Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28544758›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2017

Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Han-Xiang Zhan, Jian-Wei Xu, Dong Wu, Zhi-Yang Wu, Lei Wang, San-Yuan Hu, Guang-Yong Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.7field-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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Han-Xiang ZhanDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5489-1142
Jian-Wei XuDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.
Dong WuDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.
Zhi-Yang WuDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.
Lei WangDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.
San-Yuan HuDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.
Guang-Yong ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Qilu hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250012, China.
Qilu Hospital of Shandong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a strong rationale and many theoretical advantages for neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer (PC). However, study results have varied significantly. In this study, a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies were performed in order to evaluate safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy in PC. Thirty-nine studies were selected (n = 1458 patients), with 14 studies focusing on patients with resectable disease (group 1), and 19 studies focusing on patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced disease (group 2). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 97.4% of the studies, in which 76.9% was given radiotherapy and 74.4% administered with chemoradiation. The complete and partial response rate was 3.8% and 20.9%. The incidence of grade 3/4 toxicity was 11.3%. The overall resection rate after neoadjuvant therapy was 57.7% (group 1: 73.0%, group 2: 40.2%). The R0 resection rate was 84.2% (group 1: 88.2%, group 2: 79.4%). The overall survival for all patients was 16.79 months (resected 24.24, unresected 9.81; group 1: 17.76, group 2: 16.20). Our results demonstrate that neoadjuvant therapy has not been proven to be beneficial and should be considered with caution in patients with resectable PC. Patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced disease may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy, but further research is needed.

Indexed as

Neoadjuvant TherapyAntineoplastic AgentsHumansMorbidityPancreatic NeoplasmsProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic AgentsNeoadjuvant therapypancreatic cancerR0 resectionsurvivaltumor response

Identifiers

PMID28544758
PMCPMC5463082
OpenAlexW2618526234

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.