SynthesisMedicine2016
Chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract carcinoma: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for advanced biliary tract cancers: an umbrella review.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract carcinomas.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Prognostic and predictive role of EGFR pathway alterations in biliary cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and anti-EGFR.PloS one · 2018Trial
- EGFR Target Therapy Combined with Gemox for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers: a Meta-analysis based on RCTs.Journal of Cancer · 2018Article
- Flavokawain B Inhibits Growth of Cholangiocarcinoma Cells by Suppressing the Akt Pathway.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough gemcitabine and platinum-based agents (GP) are currently regarded as the standard chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), the prognosis remains poor. Combinations with fluoropyrimidines and targeted therapy have demonstrated modest benefits. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens.
methodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched for studies published until April 2016. A meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled effect size by using random effects models. Treatment efficacies were measured using progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. The secondary outcomes included the objective response rate (ORR), 1-year survival rate, quality of life, disease control rate, and adverse events.
resultsFifteen trials that involved examining 1775 patients were reviewed. Patients who received epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted therapy in addition to standard GP chemotherapy exhibited a significantly higher median PFS (weighted mean difference = -1.49; 95% confidence interval -2.56 to -0.43), PFS (hazard ratio = 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.99), and ORR (odd ratio = 0.56; 95% confidence interval 0.38-0.82). Combining GP with fluoropyrimidines or vascular EGFR inhibitors (VEGFR) did not improve patient outcomes.
conclusionCombining EGFR-targeted therapy with the current standard GP chemotherapy is a safe and viable option that may improve the median PFS, PFS, and ORR in patients with advanced BTC. Further research investigating the optimal dosage and drug type of EGFR inhibitors for specific BTC patient groups is warranted.
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.