SynthesisBMJ open2017
Treatment targeted at underlying disease versus palliative care in terminally ill patients: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining inpatient chemotherapy utilization among patients with cancer and impact on outcomes.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Cancer care at the end of life: system-wide expenditure in a national health service.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Review
- Narrative Review of Multidisciplinary Management of Central Nervous Involvement in Patients with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: Focus on Elderly Patients.Advances in therapy · 2023Review
- Immunotherapy Versus Hospice: Treatment Decision-Making in the Modern Era of Novel Cancer Therapies.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- A Nomogram for Predicting Risk of Thromboembolism in Gastric Cancer Patients Receiving Chemotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Adverse events in deceased hospitalised cancer patients as a measure of quality and safety in end-of-life cancer care.BMC palliative care · 2020Article
- Inpatient palliative chemotherapy is associated with high mortality and aggressive end-of-life care in patients with advanced solid tumors and poor performance status.BMC palliative care · 2019Article
- Is cachexia associated with chemotherapy toxicities in gastrointestinal cancer patients? A prospective study.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2019Article
- The clinical impact of using complex molecular profiling strategies in routine oncology practice.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- Palliative chemotherapy outcomes in patients with ECOG-PS higher than 1.Ecancermedicalscience · 2018Article
- Development and validation of QMortality risk prediction algorithm to estimate short term risk of death and assess frailty: cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
- Development and validation of risk prediction equations to estimate survival in patients with colorectal cancer: cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the efficacy of active treatment targeted at underlying disease (TTD)/potentially curative treatments versus palliative care (PC) in improving overall survival (OS) in terminally ill patients.
designWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT). Methodological quality of included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. DATA SOURCES: Medline and Cochrane databases were searched, with no language restriction, from inception to 19 October 2016. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Any RCT assessing the efficacy of any active TTD versus PC in adult patients with terminal illness with a prognosis of <6-month survival were eligible for inclusion.
resultsInitial search identified 8252 citations of which 10 RCTs (15 comparisons, 1549 patients) met inclusion criteria. All RCTs included patients with cancer. OS was reported in 7 RCTs (8 comparisons, 1158 patients). The pooled results showed no statistically significant difference in OS between TTD and PC (HR (95% CI) 0.85 (0.71 to 1.02)). The heterogeneity between pooled studies was high (I
conclusionsOur systematic review of available RCTs in patients with terminal illness due to cancer shows that TTD compared with PC did not demonstrably impact OS and is associated with increased toxicity. The results provide assurance to physicians, patients and family that the patients' survival will not be compromised by referral to hospice with focus on PC.
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.