SynthesisBMC cancer2025
Efficacy and safety of molecular targeted therapies in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2025. 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.
- Precision management of radiotherapy interruption in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Induction chemotherapy counteracts the survival impact in high-risk patients defined by a novel model.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Advances in immunotherapy and targeted therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Current progress and combined approaches (Review).Oncology reports · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is one of the most common head and neck cancers worldwide. The majority of the new cases were from Asia and are the leading cause of cancer in China. The main treatment is surgery and radiotherapy with chemotherapy for advanced cases. With the advancement of targeted therapies, the objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of targeted therapies in NPC.
methodsDatabases were searched from inception to Aug 2023, comparing molecular targeted therapies (MTT) with conventional chemotherapy, chemotherapy or surgery. Study screening, data extraction, and data analysis were conducted independently by two investigators. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 1.0 was used for the quality of the studies.
resultsThere was a total of ten eligible studies with 471 participants in the treatment arm and 469 participants in the control arm. Most studies had an unclear risk of bias assessment. Upon network meta-analysis, cetuximab was found to be the most effective regimen for complete response (CR), bevacizumab was found to be the most effective regimen for partial response (PR), nimotuzumab was found to be the most effective regimen for overall survival rate (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Pairwise meta-analysis showed that MTT had a significantly better response than conventional therapies in complete response. GRADE analysis reported low certainty of evidence for CR and very low certainty of evidence for other efficacy outcomes. There was a higher chance of bleeding with MTT and was statistically significant.
conclusionIt was observed that targeted therapies were found to be a promising strategy for NPC especially recurrent and/or metastatic NPC, but the most appropriate therapy still needs to be evaluated.
trial registrationThis study was registered with the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) with a registration number of INPLASY202380024.
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.