Transarterial Therapy for Neuroendocrine Tumors: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis
Bassir, A.; Konstantinidis, M.; Moon, J. T.; Tran, A.; Chockalingam, A.; Ferreira, K.; Ludeman, E.; Habibollahi, P.; Geschwind, J. F.; Nezami, N.
Show abstract
IntroductionNeuroendocrine neoplasms are a form of tumor that develops from a variety of neuroendocrine cell types and is most commonly found in the gastrointestinal tract. As the blood from the GI tract drains into the liver, it frequently metastasizes there. Intraarterial therapies, such as bland transarterial embolisation, conventional transarterial chemoembolisation, drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolisation, and transarterial radioembolization with yttrium-90 are advanced methods for limiting the burden of neuroendocrine liver metastasis tumors. Currently, there is no study that compares all of these methods. Our goal is to compare the efficacy and harm of each of transarterial therapies for stage IV neuroendocrine neoplasms by conducting this systematic review and network meta-analysis. Methods and AnalysisWe will search electronic databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov) from their inception to November 2022 to find all studies that compare survival and clinical finding between any two of the following intraarterial interventions: bland transarterial embolisation, conventional transarterial chemoembolisation, drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolisation, and transarterial radioembolization, the latter with yttrium-90. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCT), cluster-RCTs, and observational studies. We will investigate selected articles regarding our primary outcomes (Overall survival, Progression-free survival, death) and also our secondary outcomes (post embolization syndrome, hepatic abscesses, hepatic failure, gallbladder necrosis, non-target embolization). We will also search trial registries and the references of included studies to identify any additional published or unpublished studies for possible inclusion. Risk of bias will be assessed using the tools developed by Cochrane (i.e., the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs and cluster RCTs, and ROBINS-I for observational studies). We will conduct frequentists network meta-analyses, and we will use the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool to assess the confidence in the evidence for the primary outcomes. Ethics and DisseminationWe seek to publish our findings through peer review with a high impact, and readers will have access to the data gathered in this study. Because the underlying research is based on systematic evaluations of available data, it does not require approval by an ethical review board. The systematic review and meta-analysiss findings will also be presented at various conferences and seminars. Strengths and LimitationsO_LIThis meta-analysis can be used to compare different types of intraarterial therapies for NELM, which can serve as a guide for choosing the best treatment option for non-surgical candidates. C_LIO_LIThis research will lay the groundwork for future clinical trials comparing these therapy options, which can guide clinicians with a greater degree of certainty. C_LIO_LIVariations in specific therapy, like differences in medications used for intervention, may not be considered and may affect this comparison. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Surgical Resection, Radiotherapy, And Percutaneous Thermal Ablation for Treatment of Stage 1 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis 96%
- Reporting of Retrospective Registration in Clinical Trial Publications 94%
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Perioperative mortality in low-, middle-, and high-income countries: Protocol for a multi-level meta-regression analysis 94%
- Wound Complications Following Surgery to the Lymph Nodes: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis 94%
- A method of back-calculating the log odds ratio and standard error of the log odds ratio from the reported group-level risk of disease 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trials that turn from retrospectively registered to prospectively registered: A cohort study of ‘retroactively prospective’ clinical trial registration using history data 93%
- UKCTOCS Update: Applying insights of delayed effects in cancer screening trials to the long-term follow-up mortality analysis 93%
- Controlled evaLuation of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers for COVID-19 respIraTorY disease (CLARITY): Statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled Bayesian adaptive sample size trial 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- The impact of retracted randomised controlled trials on systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines: a meta-epidemiological study 95%
- Methods used to select results to include in meta-analyses of nutrition research: a meta-research study 94%
- Clinical Trials in COVID-19 Management & Prevention: A Meta-epidemiological Study examining methodological quality 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Proportion of Randomized Controlled Trials That Inform Clinical Practice: A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 93%
- Multicenter preclinical studies as an innovative method to enhance translation: a systematic review of published studies 92%
- The impact of lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment on clinical outcomes prior to the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.