Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

193 questions · 193 findings · 70 reviews

No studies found 52 · 26.9%GRADE not reported 9 · 4.7%Very low 58 · 30.1%Low 40 · 20.7%Moderate 30 · 15.5%High 4 · 2.1%

Temsirolimus + bevacizumab vs bevacizumab + IFN‐α (targeted agent + targeted agent versus targeted agent + classic immunotherapy)

Serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) · Treatment‐naïve metastatic renal cell carcinoma (any cell type)

Temsirolimus + bevacizumab showed no clear difference in serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) compared with bevacizumab + IFN‐α (targeted agent + targeted agent versus targeted… (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Everolimus + bevacizumab vs bevacizumab + IFN‐α (targeted agent + targeted agent versus targeted agent + classic immunotherapy)

Serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) · Treatment‐naïve metastatic renal cell carcinoma (any cell type)

Everolimus + bevacizumab showed no clear difference in serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) compared with IFN α‐2a + bevacizumab (targeted agent + targeted agent versus… (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Sunitinib vs adjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab)

Serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) · Treatment‐naïve metastatic renal cell carcinoma (clear cell type); IMDC intermediate, poor risk patients only.

Sunitinib probably leads to higher serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) compared with nivolumab + ipilimumab (targeted agent versus combinations of… (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Serious adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Serious adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Azathioprine vs cyclophosphamide

Serious adverse events · adults with renal vasculitis for maintenance therapy

Azathioprine showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with cyclophosphamide (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Postoperative MMC‐EMDA with sequential BCG induction and maintenance vs postoperative BCG induction and maintenance therapy

Serious adverse events

It is very uncertain whether postoperative MMC‐EMDA with sequential BCG induction and maintenance changes serious adverse events compared with postoperative BCG induction and maintenance therapy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Leflunomide vs methotrexate

Serious adverse events* · adults with renal vasculitis for maintenance therapy

Leflunomide showed no clear difference in serious adverse events* compared with methotrexate (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Sunitinib vs IFN‐α (targeted agent versus classic immunotherapy)

Serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4) · Treatment‐naïve metastatic renal cell carcinoma (clear cell type)

Sunitinib probably leads to higher serious adverse events (Grade 3 or 4)assessed as: CTCAE v3.0 compared with interferon‐α (IFN‐α) (targeted agent versus classic immunotherapy) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

TDC vs medical therapy

Secondary outcome:total serious adverse events at the end of · people with patent foramen ovale and a history of cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack

TDC showed no clear difference in secondary outcome:total serious adverse events at the end of compared with medical therapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Evening vs morning dosing regimen

Serious adverse events · adults with primary (essential) hypertension whose systolic or diastolic (or both) blood pressure levels were 130/80 mmHg or greater

It is very uncertain whether evening changes serious adverse events compared with morning dosing regimen (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review