Copyright
©2006 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 21, 2006; 12(43): 6973-6981
Published online Nov 21, 2006. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i43.6973
Published online Nov 21, 2006. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i43.6973
Table 3 Subgroup analyses on 6-mo survival rate
Subgroups | Trials | Patients | Mode | RD [95% CI] | P |
GEM plus targeted drug vs GEM alone | [13, 14, 26] | 1496 | Fixed | 0.06 [0.01, 0.11] | 0.02 |
GEM plus DDP vs GEM alone | [9, 10, 18, 20, 23, 24] | 560 | Fixed | 0.05 [-0.03, 0.13] | 0.24 |
GEM plus 5-FU vs GEM alone | [12, 22, 28] | 881 | Random | 0.04 [-0.09, 0.17] | 0.57 |
GEM plus topoisomerase I inhibitor vs GEM alone | [16, 21, 24, 27] | 928 | Fixed | 0.01 [-0.05, 0.08] | 0.72 |
GEM plus capecitabine vs GEM alone | [8, 29] | 399 | Fixed | 0.00 [-0.08, 0.10] | 0.97 |
- Citation: Xie DR, Liang HL, Wang Y, Guo SS, Yang Q. Meta-analysis on inoperable pancreatic cancer: A comparison between gemcitabine-based combination therapy and gemcitabine alone. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12(43): 6973-6981
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v12/i43/6973.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v12.i43.6973