ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be the best neoadjuvant therapy modality for non-metastatic pancreatic cancer: a population based study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: Currently, there are no studies showing which neoadjuvant therapy modality can provide better prognosis for patients after pancreatic cancer surgery. This study explores the optimal neoadjuvant therapy model by comparing the survival differences between patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer (cT1-4N0-1M0) who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NARCT). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 723 patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy before surgery from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. After propensity score matching (PSM), we compared the effects of NACT and NARCT on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer, and then performed subgroup analyze. Finally, we used univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis to explore potential risk factors for OS and CSS in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with preoperative neoadjuvant therapy. Result: Before PSM, mOS (30.0 months VS 26.0 months, P=0.122) and mCSS (30.0 months VS 26.0 months, P=0.117) were better in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with NACT compared with NARCT, but this was not statistically significant (P>0.05). After PSM, mOS (30.0 months VS 25.0 months, P=0.032) and mCSS (33.0 months VS 26.0 months, P=0.028) were better in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with NACT compared with NARCT, and this difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Multivariate Cox regression analysis results showed that age, lymph node positivity, and NARCT were independent adverse prognostic factors for OS and CSS in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. Conclusion: The study results show that compared with NARCT, NACT is the best preoperative neoadjuvant therapy mode for patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. This result still needs to be confirmed by more prospective randomized controlled trials.
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.