SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021
The Efficacy of Intra-Arterial Plus Intravesical Chemotherapy
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDue to the poor prognosis, the treatment of high-risk bladder cancer (HRBC) remains controversial. This meta-analysis aims to access the efficacy of intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) combined with intravesical chemotherapy (IC)
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library databases, EMBASE (until June 2020) was conducted. PRISMA checklist was followed. The data were analyzed by RevMan v5.3.0.
resultsA total of five articles including 843 patients were studied. The analysis demonstrated that the IAC + IC group had a greater improvement of overall survival (P = 0.02) and significant reduction in terms of tumor recurrence rate (P = 0.0006) and tumor progression rate (P = 0.008) compared with the IC group. The recurrence-free survival in the IAC + IC group was significantly higher than that in the IC group (P = 0.004), but there was no significant difference in progression-free survival between the two groups (P = 0.32). In addition, the combination of IAC and IC significantly extended tumor recurrence interval (P = 0.0001) and reduced tumor-specific death rate (P = 0.01) for patients with HRBC compared with IC alone. For side effects related with IAC, although about half of the patients experienced some toxicities, most of them were mild and reversible (grades 1-2, 22.3%
conclusionPatients with HRBC treated with IAC + IC after bladder-sparing surgery had a marked improvement in the overall survival, recurrence-free survival, time interval to first recurrence, tumor recurrence rate, tumor progression rate, and tumor-specific death rate than patients treated with IC alone. However, progression-free survival was not significantly correlated with treatment strategy. In addition, patients seemed to tolerate well the toxicities related with IAC. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42021232679.
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.