ArticleCancer biology & therapy2018
A mixed treatment comparison of toxicity of gemcitabine combined with different targeted drugs in the treatment of advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer.
Article in Cancer biology & therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- DEAD/H-box RNA helicase 10 promotes pancreatic cancer cell proliferationWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- A novel gemcitabine analog as a potential anticancer agent: synthesis andAmerican journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Biological evaluation of novel gemcitabine analog in patient-derived xenograft models of pancreatic cancer.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Cytotoxic effects of gemcitabine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles in pancreatic cancer cells.Journal of drug delivery science and technology · 2020Article
- EIF5A regulates proliferation and chemoresistance in pancreatic cancer through the sHH signalling pathway.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The mixed treatment comparison study was performed in order to compare the toxicities of Gemcitabine and different targeted drug combinations in the treatment of advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC). Searches were performed from the inception of PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to February 2017. This study included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Gemcitabine and different targeted drug combinations in the treatment of advanced/metastatic PC. Odds ratio (OR) values were calculated by direct and indirect comparisons, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) were drawn. A total of six RCTs were finally incorporated into the study. These studies included six therapy regimens: Gemcitabine + Axitinib, Gemcitabine + Trametinib, Gemcitabine + Sorafenib, Gemcitabine + Bevacizumab, Gemcitabine + Erlotinib and Gemcitabine + Tipifarnib. The results showed that Gemcitabine + Axitinib combinations showed lower incidence rates of rashes (all grades) in comparison to Gemcitabine + Trametinib and Gemcitabine + Erlotinib combinations. Compared with Gemcitabine+ Trametinib combinations, Gemcitabine + Axitinib combinations showed lower incidence rates of diarrhea (grade ≥ 3). Moreover, the cluster analyses results revealed that Gemcitabine + Axitinib combinations and Gemcitabine + Sorafenib combinations showed lower incidence rates of hematotoxicity, while Gemcitabine + Axitinib combinations showed lower incidence rates of non-hematotoxicity. Collectively, the data provided strong evidence of Gemcitabine + Axitinib combinations showing lower incidence rates of non-hematotoxicity, and Gemcitabine + Axitinib and Gemcitabine + Sorafenib combinations may have lower incidence rates of hematotoxicity in the treatment of advanced/metastatic 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.