Table 2 The general characteristics of the 14 systematic reviews and meta-analyses
From: Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for advanced biliary tract cancers: an umbrella review
First author, Year | Original article retrieval time | Journal | Total No. of included studies | Type of study | Study design | Type of Chemotherapy | Subgroup No. of included studies | Intervention (No.of cases) | Control (No.of cases) | Sample size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ALESSANDRO RIZZO,2020 [22] | 2019/11/02 | IN VIVO | 4 | Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | RCTs | G-based + anti-EGFR vs. G-based | 4 | Gem-based + anti-EGFR (228) | Gem-based CHT alone (222) | 450 patients |
Lawrence Chen, 2016 [16] | 2016/04 | MEDICINE | 15 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | GP vs. G | 2 | GP(202) | G(184) | 386 patients |
GP + anti-EGFR vs. GP | 4 | GP + anti-EGFR (316) | GP(313) | 629 patients | ||||||
Ting Zheng, 2020 [19] | 2018/12 | ONCOLOGY RESEARCH AND TREATMENT | 5 | Meta-analysis | Restrospective; RCTs | GP vs. FP | 5 | GP(311) | FP(416) | 727 patients |
Xin ZHUANG, 2017 [21] | 2016/07 | JOURNAL OF HUAZHONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE ANDTECHNOLOGY-MEDICAL SCIENCES | 7 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | G-based + anti-EGFR vs. G-based | 6 | Gem-based + anti-EGFR (432) | Gem-based CHT alone (423) | 855 patients |
Heng Liu, 2014 [18] | 2013/11 | WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY | 7 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | G-based vs. non-G-based | 4 | Gem-based(150) | non-G-based(153) | 303 patients |
G-based vs. G | 3 | Gem-based(275) | G (280) | 555 patients | ||||||
Sheng Zhao, 2016 [17] | 2016/03 | ONCOTARGETS AND THERAPY | 6 | Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | RCTs | G-based + anti-VEGFR/EGFR vs. G-based | 6 | G-based + anti-VEGFR/ EGFR(NA) | G-based(NA) | 855 patients |
Alessandro Rizzo, 2022 [26] | 2021/12/08 | EXPERT REVIEW OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY | 2 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | Fluoropyrimidine-based doublet CHT vs. ASC or 5-FU/LV | 2 | Fluoropyrimidine-based doublet CHT(169) | ASC or 5-FU/LV(167) | 336 patients |
Wen-Jie Ma, 2020 [27] | 2019/06/12 | HBP | 5 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | Fluoropyrimidine-based vs. Observation | 4 | Fluoropyrimidine-based (381) | Observation(358) | 739 patients |
G-based vs. Observation | 3 | G-based(246) | Observation(238) | 484 patients | ||||||
Julien Edeline, 2022 [28] | NA | EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER | 2 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | G-based vs. Observation | 2 | G-based(212) | Observation(207) | 419 patients |
Abdel-Rahman O, 2018 [29] | 2017/06 | COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 7 | Meta-analysis | RCTs | G + S-1 vs. S-1 | 2 | G + S-1(76) | S-1(75) | 151 patients |
Yan Li,2019 [30] | 2018/10/06 | FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY | 25 | Network Meta-analysis | Restrospective; RCTs | Folfox-4 vs. Observation | NA | Folfox-4(NA) | Observation(NA) | NA |
XP vs. GP | NA | XP(NA) | GP(NA) | NA | ||||||
G + S-1 vs. GC | NA | GS(NA) | GC(NA) | NA | ||||||
Jie Ying, 2019 [31] | 2018/04 | CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY | 32 | Network Meta-analysis | Restrospective; RCTs | G-based CHT vs. single CHT(mainly FU alone) | 15 | GEM-based CHT(233) | single CHT(396) | 629 patients |
Fluoropyrimidine-based CHT vs. single TAs | 15 | Fluoropyrimidine-based CHT(527) | single TAs(150) | 677 patients | ||||||
Taxanes-based CHT vs. single CHT(mainly FU alone) | 9 | Taxanes-based CHT(54) | single CHT(396) | 450 patients | ||||||
Fluoropyrimidine-based CHT vs. single CHT(mainly FU alone) | 8 | Fluoropyrimidine-based CHT (244) | single CHT(348) | 592 patients | ||||||
Wei Zheng, 2019 [32] | 2017/11 | JOURNAL OF CANCER | 16 | Network Meta-analysis | RCTs | G + S-1 vs. G | NA | G + S-1(NA) | G(NA) | NA |
G + S-1 vs. 5-FU | NA | G + S-1(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
CapC vs.5-FU | NA | CapC(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
GEMOX vs. 5-FU | NA | GEMOX (NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
FP vs. 5-FU | NA | FP(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
Yanfeng Jiang, 2021 [33] | 2020/08/10 | FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY | 24 | Network Meta-analysis | RCTs | Observation vs. Folfox-4 | NA | Observation(NA) | Folfox-4(NA) | NA |
Observation vs. C-GEMOX | NA | Observation(NA) | C-GEMOX(NA) | NA | ||||||
Observation vs. GEMOX + erlotinib | NA | Observation(NA) | GEMOX + erlotinib(NA) | NA | ||||||
GP + cediranib vs. 5-FU | NA | GP + cediranib(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
GP vs. 5-FU | NA | GP(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
G + S-1 vs. 5-FU | NA | GS(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
C-GEMOX vs. 5-FU | NA | C-GEMOX(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
RAM + GP vs. 5-FU | NA | RAM + GP(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
MER + GP vs. 5-FU | NA | MER + GP(NA) | 5-FU(NA) | NA | ||||||
XELOX vs. G + XELOX | NA | XELOX(NA) | G + XELOX(NA) | NA | ||||||
XELOX vs. GEMOX + erlotinib | NA | XELOX(NA) | GEMOX + erlotinib(NA) | NA |