SynthesisMedicine2018
Meta-analysis of the effects of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor on recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of EGFR gene polymorphisms in oral squamous cell carcinoma patients of Southeast Iran: A case-control study.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy and non-anti-EGFR therapy in recurrent/metastatic (RM) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).
methodsThe Cochrane library, WanFang Data, PubMed, Medline, VIP, CBM, and EBSCO databases were searched for relevant studies. The objective response rate (ORR, defined as complete response or partial response according to RECTST version 1.1) and grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were used.
resultsTen studies involving 2260 patients were included. Primary meta-analysis showed that anti-EGFR therapy improved the ORR [odds ratio (OR): 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.44-2.21, P <.00001]. Subgroup analyses revealed that the ORR of patients with RM HNSCC could be improved by monoclonal antibodies (OR: 1.89, 1.46-2.45, P <.00001) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (OR: 1.57, 1.07-2.31, P = .02). Analysis of grade 3 to 4 adverse effects demonstrated that diarrhea (3.15, [1.90, 5.20]), rash/desquamation (13.66, [6.86, 27.20]), hypomagnesemia (1.83, [1.28, 2.62]), vomiting (1.99, [1.00, 3.95]), anorexia (3.34, [1.45, 7.73]), dehydration (2.22, [1.19, 4.12]), and hypokalemia (1.63, [1.09, 2.42]) were significantly associated with anti-EGFR therapy.
conclusionAnti-EGFR therapy is recommended for patients with RM HNSCC. Adverse effects, such as diarrhea, anorexia, hypomagnesemia, and hypokalemia, should be carefully monitored during anti-EGFR therapy.
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.