ( · people with HGG Anti‐angiogenic therapy leads to lower progression‐free survival ( compared with no anti‐angiogenic therapy (high certainty). Anti‐angiogenic therapy for high‐grade glioma (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | HR 0.75 [0.69, 0.82] | 8 studies · 2833 participants | High |
Anti‐angiogenic therapy vs no anti‐angiogenic therapy Progression‐free survival ( · people with HGG Anti‐angiogenic therapy probably leads to lower progression‐free survival ( compared with no anti‐angiogenic therapy (moderate certainty). Anti‐angiogenic therapy for high‐grade glioma (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | HR 0.64 [0.54, 0.76] | 2 studies · 762 participants | Moderate |
Anti‐angiogenic therapy vs no anti‐angiogenic therapy Progression‐free survival ( · people with HGG Anti‐angiogenic therapy leads to lower progression‐free survival ( compared with no anti‐angiogenic therapy (high certainty). Anti‐angiogenic therapy for high‐grade glioma (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | HR 0.72 [0.66, 0.77] | 10 studies · 3464 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti‐angiogenic therapy for high‐grade glioma 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.