SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Targeted
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Non-melanoma skin cancer is the most prevalent malignancy. Primary treatments may at times yield suboptimal results. In these cases, alternative therapies or the combination of different modalities may be required to achieve complete removal and prevent the risk of recurrence. Methods: We examined studies published up to July 2025 using databases such as PubMed and Scopus, focusing on the performance of rhenium-assisted therapies with respect to therapeutic efficacy and potential adverse effects. Studies investigating the therapeutic outcomes of rhenium-assisted therapies for cutaneous lesions were considered. The primary endpoint was the response rate to rhenium-assisted therapies. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 10 studies involving 433 patients and more than 618 lesions. Of these, seven studies were included in the meta-analysis, in which rhenium-assisted therapy achieved a complete response rate of 88.67%(95% CI: 84.7-91.7%) and an overall response rate of 92.9% (95% CI: 89.1-95.5%). A leave-one-out analysis was performed to assess the study's impact on heterogeneity, revealing that one study markedly influenced the pooled effect. By excluding this outlier, heterogeneity was substantially reduced, while the overall mean effect remained significant (complete response 94, 95% CI [90, 96%]; overall response 97, 95% CI [92, 99%]). Conclusion: Rhenium-assisted therapy for skin cancer appears effective and safe in treating lesions unresponsive to standard options. It may represent a valuable tool, providing advantages over conventional approaches. Further studies are warranted to confirm its efficacy and establish standardized protocols.
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.