ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2016
Different schedules of irinotecan administration: A meta-analysis.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- NCI 7977: A Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Intermittent Oral ABT-888 (Veliparib) plus Intravenous Irinotecan Administered in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.Cancer research communications · 2023Article
- Real-Life Effectivity of Dose Intensity Reduction of First-Line mFOLFIRI-Based Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancers: Sometimes Less Is More.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Phase 1 study of alisertib (MLN8237) and weekly irinotecan in adults with advanced solid tumors.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of the UDP glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 genotype-directed schedule of irinotecan administration is still far from being introduced into clinical practice, and the efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan are in part schedule-dependent. The objective of the present meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy and adverse effects of 3-weekly vs. weekly irinotecan for the treatment of solid tumors. The PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and the search engines Google Scholar and Medical Martix were searched for randomized controlled trials to compare the two regimens of irinotecan administration. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that the 3-weekly regimen yielded a longer time to progression, while other measures of efficacy, such as the objective response rate and overall survival of patients with solid tumors were similar between the two regimens of irinotecan administration. Furthermore, the group receiving the 3-weekly regimen had a lower incidence of grade 3/4 diarrhea and a higher rate of grade 3/4 neutropenia compared with the group receiving the weekly regimen. However, these results require confirmation by large-sample, multicenter, randomized, controlled trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.