ReviewCureus2026
Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Versus Standard Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal neoadjuvant strategy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) remains uncertain. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) combines extended induction chemotherapy with radiotherapy before surgery. Whether TNT improves oncologic outcomes over standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) is unclear; the incremental benefit of the radiotherapy component itself has also been questioned. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus identified comparative studies of TNT vs standard NACRT in BRPC published between January 2005 and May 2026. Randomized controlled trials and observational comparative studies were included. Random-effects meta-analysis using the DerSimonian-Laird method was performed. Primary outcomes were overall survival and R0 resection rate. Secondary objectives assessed the independent survival benefit of radiotherapy and the influence of chemotherapy backbone selection. Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis. Nineteen primary studies comprising 9,219 patients contributed to data extraction. TNT was associated with superior R0 resection rates (94%-95% vs. 78%-80%) and higher pathological complete response (pCR) rates (5.8%-13.0% vs. 2.1%-6.0%) compared to standard NACRT. TNT was associated with improved overall survival in the largest available database analysis (hazard ratio (HR), 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-0.94), though a smaller cohort showed no difference. The radiotherapy component did not confer an independent survival benefit when added to systemic chemotherapy (PREOPANC-2 BRPC subgroup HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.53-1.21,
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.