ArticleComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Efficacy and Side Effects of Irinotecan Combined with Nedaplatin versus Paclitaxel Combined with Cisplatin in Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer and Tumor Marker Analysis: Based on a Retrospective Analysis.
Article 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 It has been retracted, and should not be counted.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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Cilostazol protective effect on nedaplatin-induced genotoxicity in cultured human lymphocytes.Toxicology reports · 2025Article
- Retracted: Efficacy and Side Effects of Irinotecan Combined with Nedaplatin versus Paclitaxel Combined with Cisplatin in Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer and Tumor Marker Analysis: Based on a Retrospective Analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2023Article
- Investigation of the Possible Protective Effect ofAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-06-28Concerns/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 ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A case-control study was adopted to investigate the efficacy and side effects of irinotecan combined with nedaplatin (NP) versus paclitaxel combined with cisplatin for locally advanced cervical cancer (CC) neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and to analyze the changes in tumor marker levels. Methods: A total of 96 patients with locally advanced CC who were treated from October 2019 to October 2021 were enrolled in our hospital as the research subjects, and their clinical data were collected for retrospective analysis and grouped according to their treatment regimens. Among them, 53 patients received paclitaxel combined with cisplatin as the control group, and the other 43 patients received irinotecan combined with NP as the observation group. The clinical effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and alterations in tumor markers (CEA, AFP, CA125, and SCCA) were compared between the two groups. The incidence of common chemotherapy side effects was observed and compared between the two groups, including nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain and diarrhea, liver function impairment, bone marrow suppression, transient hyperglycemia, rash, ECG abnormalities, peripheral neurotoxicity, and muscle aches and pains. Results: The clinical efficiency of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 97.67% in the observation group and 81.13% in the control group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups ( Conclusion: Irinotecan in combination with nedaplatin can be an effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen for advanced localized cervical cancer, particularly in patients with combined diabetes.
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.