ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2022
Current update of treatment strategies for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a narrative review.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is a tumor that infiltrates into the large blood vessels, with a high probability that the tumor will remain after surgical resection. To date, there has been no confirmed treatment strategy for BRPC. However, high-level studies, such as those using the intention-to-treat analysis, have recently been published. This review aimed to update the current status of treatment strategies for BRPC. Methods: We searched for studies, including those investigating patients with BRPC, either treated by upfront surgery or with neoadjuvant treatment and reported the R0 resection rate and overall survival using an intention-to-treat analysis. Key Content and Findings: Consequently, 22 articles were identified. Twelve were prospective studies. Six studies compared neoadjuvant therapy with upfront surgery, and both the R0 resection rate and overall survival in patients who underwent upfront surgery were significantly worse than in those who underwent neoadjuvant treatment in all studies. Six studies evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy, while 15 studies neoadjuvant chemoradiation. No reports showed the superiority or inferiority of the two methods, and the optimal regimen was not determined in either treatment. The high-precision radiation therapy techniques have been studied, but the optimal method and dose fractionation were unclear. Conclusions: The current standard of care for the BRPC is neoadjuvant therapy. Although the optimal regimen of neoadjuvant therapy was not determined, several prospective trials are underway to identify the optimal neoadjuvant treatment.
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.