Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29614980›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2018

Chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for localized gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Daniel M Girardi, Mariana A de Lima, Gabriel C B Pereira, Marcelo V Negrão, Rossana V M López, Fernanda C Capareli, Jorge Sabbaga, Paulo Marcelo G Hoff

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel M GirardiDepartment of oncology, Hospital Sírio Libanês, SGAS 613, conjunto E lote 95, Asa Sul, Brasília, DF, 70200-001, Brazil. danielmgirardi@gmail.com.
Mariana A de LimaInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Gabriel C B PereiraOncoclinica, Macapá, Brazil.
Marcelo V NegrãoInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rossana V M LópezInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Fernanda C CapareliInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Jorge SabbagaInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Paulo Marcelo G HoffInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRCentro de Pesquisas Oncológicas · BRHospital Sírio-Libanês · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment of localized gastric cancer (LGC) consists of surgical resection followed by adjuvant treatment. Both chemoradiation (CRT) and chemotherapy (CT) regimens have shown benefit in survival outcomes versus observation. However, there are few data comparing these approaches.

methodsThis study included consecutive patients with LGC treated at Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP) from 2012 to 2015. CRT was based on the INT-0116 regimen and CT consisted of a platinum and fluoropyrimidine doublet. Treatment choice was based on physician preference. Toxicity was evaluated for every cycle. Overall survival (OS) analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to minimize selection bias.

resultsA total of 309 patients were evaluated, 227 in CRT group and 82 in CT group. The most prevalent grade 3/4 toxicities in CRT and CT groups were: nausea/vomiting (9.25 vs 4.9%), fatigue (9.3% vs 2.4%), mucositis (4.4% vs 1.2%), neutropenia (37.8% vs 20.9%), febrile neutropenia (3.9% vs 0%), anemia (4.3% vs 6.1%), thrombocytopenia (2.6% vs 4.9%), neuropathy (0 vs 2.4%) and hand-foot syndrome (0.4% vs 2.4%). Two grade 5 toxicities (febrile neutropenia and anemia) occurred in CRT group. There was no difference in the pattern of recurrence. After a median follow-up of 23.5 months (CRT) and 20.6 months (CT), there was no difference in OS between groups.

conclusionsCT and CRT present similar efficacy and tolerability as adjuvant treatment for LGC.

Indexed as

Chemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantChemotherapy, AdjuvantAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesStomach NeoplasmsAdjuvantChemoradiotherapyChemotherapyGastric cancerPropensity score

Identifiers

PMID29614980
PMCPMC5883367
OpenAlexW2805717062

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.