Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41981647›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2026

Comparison of overall survival across treatment modalities for oesophageal, gastroesophageal, and gastric cancer: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Fani Apostolidou-Kiouti, Anna Bettina Haidich, Dimitris Mavridis, Aikaterini Ioanna Apostolaki, Dimitris Tsavdaris, Adriani Nikolakopoulou

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Fani Apostolidou-KioutiDepartment of Hygiene, Social-Preventive Medicine & Medical Statistics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, Thessaloniki, 54124, Greece. fania@auth.gr.ORCID 0000-0002-9156-8691
Anna Bettina HaidichDepartment of Hygiene, Social-Preventive Medicine & Medical Statistics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, Thessaloniki, 54124, Greece.
Dimitris MavridisDepartment of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Aikaterini Ioanna ApostolakiAristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, 54636, Greece.
Dimitris TsavdarisAristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, 54636, Greece.
Adriani NikolakopoulouDepartment of Hygiene, Social-Preventive Medicine & Medical Statistics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, Thessaloniki, 54124, Greece. adriani.nikolakopoulou@uniklinik-freiburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancers of the oesophagus, gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), and proximal stomach share epidemiological, molecular, and therapeutic characteristics. Despite their similarities, treatment guidelines vary, and the classification of GEJ tumours remains debated. While multiple meta-analyses have addressed subsets of these malignancies, a comprehensive synthesis comparing all treatment modalities across this disease spectrum is lacking. This study aims to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the overall survival outcomes of different treatment modalities, including surgery, chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, immunotherapy, and multimodal approaches, in patients with oesophageal, GEJ, and gastric cancers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed) and The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) without date restrictions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing eligible treatments will be included. The primary outcome will be overall survival, defined as time from diagnosis to death from any cause. Secondary outcomes will include progression-free survival, disease-specific survival, dropout rates, treatment-related adverse effects, patterns of relapse, R0 resection rates, surgical morbidity, and mortality. We will look for individual patient data (IPD) from primary studies' authors and registries. We will assess risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias RoB2 tool. We plan to present each pairwise comparison with risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals from random-effects meta-analysis. A random-effects NMA model will simultaneously compare all treatments in the network. We will rank interventions using P-scores. In case we manage to access IPD and we believe the transitivity assumption does not hold for a specific comparison (or we have a disconnected network), we will use population adjustment methods to estimate an indirect treatment comparison. We will apply CINeMA to assess confidence in the findings and we will report results according to PRISMA-NMA. DISCUSSION: Neoplasms of the oesophagus, the gastroesophageal junction, and the stomach are increasingly being studied together in clinical trials, a trend driven by continuous research on their molecular characteristics and shared therapeutic patterns. This NMA aims to pool evidence employing recent advances in meta-analytic models and critically assess the confidence in the results by implementing the CINeMA approach. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42025634169).

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagogastric JunctionStomach NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyCombined Modality TherapyHumansNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicNetwork meta-analysisProtocolTreatment modalitiesUpper gastrointestinal tract neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID41981647
PMCPMC13200387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.