Systematic reviews and cancer research: a suggested stepwise approach

Kelley, George A.; Kelley, Kristi S.

doi:10.1186/s12885-018-4163-6

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Developed using the stepwise approach to systematic reviews described by Kelley and Kelley [11], the protocol of our systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (No. CRD42016045886) and has been previously published [12].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immune-related adverse events associated with programmed cell death protein-1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: a PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have remarkable clinical efficacy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the breakdown of immune escape causes a variety of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). With the increasing use of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone or in combination with other therapies, awareness and management of irAEs have become more important. We aimed to assess the incidence and nature of irAEs associated with PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors for NSCLC. Methods: Articles from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched through December 2017. The incidence of overall and organ-specific irAEs was investigated in all clinical trials with nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolimumab, durvalumab, and avelumab as single agents for treatment of NSCLC. We calculated the pooled incidence using R software with package Meta. Results: Sixteen trials were included in the meta-analysis: 10 trials with PD-1 inhibitors (3734 patients) and 6 trials with PD-L1 inhibitors (2474 patients). The overall incidence of irAEs was 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17-28) for all grades and 4% (95% CI, 2-6) for high-grade irAEs. The frequency of irAEs varied based on drug type and organ, and patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors had an increased rate of any grade and highgrade irAEs compared with patients who received PD-L1 inhibitors. Organ-specific irAEs were most frequently observed in, in decreasing order, the endocrine system, skin, pulmonary tract, and gastrointestinal tract. The total number of patients whose death was attributed to irAEs was 14 (0.34%), and most (79%) of these patients died because of pneumonitis. The median time to the onset of irAEs after the initiation of treatment was 10 weeks (interquartile range, 6-19.5 weeks) and varied depending on the organ system involved. Conclusions: The specificity of irAEs was closely associated with the mechanism of PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies involved in restarting anticancer immune attacks. Comprehensive understanding, timely detection, and effective management could improve the compliance of patients and guide the interruption of treatment.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immune-related adverse events associated with programmed cell death protein-1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: a PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Meanwhile, systematic reviews in cancer research have recently increased in frequency. However, these reviews mostly focus on clinical data with patients and not on research using in vitro or animal models of cancer [31]. Thus, our scoping review has a role in the field as a systematic overview of cancer nanotherapeutics to provide understanding of how these formulations affect drug development and efficacy in treating cancer.…”

Section: Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sysrev: A FAIR platform for Data Curation and Systematic Evidence Review

Bozada¹,

Borden²,

Workman³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Well-curated datasets are essential to evidence based decision making and to the integration of artificial intelligence with human reasoning across disciplines. However, many sources of data remain siloed, unstructured, and/or unavailable for complementary and secondary research. Sysrev was developed to address these issues. First, Sysrev was built to aid in systematic evidence reviews (SER), where digital documents are evaluated according to a well defined process, and where Sysrev provides an easy to access, publicly available and free platform for collaborating in SER projects. Secondly, Sysrev addresses the issue of unstructured, siloed, and inaccessible data in the context of generalized data extraction, where human and machine learning algorithms are combined to extract insights and evidence for better decision making across disciplines. Sysrev uses FAIR - Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse of digital assets - as primary principles in design. Sysrev was developed primarily because of an observed need to reduce redundancy, reduce inefficient use of human time and increase the impact of evidence based decision making. This publication is an introduction to Sysrev as a novel technology, with an overview of the features, motivations and use cases of the tool. Methods: Sysrev.com is a FAIR motivated web platform for data curation and SER. Sysrev allows users to create data curation projects called "sysrevs" wherein users upload documents, define review tasks, recruit reviewers, perform review tasks, and automate review tasks. Results: Thousands of Sysrev projects have been created, accommodating research in a wide variety of disciplines. Described use cases include data curation, managed reviews, and SERs. Through public accessibility and the ability for users to clone the framework of other projects, Sysrev demonstrates alignment to FAIR Principles.

show abstract

“…Fig. 1 depicts a stepwise process suggested by the authors for moving from a SRPSR to one's own review, details of which can be found elsewhere (10) . Briefly, a major decision that needs to be made is whether a new systematic review, with or without meta-analysis, is needed.…”

Section: Systematic Reviews Of Previous Systematic Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in a systematic review with AD meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examining the impact of modified dietary interventions on maternal glucose control and neonatal birth weight, Yamamoto et al cited three previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to the topic but none specific to their proposed work regarding the impact of modified dietary interventions on detailed maternal glycaemic parameters, including changes in glucose-related variables (63) . As previously mentioned, one approach to help justify one's own work, though more time-consuming and resource intensive, is to conduct and publish a systematic review of previous systematic reviews with meta-analysis on the topic and describe this in the introduction section of the manuscript (10) . Finally, the end of the introduction should clearly delineate the purpose/objective(s)/research question(s) of the intended systematic review with AD metaanalysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis in nutrition research

Kelley

2019

Br J Nutr

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There exists an ever-increasing number of systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, in the field of nutrition. Concomitant with this increase is the increased use of such to guide future research as well as both practice and policy-based decisions. Given this increased production and consumption, a need exists to educate both producers and consumers of systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, on how to conduct and evaluate high-quality reviews of this nature in nutrition. The purpose of this paper is to try and address this gap. In the present manuscript, the different types of systematic reviews, with or without meta-analyses, are described as well as the description of the major elements, including methodology and interpretation, with a focus on nutrition. It is hoped that this non-technical information will be helpful to producers, reviewers and consumers of systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, in the field of nutrition.

show abstract

Systematic reviews and cancer research: a suggested stepwise approach

Cited by 14 publications

References 56 publications

Immune-related adverse events associated with programmed cell death protein-1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: a PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis

Immune-related adverse events associated with programmed cell death protein-1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: a PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis

Sysrev: A FAIR platform for Data Curation and Systematic Evidence Review

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis in nutrition research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About