Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007406.pub3Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 12 diciembre 2012see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Cáncer ginecológico, neurooncología y otros cánceres

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Larysa Rydzewska

    Correspondencia a: Meta‐analysis Group, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK

    [email protected]

  • Jayne Tierney

    Meta‐analysis Group, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK

  • Claire L Vale

    Meta‐analysis Group, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK

  • Paul R Symonds

    Department of Oncology, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, UK

Contributions of authors

Original review:

Larysa Rydzewska designed the protocol, identified RCTs for inclusion, extracted data from the trial publications, performed the analyses and wrote the final review. Jayne Tierney helped to design the protocol, cross‐checked the extracted data, advised on interpretation of results and commented on the review. Claire Vale cross‐checked the extracted data, advised on the interpretation of results and commented on the review. Paul Symonds advised on the interpretation of results and commented on the review.

Review update:

Larysa Rydzewska appraised the results of updated searches to identify any new, potentially eligible trials, collaborated with trialists to obtain additional, unpublished, summary data for inclusion in the updated review, performed the final analyses and updated the text of the review. Claire Vale and Paul Symonds both advised on the interpretation of the updated results and commented on the updated review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Medical Research Council, UK.

  • University of Leicester, UK.

External sources

  • No sources of support supplied

Declarations of interest

None known

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the UK Medical Research Council for funding this work.

The authors also thank Huijen Chen (Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China), Gary Eddy (Mercer School of Medicine, Macon, Georgia, USA), Shamshad Ali (Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, USA) and Noriyuki Katsumata (National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan) for providing us with supplementary data for their trials.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2012 Dec 12

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer

Review

Larysa Rydzewska, Jayne Tierney, Claire L Vale, Paul R Symonds

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007406.pub3

2010 Jan 20

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer

Review

Larysa Rydzewska, Jayne Tierney, Claire L Vale, Paul R Symonds

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007406.pub2

2008 Oct 08

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer

Protocol

Larysa Rydzewska, Jayne Tierney, Sarah Burdett, Paul RP Symonds

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007406

Differences between protocol and review

Additional post‐hoc exploratory analyses of pathological response.

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.