Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34414103›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Intrapleural Administration With Rh-Endostatin and Chemical Irritants in the Control of Malignant Pleural Effusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Cheng-Qiong Wang, Xiao-Rong Huang, Min He, Xiao-Tian Zheng, Hong Jiang, Qian Chen, Teng-Yan Fan, Lin Zhan, Juan Ling, Ji-Hong Feng and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
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 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Cheng-Qiong WangDepartment of General Practice, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Xiao-Rong HuangGCP Center, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Min HeDepartment of Nursing, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Xiao-Tian ZhengDepartment of General Practice, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Hong JiangDepartment of General Practice, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Qian ChenEvidence-Based Medicine Research Centre, Jiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanchang, China.
Teng-Yan FanDepartment of General Practice, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Lin ZhanLaboratory Research Center, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guizhou University, Guiyang, China.
Juan LingDepartment of Infection Management, Gansu Provincial People's Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Ji-Hong FengDepartment of Oncology, Lishui People's Hospital, Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Lishui, China.
Xue XiaoDepartment of General Practice, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Xiao-Fan ChenEvidence-Based Medicine Research Centre, Jiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanchang, China.
Zheng XiaoDepartment of General Practice, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.
Zunyi Medical University · CNJiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNGansu Provincial Hospital · CNGuizhou Provincial People's Hospital · CNWenzhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA modified and recombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin) is often used in the control of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) through intrapleural infusion.

objectivesTo demonstrate the clinical response, survival, and safety of Rh-endostatin plus chemical irritants, their optimal combinations, treatment threshold, and optimal usage, we performed a new systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODOLOGY: All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were collected from Chinese and English electronic databases (from inception until August 2020). We pooled the data using a series of meta-analyses and summarized the evidence quality following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

resultsWe included 75 RCTs recruiting 4,678 patients, which reported six combinations for Rh-endostatin plus chemical irritants. Among the six combinations, only Rh-endostatin plus cisplatin (DDP) with enough trials might improve the complete response [2.29 (1.93, 2.71)] and quality of life [3.01 (2.49, 3.63)] and reduce treatment failure [0.29 (0.25, 0.33)] and progressive disease [0.27 (0.22, 0.34)]. It might not increase the risk of adverse drug reactions. For patients with lung cancer, moderate to massive effusion, initial treatment, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score ≥60, or anticipated survival time ≥3 months, Rh-endostatin (30-45 mg each time, once or twice a week 3-4 times) plus DDP (30-60 mg/m

conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that Rh-endostatin with DDP may be an optimal combination, which may improve clinical response and reduce failure and progressive disease with good safety. Rh-endostatin (30-40 mg each time, once or twice a week 3-4 times) with DDP (30-40 mg/m

Indexed as

chemical irritantscisplatinendostatinmeta-analysisoptimal adjuvant strategyrecombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin)

Identifiers

PMID34414103
PMCPMC8369576
OpenAlexW3191850894

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.