ArticleDiscover oncology2022
Platinum-doublet chemotherapy for advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Discover oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- From diagnosis to treatment: navigating the course for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Clinical/pathological features and survival outcomes of extra-pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas: A retrospective single-center series.Journal of neuroendocrinology · 2025Article
- Clinicopathological Characteristics of Extrapulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinomas: Treatment Responses and Survival Outcomes: Single-Center Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Managing Metastatic Extrapulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinoma After First-Line Treatment.Current oncology reports · 2023Review
- Establishment and validation of a clinicopathological prognosis model of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas.Frontiers in oncology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlatinum-doublet chemotherapy has been conventionally used for patients with advanced gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) but evidence of chemotherapy is based on studies with small sample sizes and remains scarce. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to elucidate the efficacy of platinum-doublet chemotherapy for advanced GEP-NEC.
methodsWe performed a database search in PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE. Eligible studies were prospective and retrospective studies documenting the efficacy of platinum plus etoposide (EP) and platinum plus irinotecan (IP) for advanced GEP-NEC. Overall response rate (ORR), median progression-free survival (PFS), and median overall survival (OS) were pooled and weighted using generic inverse variance in a random-effects meta-analysis model.
resultsNineteen studies including 1157 patients were identified. The ORR of the platinum-doublet regimen, EP, and IP was 49.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41.8-56.5), 44.4% (95% CI: 35.9-53.0), and 59.4% (95% CI: 48.0-70.8). The pooled median OS of the platinum-doublet regimen, EP, and IP was 12.9 months (95% CI:10.9-15.3), 12.9 months (95% CI: 10.8-15.4), and 12.9 months (95% CI: 6.0-27.8), and the pooled median PFS of the platinum-doublet regimen, EP, and IP was 5.4 months (95% CI: 4.5-6.4), 5.4 months (95% CI 4.5-6.5), and 4.0 months (95% CI: 1.4-11.7), respectively.
conclusionConsiderable response rate and survival time of the platinum-doublet regimen for advanced GEP-NEC were observed. IP and EP regimens can be reasonably applicable and these results provide a reference for oncologists in deciding the suitable regimen for patients with advanced GEP-NEC.
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.