Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33517538›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2021

A network meta-analysis for efficacies and toxicities of different therapeutic regimens in the treatment of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Tingyu Li, Fan Yang, Kening Ma, Lijie Lv

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 55% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tingyu LiDepartment of Medical Care, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China.
Fan YangDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China.
Kening MaDepartment of Pain, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China.
Lijie LvDepartment of Medical Care, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China. lvlj@jlu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7314-3027
Jilin University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe current study set out to compare the efficacies and toxicities (grad 3 and 4) between concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), induction chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (IC + RT), IC + CCRT, RT and CCRT + adjuvant chemotherapy (CCRT + AC) in regard to advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treatment using a network meta-analysis.

methodsLiterature retrieval was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library and other English databases. Eligible randomized controlled trails (RCTs) of 5 different regimens were included. The network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect comparisons to measure pooled odd ratios (OR) and the surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA).

resultsA total of eight eligible RCTs were enrolled into this network meta-analysis after initial exclusion. With respect to hematologic toxicity, CCRT + AC exhibited higher toxicity in patients with advanced NPC in terms of anemia and leukopenia/neutropenia compared to RT. As for anemia, the toxicity of IC + CCRT was higher than those with advanced NPC. In addition, CCRT exhibited higher toxicity than RT in relation to leukopenia/neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicity in regard to nausea/vomiting suggested that CCRT, IC + CCRT and CCRT + AC presented with higher levels of toxicity in patients with advanced NPC, in contrast to RT. Lastly, RT was found to be less toxic but with higher five-year overall survival (OS) rate in patients with advanced NPC, while CCRT, IC + CCRT and CCRT + AC were more toxic in patients with advanced NPC.

conclusionAmong the five therapeutic regimens, the survival rate of IC + RT was similar to that of CCRT, and the toxicity SUCRA value of IC + RT was lower than that of CCRT. Together, our findings indicate that IC + RT may be a potentially acceptable treatment alternative to CCRT for advanced NPC, and is worthy of further investigation.

Indexed as

Nasopharyngeal NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemoradiotherapyHumansInduction ChemotherapyNasopharyngeal CarcinomaAdvanced nasopharyngeal carcinomaBayesian network modelChemotherapyEfficacyRadiotherapyRandomized controlled trialsToxicity

Identifiers

PMID33517538
OpenAlexW3129187684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.