Table 5.
Pairwise meta-analysis of VEGFR-TKIs’ all grades hypertension
| Direct compare | Study number | Total sample | Odds ratio (95% CI) | Method | Heterogeneity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cabozantinib vs placebo | 2 | 1027 | 7.42 (4.54,12.13) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.45) |
| Suntinib vs placebo | 5 | 2533 | 4.74 (3.60,6.24) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.76) |
| Sorafenib vs placebo | 10 | 5986 | 4.89 (3.72,6.43) | M–H random | I2 = 40% (P = 0.09) |
| Regorafenib vs placebo | 6 | 2050 | 5.16 (3.80,7.01) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.99) |
| Vandetanib vs placebo | 5 | 1619 | 10.56 (6.56, 17.01) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.97) |
| Nintedanib vs placebo | 2 | 848 | 1.40 (0.95,2.06) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.42) |
| Pazopanib vs placebo | 4 | 1568 | 7.18 (4.82, 10.70) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.91) |
| Axitinib vs placebo | 2 | 916 | 5.83 (4.32,7.86) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.44) |
| Sunitinib vs sorafenib | 2 | 2321 | 1.14 (0.92,1.41) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.41) |
| Axitinib vs sorafenib | 2 | 999 | 1.82 (1.34,2.45) | M–H random | I2 = 15% (P = 0.28) |
| Nintedanib vs sorafenib | 2 | 188 | 0.93 (0.40,2.18) | M–H random | I2 = 0% (P = 0.34) |