ReviewGastrointestinal tumors2018
Network Meta-Analysis of Adjuvant Chemotherapy following Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases.
Review in Gastrointestinal tumors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSix principal adjuvant chemotherapy treatments (ACTs) are currently available for patients with resected colorectal liver metastases. This meta-analysis was designed to determine the optimal ACT, as evaluated by 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates as well as by hepatic recurrences and adverse events (AEs).
methodsA systematic literature search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases was performed. The probability of the optimal therapeutic scheme and the mean ranking were estimated for each treatment using network meta-analysis.
resultsSystemic chemotherapy (SCT) had the best 2-year DFS rate (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48-1.27, 95% prediction interval [PI] = 0.17-3.56, surface under the cumulative ranking area [SUCRA] = 73) and the lowest AE rate (estimated SUCRA = 65 and predicted SUCRA = 62). Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) plus SCT had the best 5-year OS rate (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.64-1.01, 95% PI = 0.50-1.29) and the lowest hepatic recurrence rate (odds ratio = 2.87, 95% CI = 1.56-5.30, 95% PI = 0.61-13.62).
conclusionBoth SCT and HAI plus SCT showed superior efficacy and safety. Clinical trials in homogeneous populations with strict selection criteria are needed to compare these two ACTs.
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.