In terms of progression-free survival ( PFS ) , axitinib was superior compared with placebo ( HR = 0.25 , 95 % CrI : 0.17 - 0.38 ) , sorafenib ( HR = 0.46 , 95 % CrI : 0.32 - 0.68 ) and pazopanib ( HR = 0.47 , 95 % CrI : 0.26 - 0.85 ) .
Second-line treatments for the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic review/meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of second-line treatments for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), which includes the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor axitinib. ### methods Database searches were conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Indirect comparisons using a fixed-effect Bayesian model were used to assess the relative effectiveness of treatments and reported as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI). ### results Although 24 RCTs met eligibility criteria, only three studies were included in the fixed-effect Bayesian meta-analysis, due to differences in patient inclusion criteria/reported outcomes in the wider dataset. Robust meta-analysis was restricted to the subgroup pretreated with cytokines. In terms of progression-free survival ( PFS ) , axitinib was superior compared with placebo ( HR = 0.25 , 95 % CrI : 0.17 - 0.38 ) , sorafenib ( HR = 0.46 , 95 % CrI : 0.32 - 0.68 ) and pazopanib ( HR = 0.47 , 95 % CrI : 0.26 - 0.85 ) . An analysis including all patients, regardless of previous first-line treatment, reported similar results. There was no significant difference in PFS between sorafenib and pazopanib. ### conclusion Results from the present study suggest that axitinib will be an important treatment option to extend PFS in the management of advanced RCC in the second-line setting. Ongoing research will define the optimal treatment algorithm leading to a patient-focused treatment strategy.
### Instruction:
            Given the context about compound efficacy for the given treatment mentioned within the input, mentioned the compounds 
            that can co-occur for the mentioned treatment

            ### Input:
            Second-line treatments for the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic review/meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of second-line treatments for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), which includes the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor axitinib. ### methods Database searches were conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Indirect comparisons using a fixed-effect Bayesian model were used to assess the relative effectiveness of treatments and reported as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI). ### results Although 24 RCTs met eligibility criteria, only three studies were included in the fixed-effect Bayesian meta-analysis, due to differences in patient inclusion criteria/reported outcomes in the wider dataset. Robust meta-analysis was restricted to the subgroup pretreated with cytokines. In terms of progression-free survival ( PFS ) , axitinib was superior compared with placebo ( HR = 0.25 , 95 % CrI : 0.17 - 0.38 ) , sorafenib ( HR = 0.46 , 95 % CrI : 0.32 - 0.68 ) and pazopanib ( HR = 0.47 , 95 % CrI : 0.26 - 0.85 ) . An analysis including all patients, regardless of previous first-line treatment, reported similar results. There was no significant difference in PFS between sorafenib and pazopanib. ### conclusion Results from the present study suggest that axitinib will be an important treatment option to extend PFS in the management of advanced RCC in the second-line setting. Ongoing research will define the optimal treatment algorithm leading to a patient-focused treatment strategy.

            ### Response:
            axitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib
            