ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Comparison between drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization versus conventional TACE in elderly patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases: a cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Drug-eluting bead (DEB) transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) possesses several advantages over conventional TACE (cTACE) such as higher intratumor drug concentration and lower systemic toxicity, which has been widely applied in hepatocellular carcinoma patients, but related information is insufficient in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of DEB-TACE versus cTACE in treating elderly CRCLM patients. Methods: A total of 43 elderly patients with unresectable CRCLM were retrospectively analyzed in this cohort study, among which 20 cases received DEB-TACE and 23 cases received cTACE. Best treatment response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were collected. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the DEB-TACE and cTACE groups, with no statistically significant differences observed. Complete response rate (10.0% versus 4.3%, Conclusion: DEB-TACE can be an optional choice for the treatment of elderly CRCLM patients.
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.