Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35712487›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2022

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer. Is It Time for Pushing on It?

Marco Vivarelli, Federico Mocchegiani, Daniele Nicolini, Andrea Vecchi, Grazia Conte, Enrico Dalla Bona, Roberta Rossi, Andrea Benedetti Cacciaguerra

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marco VivarelliHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Federico MocchegianiHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Daniele NicoliniHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Andrea VecchiHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Grazia ConteHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Enrico Dalla BonaHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Roberta RossiHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Andrea Benedetti CacciaguerraHepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Marche Polytechnic University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic resection still represents the only curative option for patients affected by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the association with modern chemotherapy regimens is a key factor in improving the inauspicious oncological outcome. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for borderline resectable/locally advanced PDAC has been demonstrated; this evidence raises the question of whether even resectable PDAC should undergo NAT rather than upfront surgery. NAT may avoid futile surgery because of undetected distant metastases or aggressive tumor biology, providing more effective systemic control of the disease, which is hampered when adjuvant chemotherapy is delayed or precluded. However, recent data show controversial results regarding the efficacy and safety of NAT in resectable PDAC compared to upfront surgery. Although several prospective studies and meta-analyses indicate better oncologic outcomes after NAT, there are some biases, such as the methodological approaches used to capture the events of interest, which could make these results hardly reproducible. For instance, per-protocol studies, considering only the postoperative outcomes, tend to overestimate the performance of NAT by excluding patients who will never be suitable for surgery due to the development of chemotoxicity or tumor progression. To draw reliable conclusions, the studies should capture the events of interest of both strategies (NAT/upfront surgery) from the time of allocation to a specific treatment in an intention-to-treat fashion. This critical review highlights the current literature data concerning the use of NAT in resectable PDAC, summarizing the results of high-quality studies and focusing on the methodological issues of the most recent pieces of evidence.

Indexed as

chemotherapyneoadjuvant treatmentpancreatic adenocarcinomaresectable pancreatic adenocarcinomaupfront surgery

Identifiers

PMID35712487
PMCPMC9195424
OpenAlexW4281845055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.