SynthesisComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
The Efficacy of Adjuvant Targeted Therapy in Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Retracted: The Efficacy of Adjuvant Targeted Therapy in Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2023Article
- Cabozantinib-Loaded PLGA Nanoparticles: A Potential Adjuvant Strategy for Surgically Resected High-Risk Non-Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-07-19Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions · · See also: https://pubpeer.com/publications/B84B6CD963E4D9E597F3F37B4DBD6E
- Retracted
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this systematic evaluation and meta-analysis was to analyze the efficacy and adverse effects of adjuvant targeted therapy regimens in advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods: Studies eligible for the efficacy of adjuvant targeted therapy regimens in advanced or metastatic RCC published before December 2021 in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Clinical Trials Database (CENTRAL), and Web of Science were searched for (1) patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who received adjuvant postoperative targeted therapy versus those not receiving active treatment; (2) primary endpoint outcomes of disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs); and (3) design: randomized controlled trial (RCT) as inclusion criteria. Data on DFS and OS were extracted or recalculated by meta-analysis as hazard ratios (HRs), and AEs were compared using a dominance ratio (OR). Result: This systematic evaluation will provide evidence on the effectiveness and adverse effects of adjuvant targeted therapy in patients with advanced RCC. The results of meta-analysis showed that all of the three adjuvant targeted therapeutic drugs (sorafenib, sunitinib, and pazopanib) did not benefit from the adjuvant targeted therapy for DFS and OS and even increase the incidence of AEs compared to the placebo. Conclusions: The aim of this study was to summarize data on DFS, OS, and AEs in patients with advanced RCC treated with targeted therapies. The evidence provided by this systematic evaluation and meta-analysis will help guide clinical decision-making and provide insight into the future management of patients with advanced RCC.
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.