SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Treatments Compared to Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Patients With Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Patterns and Decision Drivers in Chinese Patients with Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Results from a National Physician Survey.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Neoadjuvant Treatment versus Standard Radio-Chemotherapy-An Updated Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2024Review
- Efficacy of treatment patterns based on concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage IIB cervical squamous cell carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- A quantitative analysis of artificial intelligence research in cervical cancer: a bibliometric approach utilizing CiteSpace and VOSviewer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Brachytherapy for cervical cancer: from intracavitary to interstitial technique.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Dynamic Nomogram Based on the Metastatic Number and Sites and Therapy Strategies Predicting the Prognosis of Patients with Metastatic Cervical Cancer.International journal of women's health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to identify the most effective treatment mode for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) by adopting a network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: Randomized controlled trials about treatments were retrieved from PubMed, Medline and Embase. Odds ratios (OR) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated by synthesizing direct and indirect evidence to rank the efficacy of nine treatments. Consistency was assessed by node-splitting method. Begg's test was performed to evaluate publication bias. The surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was also used in this NMA. Results: A total of 24 eligible randomized controlled trials with 6,636 patients were included in our NMA. These trials compared a total of nine different regimens: radiotherapy (RT) alone, surgery, RT plus adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), neoadjuvant CT plus CCRT, CCRT plus adjuvant CT, neoadjuvant CT, RT, CCRT plus surgery. Among those therapeutic modalities, we found that the two interventions with the highest SUCRA for OS and PFS were CCRT and CCRT plus adjuvant CT, respectively. ORs and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the two best strategies were CCRT versus CCRT plus adjuvant CT (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.53-1.31) for OS, CCRT plus adjuvant CT versus CCRT (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.96) for PFS. Conclusions: This NMA supported that CCRT and CCRT plus adjuvant CT are likely to be the most optimal treatments in terms of both OS and PFS for LACC. Future studies should focus on comparing CCRT and CCRT plus adjuvant CT in the treatment of LACC. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42019147920.
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.