Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28353094›Full record

SynthesisMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2017

Systematic review: isocaloric ketogenic dietary regimes for cancer patients.

N Erickson, A Boscheri, B Linke, J Huebner

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Complementary Medicine in the Treatment of Cancer Patients.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

N EricksonComprehensive Cancer Center, Ludwig-Maximilian-University Clinic, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. Nicole.Erickson@med.uni-muenchen.de.
A BoscheriCenter for Prevention, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine, Technical University of Munich Clinic at Rechts der Isar, Uptown München-Campus C, Georg-Brauchle-Ring 56/58, 3rd Floor, 80992, Munich, Germany.
B LinkeDepartment of Biology, Humboldt University, Invalidenstr. 42, 10115, Berlin, Germany.
J HuebnerUniversity Clinic of Jena, Medizinische Klinik II, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEJena University Hospital · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DETechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The efficacy and benefits of ketogenic diets (KD) have recently been gaining worldwide and remain a controversial topic in oncology. This systematic review therefore presents and evaluates the clinical evidence on isocaloric KD dietary regimes and reveals that evidence supporting the effects of isocaloric ketogenic dietary regimes on tumor development and progression as well as reduction in side effects of cancer therapy is missing. Furthermore, an array of potential side effects should be carefully considered before applying KD to cancer patients. In regard to counseling cancer patients considering a KD, more robust and consistent clinical evidence is necessary before the KD can be recommended for any single cancer diagnosis or as an adjunct therapy.

Indexed as

Diet, KetogenicHumansNeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCancerCancer dietKetogenic dietLow carbohydrateNutritionOncology

Identifiers

PMID28353094
OpenAlexW2603634294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.