SynthesisTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Comparison of Induction Chemotherapy Plus Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Alone in Locally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.
Synthesis in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma: molecular insights, diagnostic advances, and emerging treatment strategies.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Intratumoral habitat radiomics based on magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative prediction treatment response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Japanese journal of radiology · 2024Article
- The efficacy of induction chemotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy added to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in T3-4N0-1M0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis.Cancer biology & therapy · 2023Article
- Survival after induction chemotherapy in locoregional advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Review
- The efficacy and safety of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with induction chemotherapyTranslational cancer research · 2022Article
- Induction chemotherapy with paclitaxel, carboplatin and cetuximab for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A single-center, retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone are both standard treatment regimens for managing locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, the results of comparisons between them in clinical trials vary. Therefore, we designed this meta-analysis to illustrate their advantages and disadvantages in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
methodsWe thoroughly searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and then merged the effect indicators of hazard ratios and risk ratios using RevMan 5.1.
resultsSeven randomized controlled trials totaling 2,319 patients were included in our research. The synthesized results showed that induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.63-0.89,
conclusionsInduction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy improved survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy. For the weekly cisplatin regimen subgroup, it did not improve remote control or overall survival versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone, warranting further clarification.
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.