Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34422628›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Efficacy and Safety of

Mengqi Cheng, Jiaqi Hu, Yuwei Zhao, Juling Jiang, Runzhi Qi, Shuntai Chen, Yaoyuan Li, Honggang Zheng, Rui Liu, Qiujun Guo 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 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The role ofFrontiers in immunology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Beyond Traditional Use: The Scientific Evidence for the Role ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Research Progress on the Treatment of Related Diseases WithDrug design, development and therapy · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mengqi ChengDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jiaqi HuGraduate School, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Yuwei ZhaoGraduate School, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Juling JiangDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Runzhi QiDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Shuntai ChenDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yaoyuan LiDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Honggang ZhengDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Rui LiuDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Qiujun GuoDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Xing ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yinggang QinDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Baojin HuaDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences · CNGuang’anmen Hospital · CNBeijing University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background

methodsWe searched for literature (up to July 19, 2020) in eight electronic databases. The included studies were reviewed by two researchers. The main outcomes were the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), survival rate, quality of life (QOL), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and peripheral blood lymphocyte levels. The effect estimate of interest was the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to detect the robustness of the primary outcome and to calculate the required information size (RIS). Certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE profiler.

resultsResults based on available literature showed that, compared with patients treated with PBC alone, those treated with

conclusionCurrent low to moderate evidence revealed that SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020203486.

Indexed as

advanced gastric cancerAstragalusmeta-analysisplatinumtraditional Chinese medicine

Identifiers

PMID34422628
PMCPMC8371531
OpenAlexW3104058747

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.