Table 1.
Pairwise meta-analysis of VEGFR-TKIs’ all grades cardiovascular event
| Direct compare | Study number | Total sample | Odds ratio (95% CI) | Method | Heterogeneity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cabozantinib vs placebo | 2 | 1027 | 7.38(4.65,11.70) | M–H random | I2 = 0%(P = 0.6) |
| Suntinib vs placebo | 5 | 2533 | 4.17 (3.23,5.38) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.6) |
| Sorafenib vs placebo | 10 | 5986 | 4.65 (3.52,6.15) | M–H random | I2 = 46% (P = 0.05) |
| Regorafenib vs placebo | 6 | 2050 | 4.50 (3.39,5.98) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.461) |
| Vandetanib vs placebo | 5 | 1619 | 11.09 (7.39, 16.63) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.42) |
| Nintedanib vs placebo | 2 | 848 | 1.42 (0.97,2.07) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.36) |
| Pazopanib vs placebo | 4 | 1568 | 5.78 (4.50,7.41) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.52) |
| Axitinib vs placebo | 2 | 916 | 5.96(4.42,8.03) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.34) |
| Sunitinib vs sorafenib | 2 | 2321 | 1.16(0.94,1.43) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.55) |
| Axitinib vs sorafenib | 2 | 999 | 1.84(1.33,2.53) | M–H random | I2 = 22% (P = 0.26) |
| Nintedanib vs sorafenib | 2 | 188 | 0.61(0.30,1.25) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.97) |