ArticleBMJ open2024
Chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy in patients with gastric cancer: protocol for a systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Article
- Status quo of hypercoagulation as a prognostic indicator following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
- Synergistic Effect of miR-383 and Cisplatin on Inhibition of Growth, Proliferation, and Migration of Lung Cancer Cells.Archives of Iranian medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe integration of chemotherapy and immunotherapy is continually making new advances in the field of gastric cancer treatment and has already become the new standard of care for the disease. However, few systematic reviews cover a wide array of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody types and therapeutic modalities (perioperative or systemic) in this domain. Our aim is to incorporate the most recent clinical studies on combination therapy for the treatment of gastric cancer into a systematic review. This will comprehensively assess the benefits and drawbacks for patients with gastric cancer and will guide future research in this area. Ultimately, this will provide evidence-based support for patients with gastric cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol for a systematic review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. We will conduct a search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases from database inception, all retrieved literature will be screened by two authors in two rounds. Inclusion criteria will be randomised clinical trials, reported in English, that compare immunotherapy-combined therapy with chemotherapy alone in the perioperative and systematic first-line treatment of gastric cancer. The primary outcomes will be progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes will include objective response rate (ORR), event-free survival (EFS), disease-free survival (DFS), pathologic complete response (pCR), major pathologic response (MPR), and the R0 resection rate. Heterogeneity and publication bias of included literature will be investigated. Where included literatures allow, we will conduct meta-analyses and subgroup analyses to further refine the pros and cons of combined therapy, providing evidence-based foundations for subsequent research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This work is a review based on existing literature and no ethical review is required. Dissemination of the results will occur via academic journal publication, conference presentations, and multiple media platforms. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023477353.
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.