SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2023
Survival after radiofrequency ablation and/or chemotherapy for lung cancer and pulmonary metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- "What really works for us?" exploring therapeutic strategies for non-small cell lung cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Electrodes of radiofrequency ablation for malignant lung tumors: a narrative review of advances, applications, and prospects.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Capecitabine maintenance after radiofrequency ablation: A preventive strategy for lung oligometastases from colorectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Global trends in research on radiofrequency ablation for lung cancer: a bibliometric and visualization analysis (2008-2024).Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Precision oncology: The role of minimally-invasive ablation therapy in the management of solid organ tumors.World journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Decoding colorectal cancer lung metastasis: a global research odyssey.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- The clinical value of local consolidative therapy for oligo-residual disease in PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors-treated non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and chemotherapy are used to treat lung cancer or pulmonary metastases, but no direct comparison of overall survival (OS) has been published. The present study aimed to assess the OS of RFA and/or chemotherapy in patients with lung cancer or pulmonary metastases who were not candidates for surgical resection. Methods: To identify relevant studies, the following databases were electronically searched from their inception to 31 March 2023: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Ovid, ScienceDirect, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Chongqing VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, Wanfang Database, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Chictr.org. Manual retrieval was also conducted. We used published hazard ratios (HRs) if available or estimates from other survival data. Results: A total of 1,387 participants from 14 trials were included in the final analysis. Patients treated with RFA combined with chemotherapy significantly improved OS compared with those treated with chemotherapy alone [HR 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.61; p < 0.00001], with an absolute difference at 12 months of 29.6% (95% CI 23.7-35.5), at 24 months of 19.2% (95% CI 10.1-28.2), and at 36 months of 22.9% (95% CI 12.0-33.7). No statistically significant difference was observed in the subgroups of case type, cancer type, chemotherapy drugs, and tumor size. The HR for OS with RFA plus chemotherapy vs. RFA alone was 0.53 (95% CI 0.41-0.70; p < 0.00001), corresponding to a 27.1% (95% CI 18.3-35.8), 31.0% (95% CI 19.9-41.9), and 24.9% (95% CI 15.0-34.7) absolute difference in survival at 12 months, 24 months, and 36 months, respectively. Subgroup analysis by geographic region and TNM stage showed that RFA combined with chemotherapy still significantly improved OS compared to RFA. The HR of RFA vs. chemotherapy was 0.98 (95% CI 0.60-1.60; p = 0.94), with an absolute difference at 12 months of 1.4% (95% CI -19.2 to 22.1), at 24 months of 7.8% (95% CI -11.3 to 26.8), and at 36 months of 0.3% (95% CI -13.2 to 13.8). The overall indirect comparison of OS for RFA vs. chemotherapy was 0.95 (95% CI 0.72-1.26; p = 0.74). Data on progression-free survival were not sufficiently reported. Conclusion: RFA combined with chemotherapy might be a better treatment option for patients with lung cancer or pulmonary metastases than chemotherapy alone or RFA alone. The comparison between RFA and/or chemotherapy remains to be specifically tested. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=335032, identifier CRD42022335032.
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.