ReviewHepatobiliary surgery and nutrition2022
Systemic review of the robustness of randomized controlled trials for the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma in three domains: survival-inferred fragility index, restricted mean survival time, and the spin effect.
Review in Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of the robustness of randomized controlled trials for the treatment modalities of esophageal cancer using the fragility index - a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Survival outcomes of population-wide colonoscopy screening: reanalysis of the NordICC data.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Trial
- Fragility Index analysis for robustness of evidence in Randomized Controlled Trials in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for rectal cancer.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- The quest for optimal and reliable guidelines based on robust evidence for the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2021Article
- Beyond the Fragility Index.Pharmaceutical statisticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The vast majority of patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CC) have advanced disease at diagnosis and are candidates for palliative treatment only. The robustness of the randomized controlled trials regarding the treatment of CC are assessed. Methods: A systematic review of all randomized control trials (RCT) of treatments for both intra- and extrahepatic CC between 2010 and 2020 was performed. The survival-inferred fragility index (SIFI; the minimum number of reassignments of the best survivors between arms that would overturn the statistical outcomes) was calculated. In addition, the gain, or loss, in survival in RCTs was evaluated by the restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference. Finally, the level of spin i.e., misrepresentation of study outcomes, was measured in inconclusive studies to assess distorted reporting strategies. Results: Out of 6,167 studies retrieved, 11 could be retained for full text revision (7 with both intra- and extrahepatic CC, 3 with peri-hilar CC, and 1 with peri-hilar or distal CC). Only 3 studies included resected patients (2 with both intra- and extrahepatic CC and 1 with peri-hilar or distal CC). Nine studies investigated systemic chemotherapy (including 3 after surgical resection), one study evaluated photodynamic therapy, and another investigated the use of an endoscopically inserted stent in the biliary tract. The median SIFI was -2 [interquartile range (IQR): -6.25, -0.25] across all studies. Overall, the median RMST difference was 0.56 months (IQR: 0.10, 0.95). Finally, for inconclusive studies, the level of spin was high, moderate, and low in respectively 12.5%, 25%, and 62.5% of the studies. Conclusions: RCTs of CC showed a low degree of robustness with a frequent proportion of associated spin.
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.