ReviewCureus2023
Efficacy and Safety of the Surgery-First Approach Compared to the Chemotherapy-First Approach for Treating Low-Risk Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fertility-sparing surgical interventions for low-risk, non-metastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) affecting women of reproductive age, the chemotherapy-first approach is often preferred over the surgery-first approach. Low-risk GTN is treated with a chemotherapy-first approach, but the number of courses required can affect fertility. A surgery-first approach may decrease the number of chemotherapy courses, but its efficacy and safety compared to a chemotherapy-first approach are unclear. Thus, we investigated the efficacy and safety of the surgery-first approach compared to the chemotherapy-first approach in treating low-risk GTN. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases for relevant articles in July 2023. A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcome measures were conducted using a random-effects model. The primary outcomes were remission, the mean number of chemotherapy courses required to cure, and adverse events. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. This study protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/kysvn/). Studies for low-risk GTN included a qualitative synthesis (with 2,192 participants and ten studies, eight of which were about second uterine curettage and two about hysterectomy) and a meta-analysis (with 138 participants and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared first-line treatments of second uterine curettage and chemotherapy). Second uterine curettage may result in little to no difference in remission (risk ratio: 1.00, 95% confidence interval: 0.96-1.05; low certainty) and a slight reduction in adverse events (risk ratio: 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.47-1.60; low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain on the mean number of chemotherapy courses (mean difference: 2.84 lower, 95% confidence interval: 7.31 lower to 1.63 higher; very low certainty). Based on clinical outcomes, second uterine curettage can be comparable to the chemotherapy-first approach as a first-line treatment option for low-risk GTN; however, the overall certainty of the evidence was low or very low.
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.