SynthesisZhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer2019
[A Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Adverse Effects of Lobaplatin and Cisplatin in the Treatment of Malignant Pleural Effusion].
Synthesis in Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer, 2019. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of Lobaplatin and Cisplatin in the treatment of malignant pleural effusion.
methodsThe databases of Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, Wanfang, CNKI and VIP were retrieved so as to search the studies about the randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT) that compared the Lobaplatin and Cisplatin for malignant pleural effusion. The main outcome indicators include objective response rate, complete response, partial response, nephrotoxicity, chest pain, gastrointestinal reaction, myelosuppression, fever response and hepatotoxicity. Relative risk was used as the effect size, which was expressed as 95% confidence interval. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata 14.0 statistical software.
resultsA total of 12 RCTs and 720 MPE patients were included. The results showed that the ORR (RR=1.27, 95%CI: 1.15-1.40, P<0.001), CR (RR=1.39, 95%CI: 1.09-1.78, P=0.007), PR (RR=1.21, 95%CI: 1.02-1.42, P=0.026) in LBP thoracic perfusion chemotherapy were significantly higher than those in DDP thoracic perfusion chemotherapy. The incidence of nephrotoxicity (RR=0.31, 95%CI: 0.13-0.71, P=0.005) and gastrointestinal reactions (RR=0.44, 95%CI: 0.31-0.62, P<0.001) in the LBP group were significantly lower than those in DDP group.
conclusionsCompared with DDP pleural perfusion chemotherapy, the ORR, CR and PR of LBP pleural perfusion chemotherapy for MPE are significantly better than DDP, and its nephrotoxicity and gastrointestinal reactions are remarkably lower than DDP.
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.