ArticleDiscover oncology2024
Efficacy and safety of systemic treatment for progressive and refractory desmoid tumor: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Article in Discover oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Obstructive Pyelonephritis Secondary to Ureteral Compression by an Intra-Abdominal Desmoid Tumor in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Mesh-reinforced reconstruction after abdominal wall desmoid tumor resection: a retrospective analysis of 16 cases.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDesmoid tumors (DT) are rare, locally invasive tumors originating from connective tissue. Surgical intervention is no longer the standard treatment for DT, as systemic therapy gradually replaces it due to its superior efficacy. Despite the availability of various treatment modalities, there is a need for a first-line systemic treatment regimen that offers both effective disease control and acceptable safety profiles.
methodsTo assess the efficacy and safety of different systemic treatment agents for DT, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eligible studies were identified through searches of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases, and data were extracted according to predefined inclusion criteria.
resultsThree articles and clinical data from 295 patients with progressive and refractory DT were included in this Bayesian network meta-analysis. When considered by objective response rate (ORR), the efficacy of γ-secretase inhibitor versus placebo (OR 0.12, 95%CI 0.01-1.68) is superior to that of TKI (OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.03-7.62) and chemotherapy (OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.02-40.00). Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-TKI (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-1.79) seemed to have the highest improvement in terms of 1-yr PFS rate, while chemotherapy seemed to have the highest improvement across all therapies in terms of 2-yr PFS rate across all therapies (OR, 0.06; 95 percent CI, 0.01-2.98). In terms of safety, the incidence of AEs is highest for γ-secretase inhibitor versus placebo (OR 0.16, 95%CI 0.02-1.55), while TKI is associated with the least AEs (OR 0.62, 95%CI 0.06-6.97).
conclusionγ-secretase inhibitor provides superior local control of tumors, while chemotherapy and TKI may offer better long-term survival benefits. Among the three regimens, TKI demonstrated better treatment-related safety. These findings have important implications for guiding clinical practice in systemic treatment of DT.
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.