ReviewJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020
The efficacy and safety comparison of first-line chemotherapeutic agents (high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin, cisplatin, and ifosfamide) for osteosarcoma: a network meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
69 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Outcome and Patient Safety of Methotrexate, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin Regimen for Chemotherapy in Osteosarcoma: A Meta-Analysis.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Pooled it
- FBXL5 depletion as a novel strategy against osteosarcoma: Evidence for MEK/ERK inhibition and enhanced therapeutic sensitivity.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- RNA modifications in cancer: regulators of tumor evolution and therapeutic response.Molecular cancer · 2026Review
- Next-generation osteosarcoma models for precision medicine.Communications biology · 2026Review
- Predicting resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in osteosarcoma using machine learning with clinical data and T2-weighted MRI radiomics.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Non-invasive MRI biomarkers for assessment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in osteosarcoma: Current techniques and clinical perspectives.Journal of bone oncology · 2026Review
- Natural compounds in the treatment of osteosarcoma: just chemotherapy adjuvants? or is there much more?Cancer cell international · 2026Review
- Correlation between systemic immune inflammatory index and prognostic nutritional index and prognosis of osteosarcoma patients and construction of prediction model.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- The miR-16-1-3p passenger strand exhibits functional activity and suppresses malignant phenotypes in osteosarcoma.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Regorafenib-Induced Stress Response Alters the Bioenergetic Profile of Osteosarcoma Cells and Modulates Gene Expression Associated with Metabolic regulation-a Potential Mechanism of Osteosarcoma Treatment-Related Adaptation.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- Immunotherapy and postoperative bone defect repair strategies based on osteosarcoma tumor microenvironment characteristics: balancing antitumor effects and promotion of bone regeneration.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Review
- Integrative single-cell analysis reveals immunogenic cell death-associated heterogeneity and identifies a robust prognostic signature in osteosarcoma with experimental validation.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- [Polyphyllin VII inhibits osteosarcoma xenograft growth in mice by inducing ferroptosisNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2025Article
- Iron-Related Metabolic Targets in the Treatment of Osteosarcoma: Research Progress and Prospects.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Metabolites and Immune Cells Mediated the Causal Relationship Between the Gut Microbiota and Osteosarcoma: A Mendelian Randomization Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Identification and verification of a polyamine metabolism-related gene signature for predicting prognosis and immune infiltration in osteosarcoma.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a predictive score for chemoresistance in high-grade osteosarcoma at baseline.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Dual Regulation of Sprouty 4 Palmitoylation by ZDHHC7 and Palmitoyl-Protein Thioesterase 1: A Potential Therapeutic Strategy for Cisplatin-Resistant Osteosarcoma.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Polydatin-Induced Shift of Redox Balance and Its Anti-Cancer Impact on Human Osteosarcoma Cells.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Article
- Injectable hydrogels for Fenton-like MnMaterials today. Bio · 2024Article
9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOsteosarcoma, a primary malignant bone tumor derived from mesenchymal tissue, is the most common type of pleomorphic tumor that occurs in children and adolescents. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of high-dose methotrexate (M), doxorubicin (D), cisplatin (C), and ifosfamide (I) in the management of osteosarcoma.
methodsElectronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase database were searched for studies published from when the databases were established to July 13, 2019. The network meta-analysis was performed using software R 3.3.2 and STATA version 41.0 after demographic and outcome data extraction. The ranks based on probabilities of interventions for each outcome were performed. In addition, the consistency of direct and indirect evidence was assessed by node splitting.
resultsThe network meta-analysis results revealed that MDCI had a significant lower hazard risk of overall survival [MDCI vs MDC: HR = 0.74, 95% CrI (0.23, 0.87); MDCI vs DC: HR = 0.60, 95% CrI (0.16, 0.92)]. In addition, MDCI had a clearly longer progression-free survival time than that of DC [MDCI: HR = 0.88, 95% CrI (0.46, 0.98)]. No significant difference was detected in MDC and DC in OS, PFS, and AEs. The probabilities of rank plot showed that MDCI ranked first in OS (73.12%) and PFS (52.43%). DC was the best treatment in safety, ranked first (75.43%).
conclusionsMDCI showed its superiority among all chemotherapeutic agents in relation to efficacy and safety, followed by MDC. In addition, MDCI was associated with an increased risk of AEs. According to our analysis, DC was less effective but safer for MDC and MDCI.
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.