Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36300280›Full record

Trial reportBiomolecules & biomedicine2023

Efficacy and safety of PEG-rhG-CSF in preventing chemoradiotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

Weiwei Li, Mohan Dong, Shigao Huang, Liu Shi, Hua Yang, Ying Zhang, Jie Gong, Mei Shi, Lichun Wei, Lina Zhao

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Development and practice of a standardized management pathway for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with gynecological malignancies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Weiwei LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Mohan DongDepartment of Medical Education, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Shigao HuangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Liu ShiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Hua YangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Ying ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Jie GongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Mei ShiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Lichun WeiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Lina ZhaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi an, China.
Air Force Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The standard of care for locally advanced cervical cancer is concurrent chemoradiotherapy, which is associated with significant toxicity, especially hematologic toxicity. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) in preventing neutropenia during radical chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer, 40 patients receiving prophylaxis from February 2018 to July 2019 were randomly divided into two arms in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the study arm (N = 21) received PEG-rhG-CSF, while patients in the control arm (N = 19) received short-acting rhG-CSF. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia, and the secondary endpoints were the incidence of febrile neutropenia, chemotherapy delay, and radiotherapy interruption. In addition, dynamic changes in absolute neutrophil count during radical chemoradiotherapy and adverse events were compared between the two groups. There were 0 and 4 cycles of grade 3-4 neutropenia in the PEG-rhG-CSF and rhG-CSF groups, respectively. The incidence of neutropenia of all grades was lower in patients on PEG-rhG-CSF than on rhG-CSF [24.05% (19/79) vs. 56.94% (41/72); p < 0.001]. No patient developed neutropenic fever. The lowest values of neutropenia during concurrent chemoradiotherapy cycles were 2.73 ± 1.02 and 1.91 ± 0.79 × 10 9/ml in the PEG-rhG-CSF and rhG-CSF groups, respectively (p < 0.001). In the PEG-rhG-CSF and rhG-CSF groups, 0 and 8 (11.11%) cycles of chemotherapy were delayed due to neutropenia, respectively (p = 0.01). There was no delay of radiotherapy by more than one week in either group. Prophylactic use of PEG-rhG-CSF during chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer can effectively prevent neutropenia and associated adverse events. PEG-rhG-CSF may be an effective strategy to provide uninterrupted radical chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsNeutropeniaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyFemaleGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHumansPolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant ProteinsGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factorpegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factorPolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID36300280
PMCPMC10113940
OpenAlexW4307425303

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.