MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391127353 · doi:10.1111/iwj.14638

RETRACTED: Evaluation of bevacizumab biosimilar on wound healing complications in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection: A systematic review and meta‐analysis in anorectal medicine

2024· review· en· W4391127353 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yixi Li, Zhimou Mei, Liang Shi, Yin Wan, Xiaoli Zhou, Ting Zeng, Yi Liu, Jia Yao Yang, Zhaohong Shi

Post-publication record

OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Wound Journal · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBevacizumabBiosimilarAdverse effectColorectal cancerCochrane LibrarySurgeryWound healingIntensive care medicineCancerInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complications related to wound healing pose substantial obstacle in the management of colorectal cancer (CRC), specifically in the field of anorectal medicine. Biosimilars of bevacizumab have emerged as crucial therapeutic agents in the management of these complications. With the particular emphasis on effects of Bevacizumab Biosimilar Plus on wound healing among patients diagnosed with CRC, this review underscores the potential of this anorectal medication to improve patient outcomes and was aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of Bevacizumab Biosimilar Plus in relation to complications associated with wound healing in patients with CRC. The assessment centers on its therapeutic potential and safety profile within the domain of anorectal medicine. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was performed, resulting in the identification of 19 pertinent studies out of an initial 918. Priority was given to assessing the safety and adverse effects of Bevacizumab Biosimilar Plus in conjunction with its effectiveness in wound healing. The extracted data comprised the following: study design, patient demographics, comprehensive treatment regimens, wound healing-specific outcomes and adverse effects. The evaluation of study quality was conducted utilizing the instruments provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Bevacizumab Biosimilar Plus demonstrates efficacy in the management of wound healing complications among patients with CRC, with a safety and efficacy profile similar to that of the original Bevacizumab, according to the analysis. Notably, several studies reported improved rates of wound healing in relation to the biosimilar. The safety profiles exhibited similarities to the anticipated anti-VEGF agent effects. In wound management, the biosimilar also demonstrated advantages in terms of prolonged efficacy. In addition, analyses of cost-effectiveness suggested that the use of biosimilars could result in cost reductions. Bevacizumab Biosimilar Plus exhibited potential as an anorectal medication for the effective management of wound healing complications in patients with CRC. This has substantial ramifications for improving the quality of patient care, encompassing the affordability and effectiveness of treatments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.013
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Wound JournalSame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207