Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33796448›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Treatment Response, Survival, and Safety of Transarterial Chemoembolization With CalliSpheres

Bin Liang, Joyman Makamure, Shenglei Shu, Lijie Zhang, Tao Sun, Chuansheng Zheng

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.2field-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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Comparison of CalliSpheresRadiology and oncology · 2023
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bin LiangDepartment of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Joyman MakamureDepartment of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Shenglei ShuDepartment of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Lijie ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Tao SunDepartment of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Chuansheng ZhengDepartment of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CNUnion Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDrug-eluting embolic transarterial chemoembolization (DEE-TACE) is an advance in TACE technique. However, at present there is insufficient evidence to support that DEE-TACE is superior to conventional TACE (cTACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TACE with CalliSpheres DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang Databases were searched to identify relevant articles published before March 26, 2020. The data regarding treatment response, survival profile, adverse events and liver function indexes were retrieved.

resultsA total of 16 studies with 1454 HCC patients (722 treated with CSM-TACE and 732 with cTACE) were included. Patients receiving CSM-TACE had higher 1-month complete response (CR), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) (odds ratio (OR): 2.00, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.29-3.09; OR: 2.87, 95% CI: 2.15-3.83; OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.37-2.95, respectively), 3-month CR, ORR, DCR (OR: 4.04, 95%CI: 2.46-6.64; OR: 3.39, 95%CI: 2.45-4.70; OR: 1.71, 95%CI: 1.14-2.55 respectively), and 6-month CR, ORR, DCR (OR: 4.02, 95%CI: 2.26-7.16; OR: 3.00, 95%CI: 2.05-4.38; OR: 2.66, 95%CI: 1.70-4.16 respectively) than those treated with cTACE. Furthermore, CSM-TACE exhibited a trend toward improved progression free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 0.86, 95%CI: 0.67-1.11) and overall survival (HR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.59-1.07) over cTACE although these differences did not reach statistical significance. In terms of safety, the two TACE treatments showed similar post-treatment pain (OR: 0.84, 95%CI: 0.55-1.28), fever (OR: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.60-1.63), nausea/vomiting (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.60-1.17), as well as 1-month follow-up alanine aminotransferase (Mean difference (MD): -3.66, 95%CI: -10.38-3.07), aspartate aminotransferase (MD: -2.30, 95%CI: -8.91-4.31) and total bilirubin (MD: -0.15, 95%CI: -2.26-1.96).

conclusionCSM-TACE displays superior treatment response, non-inferior survival profile and safety over cTACE in HCC patients.

Indexed as

CalliSpheres® microsphereshepatocellular carcinomameta-analysissafetysurvivaltreatment response

Identifiers

PMID33796448
PMCPMC8008112
OpenAlexW3136507564

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.