ArticleHeliyon2024
Chemotherapy alone versus chemotherapy plus
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Novel Self-Regulated, Non-Directional Magnetic Thermos-BrachytherapyAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- 125I inhibits the progression of cervical cancer by upregulating the HSF1/PU.1/SYK signaling pathway and consequently enhancing the apoptotic response mediated by ROS/USP7/P53.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Surgical Advancements, Immunotherapy, Targeted and Conventional Therapies, Biopsy, Colposcopy, and Pap Smear Integration in the Management of Cervical Cancer.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rationale and objectives: The primary aim of this study was to conduct a retrospective comparative analysis of the survival outcomes in patients with recurrent cervical cancer (CC). Specifically, we aimed to compare the efficacy of chemotherapy alone versus the combined approach of chemotherapy and Materials and methods: Patients diagnosed with recurrent CC subsequent to the failure of initial chemotherapy from January 2007 to December 2016 were enrolled from 2 hospitals. These patients were then divided into two groups: Group A, which underwent second-line chemotherapy alone, and Group B, which received both second-line chemotherapy and Results: A matched cohort comprising 88 patients each in Group A and Group B was included in the study. In Group A, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year cumulative PFS rates were 40.9 %, 15.9 %, and 5.7 % respectively, while in Group B, these rates were significantly higher at 79.5 %, 48.9 %, and 25.0 % (P = 0.003). Similarly, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year cumulative OS rates among Group A were 67.0 %, 27.3 %, and 5.7 % compared to 89.8 %, 63.6 %, and 30.7 % among Group B, suggesting a difference with statistical significance (P < 0.001) between the two groups. Moreover, the incidence of complications was similar between groups (P = 0.698). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the combined approach of chemotherapy and
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.