Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38298696›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Chemotherapy alone versus chemotherapy plus

Zhimei Huang, Wang Yao, Zhihui Zhong, Guang Yang, Jihong Liu, Haifeng Gu, Jinhua Huang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Novel Self-Regulated, Non-Directional Magnetic Thermos-BrachytherapyAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Zhimei HuangDepartment of Minimal Invasive Intervention, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, PR China.
Wang YaoDepartment of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, Province Guangdong, PR China.
Zhihui ZhongDepartment of Minimal Invasive Intervention, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, PR China.
Guang YangDepartment of Minimal Invasive Intervention, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, PR China.
Jihong LiuDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, PR China.
Haifeng GuDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, PR China.
Jinhua HuangDepartment of Minimal Invasive Intervention, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, PR China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNThe First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Cervical cancerComplicationDisease-free survivalLocal recurrenceOverall survival

Identifiers

PMID38298696
PMCPMC10828072
OpenAlexW4390921255

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.