Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29563772›Full record

SynthesisDrug design, development and therapy2018

Combination therapy versus gemcitabine monotherapy in the treatment of elderly pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Jiamin Jin, Chunbo Teng, Tao Li

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drug design, development and therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jiamin JinCollege of Life Science, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, China.
Chunbo TengCollege of Life Science, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, China.
Tao LiCollege of Life Science, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, China.
Northeast Forestry University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to compare the efficacy of combination therapy versus gemcitabine monotherapy in the treatment of elderly pancreatic cancer (PC) by using a meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND

methodsDatabases were searched to identify relevant clinical trials. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Statistical analyses were conducted by using Comprehensive Meta Analysis software (version 2.0).

resultsA total of 3,401 elderly PC patients from six randomized controlled trials were included for analysis. In comparison with gemcitabine alone, combination therapy in elderly PC patients did not significantly improve OS (HR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.82-1.06,

conclusionThe findings of this study suggest that combined chemotherapy, but not for gemcitabine plus targeted agents, could be recommended for elderly PC patients due to its survival benefits. Further studies are still needed to assess the treatment tolerance of combination chemotherapy in these patient populations.

Indexed as

AgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCombined Modality TherapyDeoxycytidineDose-Response Relationship, DrugGemcitabineHumansMolecular StructurePancreatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStructure-Activity RelationshipSurvival RateDeoxycytidineGemcitabineelderlymeta-analysispancreatic cancerrandomized controlled trialstargeted agents

Identifiers

PMID29563772
PMCPMC5846317
OpenAlexW2791860635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.