Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Gastroenterol. Jan 21, 2016; 22(3): 1179-1189
Published online Jan 21, 2016. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i3.1179
Published online Jan 21, 2016. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i3.1179
Table 2 Clinical trials with angiogenesis targeting agents
Study | n | Design | Line | Treatment | Primary end point | Results | P value |
AVAGAST[59] | 774 | Phase 3, RCT | First | Bevacizumab + XP vs Placebo + XP | OS | HR = 0.87; 95%CI: 0.73-1.03 | 0.1002 |
REGARD[61] | 355 | Phase 3, RCT | Second | RAM vs Placeb | OS | HR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.68-0.96 | 0.0470 |
RAINBOW[62] | 665 | Phase 3, RCT | Second | RAM + paclitaxel vs Placebo + paclitaxel | OS | HR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.68-0.96 | 0.0170 |
Qin et al[63] | 270 | Phase 3, RCT | Third | Apatinib vs placebo | OS | HR = 0.71; 95%CI: 0.54-0.94 | 0.0160 |
- Citation: Lee SY, Oh SC. Changing strategies for target therapy in gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22(3): 1179-1189
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v22/i3/1179.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i3.1179