Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33489889›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2020

Effect of Induction Chemotherapy in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

Shan-Shan Yang, Jian-Gui Guo, Jia-Ni Liu, Zhi-Qiao Liu, En-Ni Chen, Chun-Yan Chen, Pu-Yun OuYang, Fei Han, Fang-Yun Xie

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Optimal induction chemotherapy regimen for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: an update Bayesian network meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Shan-Shan YangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Jian-Gui GuoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, China.
Jia-Ni LiuDepartment of Head and Neck Oncology, The Cancer Center of the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai, China.
Zhi-Qiao LiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
En-Ni ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Chun-Yan ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Pu-Yun OuYangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Fei HanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Fang-Yun XieDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNFifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University · CNFirst People's Hospital of Foshan · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious meta-analysis had evaluated the effect of induction chemotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. But two trials with opposite findings were not included and the long-term result of another trial significantly differed from the preliminary report. This updated meta-analysis was thus warranted.

methodsLiterature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials focusing on the additional efficacy of induction chemotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Trial-level pooled analysis of hazard ratio (HR) for progression free survival and overall survival and risk ratio (RR) for locoregional control rate and distant control rate were performed.

resultsTwelve trials were eligible. The addition of induction chemotherapy significantly prolonged both progression free survival (HR=0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-0.76, p<0.001) and overall survival (HR=0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.80, p<0.001), with 5-year absolute benefit of 11.31% and 8.95%, respectively. Locoregional (RR=0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.92, p=0.002) and distant control (RR=0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.80) rates were significantly improved as well. The incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events during the concurrent chemoradiotherapy was higher in leukopenia (p=0.028), thrombocytopenia (p<0.001), and fatigue (p=0.038) in the induction chemotherapy group.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis supported that induction chemotherapy could benefit patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma in progression free survival, overall survival, locoregional, and distant control rate.

Indexed as

induction chemotherapymeta-analysisnasopharyngeal carcinomaradiotherapyupdated

Identifiers

PMID33489889
PMCPMC7820771
OpenAlexW3119010938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.