ArticleTranslational cancer research2020
Comparison of local control and survival outcomes between surgical and non-surgical local therapy on pelvic Ewing's sarcoma patients: a meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of surgical therapy to nonsurgical therapy is still a controversial topic in pelvic Ewing's sarcoma (ES) management. We perform a systemic review and meta-analysis to compare the effect of local control (LC) and survival outcomes between surgical and nonsurgical local therapy on pelvic ES patients with systemic chemotherapy.
methodsPublished retrospective studies searched from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases that investigated the effects of surgical and nonsurgical local therapy on the LC and survival outcomes of patients with pelvic ES treated with chemotherapy were included in our study. Our primary outcome was the LC rate and progression-free survival (PFS) rate. The effect of confounders of extend of disease, surgical margin and chemotherapy respond on PFS was analyzed in subgroups.
resultsTen studies with 782 pelvic ES patients were included in our analysis. Surgical patients showed higher LC and PFS rate comparing to nonsurgical patients [LC: risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52-1.00, P=0.05, I
conclusionsSurgical therapy is primarily recommended in localized, resectable, good chemotherapeutic respond pelvic ES. Inadequate resection and poor chemotherapeutic respond are negative prognostic factors in surgical patients and their surviving are not improved comparing with nonsurgical patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020149224.
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.