Cochrane · systematic review · CD013348
Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeting therapy for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer
Chuai, Y, Rizzuto, I, Zhang, X, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2021 · Cochrane Library
Gynaecological, Neuro-oncology and Orphan CancerAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
35
current version
GRADE rated
27
No studies
8
Included studies
NR
No studies 8 · 22.9%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 10 · 28.6%Low 11 · 31.4%Moderate 6 · 17.1%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy
Population: women with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | HR 0.77 [0.62, 0.95] | 1 study · 452 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specificadverse events: gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | RR 18 [2.42, 133.67] | 1 study · 440 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: serious haemorrhage Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | RR 5 [1.11, 22.56] | 1 study · 440 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: serious thromboembolic events Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | RR 4.5 [1.55, 13.08] | 1 study · 440 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: hypertension Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | RR 13.75 [5.07, 37.29] | 1 study · 440 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Serious adverse events Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | RR 1.44 [1.16, 1.79] | 1 study · 439 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Economic evaluation Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 452 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Cediranib plus chemotherapy compared to placebo plus chemotherapy
Population: women with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | HR 0.94 [0.53, 1.65] | 1 study · 69 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | RR 3.27 [0.14, 77.57] | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: serious haemorrhage Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | RR 5.45 [0.27, 109.49] | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: serious thromboembolic events Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | RR 3.41 [0.14, 80.59] | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Specific adverse events: serioushypertension Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | RR 0.36 [0.02, 8.62] | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Serious adverse events Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | RR 1.15 [0.75, 1.78] | 1 study · 67 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Economic evaluation ‐ not measured Cediranib plus chemotherapy vs placebo plus chemotherapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy compared to chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy
Population: women with recurrent or FIGO stage IVB cervical cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | HR 0.9 [0.51, 1.6] | 1 study · 52 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae ‐ not reported Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Specific adverse events: haemorrhage ‐ not reported Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Specific adverse events: thromboembolic events ‐ not reported Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Specific adverse events: hypertension Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | RR 5.14 [1.28, 20.73] | 1 study · 52 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Serious adverse events ‐ not reported Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Economic evaluation ‐ not measured Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy vs chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pazopanib plus lapatinib compared to lapatinib
Population: women with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | HR 2.71 [1.16, 6.31] | 1 study · 117 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | RR 2 [0.19, 21.59] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: haemorrhage Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | RR 2 [0.72, 5.58] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: thromboembolic events Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | RR 3 [0.12, 72.5] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: hypertension Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | RR 12 [2.94, 49.01] | 1 study · 152 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Serious adverse events Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | RR 1.45 [0.94, 2.26] | 1 study · 152 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Economic evaluation ‐ not measured Pazopanib plus lapatinib vs lapatinib | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pazopanib compared to lapatinib
Population: women with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Pazopanib vs lapatinib | HR 0.96 [0.67, 1.38] | 1 study · 152 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae Pazopanib vs lapatinib | RR 1.03 [0.07, 16.12] | 1 study · 150 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: haemorrhage Pazopanib vs lapatinib | RR 1.03 [0.31, 3.4] | 1 study · 150 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: thromboembolic events Pazopanib vs lapatinib | RR 3.08 [0.13, 74.42] | 1 study · 150 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Specific adverse events: hypertension Pazopanib vs lapatinib | RR 11.81 [2.89, 48.33] | 1 study · 150 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Serious adverse events Pazopanib vs lapatinib | RR 1.31 [0.83, 2.07] | 1 study · 150 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Economic evaluation ‐ not measured Pazopanib vs lapatinib | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |