MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405122992 · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2024.1478377

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of perioperative immunochemotherapeutic strategies for locally advanced esophageal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4405122992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiao Zhang, Peixi Zhao, Rui Xu, Le Han, Wenjuan Chen, Yili Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Immunology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersXi'an Municipal Bureau of Science and Technology
KeywordsEsophageal cancerMedicineMeta-analysisPerioperativeSystematic reviewIntensive care medicineCancerOncologyMEDLINEInternal medicineSurgeryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The aim of this network meta-analysis was to clarify the efficacy and safety of different immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant phase for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI and WanFang databases from January 2000 until May 2024. The primary endpoints were pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (MPR), R0 resection rate, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), treatment-related adverse events(TRAEs) of any grade and TRAEs of grade 3 or higher. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool were used to evaluate risk of bias. To analyze the data, Review Manager 5.3 and Stata16.0 were applied. Results: Fourteen eligible studies (six randomized controlled trials) and 8 retrospective cohort studies) enrolling 1139 patients were included for this network meta-analysis. All studies originated from China. For patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, neoadjuvant immunochemotherapeutic strategies showed significant advantages over traditional neoadjuvant therapy in terms of pCR, MPR, ORR and DCR. Among the analyzed regimens, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated the most pronounced improvements in pCR and MPR, while pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy achieved the best outcomes in terms of ORR and DCR. There were no significant differences observed among the various neoadjuvant treatment strategies regarding R0 resection rate, any grade TRAEs, or grade≥3 TRAEs. The most common TRAEs in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus immunotherapy group were myelosuppression and gastrointestinal damage, with most grade 3 or higher TRAEs being hematologic adverse events. The most frequent immune-related adverse events(irAEs) included rash (4.2-21.7%), thyroid dysfunction (hypothyroidism or hyperthyroidism, 6.3-17.4%), and pneumonia (4.2-6.3%), with the majority being mild to moderate (grade 1 or 2). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy regimens demonstrate relatively high efficacy and tolerable safety profiles. Among the evaluated regimens, the combination chemotherapy with camrelizumab had relatively high pCR and MPR, whereas the combination chemotherapy with pembrolizumab had relatively high ORR and DCR. There were no significant differences in safety among the various regimens. Our study suggests that evaluating the efficacy and safety of different ICIs may be helpful in clinical decision-making. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024583548.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.046
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.348 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ImmunologySame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207