Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27845907›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

Matched analysis of induction chemotherapy plus chemoradiotherapy versus induction chemotherapy plus radiotherapy alone in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a multicenter study.

Bin Zhang, Ying Hu, Rui-Hua Xiong, Yu-Fei Pan, Qian-Lan Xu, Xiang-Yun Kong, Rui Cai, Qiu-Qiu Chen, Hua-Ying Tang, Wei Jiang

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

10 authors.

Bin ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Ying HuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Rui-Hua XiongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, 181st Hospital of People's Liberation Army, Guilin, PR China.
Yu-Fei PanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nan Xishan Hospital, Guilin, PR China.
Qian-Lan XuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Xiang-Yun KongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Rui CaiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Qiu-Qiu ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Hua-Ying TangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.
Wei JiangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University, Guilin, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe relative efficacy of induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) versus IC followed by radiotherapy (RT) alone in locoregionally advanced NPC remains unclear.

methodsA total of 877 patients with locally advanced NPC who underwent IC/CCRT or IC/RT at four institutions in China between January 2004 and December 2010 were retrospectively assessed. IC was cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy; concurrent chemotherapy, single agent cisplatin. Two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2DCRT) was the radiotherapy technique. All patients were matched in an equal ratio using a pair-matched method. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) and toxicities were assessed.

resultsEligible patients were matched (n = 642; 321 patients per arm) based on eight clinicopathological characteristics. Five-year OS, DFS, DMFS, and LRRFS were 76%, 70%, 86%, and 88% for IC/CCRT and 75%, 70%, 90%, and 91% for IC/RT, respectively. There were no statistically significant survival differences between arms (P>0.05), even in subgroup analysis. In multivariate analysis, treatment (IC/CCRT vs. IC/RT) was not an independent prognostic factor for any survival end-point. Grade 3/4 acute gastrointestinal toxicities (vomiting, nausea) and hematological toxicities (leucopenia/neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia) were significantly more common in the IC/CCRT arm than IC/RT arm during RT.

conclusionOverall, IC/CCRT failed to demonstrate any survival advantage but higher acute toxicities over IC/RT in locoregionally advanced NPC.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinomaChemoradiotherapyCisplatinDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansInduction ChemotherapyKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNasopharyngeal CarcinomaNasopharyngeal NeoplasmsCisplatinconcurrent chemoradiotherapyinduction chemotherapynasopharyngeal carcinomaradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID27845907
PMCPMC5355164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.