MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415157093 · doi:10.1007/s12672-025-03707-5

Strategies for managing EMA/CO resistant in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia a systematic review and meta analysis

2025· review· en· W4415157093 on OpenAlex
Febia Erfiandi, Setyo Teguh Waluyo, Candra Novi Ricardo Sibarani, Gatot Nyarumenteng Adhipurnawan Winarno, Aini Sofa Haniah, Nicholas Adrianto

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Trophoblastic Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisCochrane LibrarySystematic reviewSalvage therapyNeutropeniaPublication biasMEDLINEInclusion and exclusion criteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the efficacy and safety of salvage regimens in managing EMA/CO-resistant GTN, providing evidence to inform optimal treatment strategies. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Wiley Online Library until December 27, 2024. Studies on EMA/CO chemoresistance in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) were included, and alternative regimens and surgical interventions were also considered. Exclusion applied to non-human studies and those unrelated to EMA/CO chemoresistance. Data extraction and quality assessment followed PRISMA, Cochrane ROB-2, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, with heterogeneity (I²) and publication bias assessed. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024574582). RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing patients predominantly with advanced-stage (FIGO III-IV) and high-risk GTN. EMA/EP and EP/EMA were the most frequently evaluated salvage regimens, with a pooled complete remission rate of 78.7% (95% CI: 67.4–88.1%) across 84 patients. No significant heterogeneity (I² = 27.05%) or publication bias was detected. Alternative regimens, including BEP, FAEV, and TP/TE, demonstrated favourable remission rates in small cohorts but lacked generalizability. Neutropenia (68%), thrombocytopenia (41%), and anaemia (30%) were the most commonly reported toxicities with EP/EMA. Safety data for other regimens were limited. CONCLUSION: EMA/EP and EP/EMA remain the most effective and well-studied salvage regimens for EMA/CO-resistant GTN, demonstrating high remission rates with manageable toxicity. While alternative regimens such as BEP, FAEV, and TP/TE show encouraging results, their limited evidence base precludes definitive comparison. Further prospective studies are needed to establish optimal salvage strategies and refine toxicity management.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.360 · 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