EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy): Progression‐free survival
EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… showed no clear difference in progression-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy); GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) Progression-free survival · People with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity or oropharynx · 24 to 70 months, Monoclonal antibody + chemoradiotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy alone EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… showed no clear difference in progression-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy); GRADE not reported. Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy (2015) · Cochrane All outcomes | HR 1.08 [0.89, 1.32] | 1 study · 891 participants | GRADE not reported |
EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) Progression-free survival · People with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity or oropharynx · 24 to 70 months, Monoclonal antibody + radiotherapy vs radiotherapy alone EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… led to lower progression-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy); GRADE not reported. Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy (2015) · Cochrane All outcomes | HR 0.70 [0.54, 0.91] | 1 study · 424 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2015-02 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.