Table 5 The first and second highest percentage within each intervention over ranks.

From: Network Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Postmenopausal, HR–Positive Breast Cancer

Rank

Ana

Ana+Gef

Ana+Tam

CT

Eve+Let

Exe (≥20wks)

Exe (<20wks)

Exe (<20wks)+Cel

Let

Tam

COR

4,6(20%) 5(29%)

9(36%) 10(22%)

5(16%) 6(16%)

9(10%) 10(58%)

1(62%) 2(20%)

1(14%) 2(13%)

7(23%) 8(19%)

2(16%) 3(18%)

2(35%) 3(33%)

7(22%) 8(28%)

TC

5(22%) 6(25%)

8(22%) 9(36%)

7(16%) 8(19%)

1(22%) 2(18%)

1(44%) 2(30%)

9(2%) 10(93%)

7(19%) 8(22%)

1(22%) 9(17%)

3(34%) 4(21%)

4(19%) 5(20%)

PR

4(21%) 5(20%)

8(18%) 9(34%)

3(16%) 4(14%)

9(13%) 10(70%)

1(45%) 2(18%)

8(15%) 9(14%)

6(19%) 7(22%)

8(17%) 9(16%)

3(25%) 4(17%)

6(20%) 7(19%)

CR

7,9(20%) 8(26%)

4(15%) 3(18%)

9(18%) 10(34%)

1(94%) 6(7%)

4(20%) 5(15%)

2(32%) 3(17%)

5(18%) 6(19%)

2(34%) 3(25%)

5(23%) 6(25%)

9(26%) 10(23%)

BCS

2(52%) 3(26%)

1(69%) 2(14%)

5(18%) 6(22%)

7(30%) 8(55%)

–

7(36%) 8(40%)

3(29%) 4(20%)

–

4(30%) 5(28%)

5(29%) 6(37%)

Fatigue

6(22%) 7(26%)

8(18%) 9(61%)

2(19%) 3(15%)

8(23%) 9(18%)

1(72%) 2(14%)

–

6(19%) 7(21%)

2(18%) 3,4(11%)

3(23%) 4(26%)

2(23%) 3(25%)

Hot flush

3(27%) 4(31%)

6(20%) 7(32%)

1(57%) 2(16%)

8(33%) 9(43%)

5(31%) 6(32%)

–

6(41%) 7(29%)

8(42%) 9(47%)

3(26%) 4(29%)

2(37%) 3(25%)

SMAA (COR, TC)

4(23%) 5(24%)

8(22%) 9(26%)

5–7(15%)

9(22%) 10(26%)

1(64%) 2(19%)

9(17%) 10(50%)

6(18%) 7(20%)

2(16%) 3(17%)

2(41%) 3(31%)

6(19%) 7(22%)

  1. For fatigue and hot flush, rank 1 was worst and rank N was best. For others, rank 1 was best and rank N was worst. Bold figures represent the highest probabilities associated with the individual interventions and their associated ranks. Ana = anastrozole, Gef = gefitinib, Tam = tamoxifen, CT = chemotherapy, Eve = Everolimus, Let = letrozole, Exe (<20wks) = Exemestane (<20wks), Exe (≥20wks) = Exemestane (≥20wks), Cel = Celecoxib.
Back to article page