Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36638709›Full record

SynthesisESMO open2023

Does neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer improve overall survival? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

P L S Uson Junior, D Dias E Silva, N M de Castro, E da Silva Victor, E T Rother, S E A Araújo, M J Borad, F Moura

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in ESMO open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

P L S Uson JuniorCenter for Personalized Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo. Electronic address: pedro.serrano@einstein.br.
D Dias E SilvaHospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
N M de CastroHospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
E da Silva VictorHospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
E T RotherHospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
S E A AraújoCenter for Personalized Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo.
M J BoradMayo Clinic, Phoenix, USA.
F MouraCenter for Personalized Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo.
Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein · BRWinnMed · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy may improve overall survival (OS) in 'borderline' resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC). Whether the results are the same in upfront RPC is unknown. MATERIALS AND

methodsTo evaluate the association of neoadjuvant treatment and survival outcomes in RPC, a systematic literature review was carried out including prospective randomized trials of neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery. Articles indexed in PubMed, Embase and Scopus were evaluated. Data regarding systemic treatment regimens, R0 resection rates, disease-free survival (DFS) and OS were extracted. The outcomes were compared using a random-effects model. The index I

resultsOf 3229 abstracts, 6 randomized controlled trials were considered eligible with a combined sample size of 805 RPC patients. Among the trials, PACT-15, PREP-02/JSAP-05 and updated long-term results from PREOPANC and NEONAX trials were included. Combining the studies with meta-analysis, we could see that neoadjuvant treatment in RPC does not improve DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 (0.46-1.09)] or OS [HR 0.76 (0.52-1.11)], without significant heterogeneity. Interestingly, R0 rates improved ∼20% with the neoadjuvant approach [HR 1.2 (1.04-1.37)]. It is important to note that most studies evaluated gemcitabine-based regimens in the neoadjuvant setting.

conclusionsNeoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation does not improve DFS or OS in RPC compared to upfront surgery followed by adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant treatment improves R0 rates by ∼20%. Randomized ongoing trials are eagerly awaited with more active combined regimens including modified FOLFIRINOX.

Indexed as

Pancreatic NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicchemotherapyFOLFIRINOXgemcitabineneoadjuvant treatmentoverall survivalresectable pancreatic cancer

Identifiers

PMID36638709
PMCPMC10024142
OpenAlexW4316174652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.