SynthesisMedicine2016
Human papillomavirus-related esophageal cancer survival: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing the Effect of Nucleic Acid Vaccines in the Treatment of HPV-Related Cancers: An Overview of Delivery Systems.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Review
- Review
- Esophageal cancer: the rise of adenocarcinoma over squamous cell carcinoma in the Asian belt.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- Molecular detection of human papillomavirus-16 among Sudanese patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma and salivary gland carcinoma.BMC research notes · 2021Article
- Review
- Prognostic role of HPV infection in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Infectious agents and cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman papillomavirus (HPV) has been identified to be related to progression of esophageal cancer. However, the results remain controversial. A meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies was therefore conducted to address this issue.
methodsThe electronic databases of MEDLINE and Excerpta Medica database were searched till April 30, 2016. Study-specific risk estimates were pooled using a random-effects model.
resultsTen studies involving a total of 1184 esophageal cancer cases were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled hazard ratio comparing HPV-positive to HPV-negative esophageal cancers was 1.03 (95% confidence interval 0.78-1.37), which was not significantly correlated with improved survival. However, HPV-16-positive patients might have a significantly favorable survival (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.44-1.21).
conclusionThe meta-analysis indicated that HPV infection may not be of prognostic utility in the evaluation of factors contributing to esophageal cancer. Further large prospective studies are encouraged to stratify survival analysis by HPV type.
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.