Severe adverse effects · people with metastatic CRC
Irinotecan + targeted therapy leads to higher severe adverse effects compared with irinotecan (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Irinotecan, docetaxel, paclitaxel, vinorelbine, ganciclovir, epirubicin, multiple drugsϯ · healthcare staff who handle infusional hazardous drugs
It is very uncertain whether closed‐system transfer device plus safe handling changes irinotecan, docetaxel, paclitaxel, vinorelbine, ganciclovir,… compared with safe handling alone (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
Very low
5‐fluorouracil, cytarabine, gemcitabine, irinotecan, docetaxel, paclitaxel, vinorelbine, multiple drugsϯ · healthcare staff who handle infusional hazardous drugs
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
Very low
Cytarabine, gemcitabine, and irinotecan · healthcare staff who handle infusional hazardous drugs
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
Very low
5‐fluorouracil, cytarabine, gemcitabine, and irinotecan · healthcare staff who handle infusional hazardous drugs
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
Very low
Intervention not reported
All intervention options · people with first recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV), BEV + lomustine (LOM), regorafenib (REG), fotemustine…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Intervention not reported
BEV+IRI (1 RCT, 79 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention leads to higher BEV+IRI (1 RCT, 79 participants) (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV+VB111 (1 RCT, 128 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention leads to higher BEV+VB111 (1 RCT, 128 participants) (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV+TRC 105 (1 RCT, 49 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention leads to higher BEV+TRC 105 (1 RCT, 49 participants) (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
All intervention options · people with first recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV), BEV + lomustine (LOM), regorafenib (REG), BEV + irinotecan…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Intervention not reported
Outcomes (5 RCTs, 1024 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV(8 RCTs; 498 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
FOM (1 RCT, 32 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention showed no clear difference in FOM (1 RCT, 32 participants); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV+HSPPC96 1 RCTs; 53 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention showed no clear difference in BEV+HSPPC96 1 RCTs; 53 participants) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV+ONA(1 RCT; 64 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention showed no clear difference in BEV+ONA(1 RCT; 64 participants) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV+CAB (1 RCT; 58 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention showed no clear difference in BEV+CAB (1 RCT; 58 participants) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
BEV+DAS (2 RCTs, 83 participants) · people with any recurrence of glioblastoma Interventions: bevacizumab (BEV) Comparison: bevacizumab 9BEV), BEV+carboplatin (CAB),…
The intervention showed no clear difference in BEV+DAS (2 RCTs, 83 participants) (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Overall survival (Death) · patients with advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer
IRI with fluoropyrimidines showed no clear difference in overall survival (Death) compared with single agent IRI (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Progression‐free survival (PSF) · patients with advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer
IRI with fluoropyrimidines probably leads to lower progression‐free survival (Disease progression) compared with single agent IRI (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Grade 3/4 diarrhea · patients with advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer
IRI with fluoropyrimidines probably leads to lower grade 3/4 diarrhea compared with single agent IRI (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review