SynthesisAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2025
Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Plus Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Compared to Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Alone in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neoadjuvant Paclitaxel-Carboplatin Followed by Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy versus Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Alone in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
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
introductionThis systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) compared to CCRT alone in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC).
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, EBSCOHost, ProQuest, and grey literature (Google Scholar, OpenGrey, WorldCat) up to April 26, 2024 (PROSPERO: [CRD42024540599]). Seven studies were included (stages IB2-IVA, FIGO 2018), involving 446 participants. Outcomes included complete response (CR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse effects.
resultsSeven studies were included (n = 1,638), with 825 patients receiving NACT+CCRT and 813 receiving CCRT alone. The NACT+CCRT group showed higher CR rates (77% vs. 70.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.40-3.83). No significant differences were found in PFS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.53-1.69) or OS (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.56-2.03). Adverse effects, including anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and creatinine elevation, showed no significant differences between the groups.
conclusionIn patients with locally advanced cervical cancer, NACT followed by CCRT is associated with comparable survival outcomes and a similar safety profile to standard CCRT, with a non-significant trend toward improved CR.
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.