Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17896834›Full record

SynthesisDrugs & aging2007

Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing gemcitabine-based doublets versus gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Eugeniu Banu, Adela Banu, Andrei Fodor, Bruno Landi, Philippe Rougier, Gilles Chatellier, Jean-Marie Andrieu, Stephane Oudard

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drugs & aging, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2011
    Guideline
  4. Pancreatic cancer.BMJ clinical evidence · 2010
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Consensus on the treatment of pancreatic cancer in Spain.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2009
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Eugeniu BanuMedical Oncology Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France. banu_eugeniu@yahoo.fr
Adela Banu
Andrei Fodor
Bruno Landi
Philippe Rougier
Gilles Chatellier
Jean-Marie Andrieu
Stephane Oudard

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the impact on overall survival at 6, 12 and 18 months of gemcitabine-based doublets compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data on the use of gemcitabine-based doublets compared with gemcitabine alone in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer treated in randomised controlled phase II-III trials with overall survival as the principal or secondary endpoint. To this end, a literature search was performed using Cochrane methodology. The relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were estimated based on adjusted number of deaths and patients at risk according to the extent of follow-up and censoring. Twenty-three randomised clinical trials including 5886 patients met the inclusion criteria. In these trials, 2932 patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine-based doublets and 2954 patients to receive gemcitabine alone.

resultsGemcitabine-based doublets were associated with small but significant reductions in the risk of death at 6, 12 and 18 months of 8% (95% CI 3, 13), 4% (95% CI 2, 7) and 3% (95% CI 1, 5), respectively (p<0.005 for all timepoints). No heterogeneity between studies was observed. Subgroup analyses showed an overall survival benefit for gemcitabine-based doublets in clinical trials testing the same planned dose intensity of gemcitabine in comparative arms, using platinum salt-based protocols and with survival as the primary endpoint.

conclusionThis meta-analysis of data obtained from randomised controlled phase II-III trials of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer showed a small but significant improvement in overall survival for patients receiving gemcitabine-based doublets compared with gemcitabine alone.

Indexed as

Neoplasm MetastasisAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDeoxycytidineGemcitabineHumansPancreatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival AnalysisAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticDeoxycytidineGemcitabine

Identifiers

PMID17896834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.