**5. Conclusions**

In summary, the current study showed the comprehensive evidence-based comparative efficacy of different types of targeted therapies, which would help clinicians use targeted therapies in clinical practice. Cabozantinib and alectinib showed the highest probability for the first-line treatment ranking in ORR and PFS, respectively.

**Supplementary Materials:** The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/4/1063/ s1: Figure S1: Flow diagram for selection of relevant studies, Figure S2: Inconsistency-detecting heat map between direct and indirect comparisons for overall response rate in the frequentist approach, Figure S3: Inconsistency-detecting heat map between direct and indirect comparisons for progression-free survival in the frequentist approach, Figure S4: Node-splitting analysis of inconsistency for the comparison of overall response rate in the Bayesian approach, Figure S5: Node-splitting analysis of inconsistency for the comparison of progression-free survival in the Bayesian approach, Figure S6: Convergence diagnostics for the comparison of overall response rate, Figure S7: Convergence diagnostics for the comparison of progression-free survival, Figure S8: Treatment ranking plots according to overall response rate and progression-free survival, Figure S9: Cluster ranking plot based on SUCRA values of the overall response rate and progression free-survival of treatments, Figure S10: Two-dimensional graphs for response ratio and hazard ratio compared to dummy group, Table S1: General characteristics of the studies included in the final analysis, Table S2: Test for heterogeneity, Table S3: Direct pairwise comparative efficacy in the frequentist approach, Table S4: Comparative efficacy of targeted therapies for overall response rate in the network meta-analysis based on the frequentist approach, Table S5: Comparative efficacy of targeted therapies for progression-free survival in the network meta-analysis based on the frequentist approach, Table S6: Treatment ranking probability based on overall response rate, Table S7: Treatment ranking probability based on progression-free survival, eReferences: List of studies included in the network meta-analysis.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, S.-K.M. and T.H.; methodology, S.-K.M. and T.H.; formal analysis, T.H.; investigation, T.H. and S.-K.M.; data curation, T.H. and S.-K.M.; writing—original draft preparation, T.H.; writing—review and editing, S.-K.M., T.T.P., T.H., J.K., and W.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**


© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

*Article*
