Question · asked by 1 review
EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy): Locoregional control
- Population
- People with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity or oropharynx
- Intervention
- EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)
- Comparison
- Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)
- Outcome
- Locoregional control
EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… probably leads to lower locoregional control compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) Locoregional control · People with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity or oropharynx · 24 to 70 months EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… probably leads to lower locoregional control compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) (moderate certainty). Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy (2015) · Cochrane All outcomes | HR 0.68 [0.52, 0.89] | 1 study · 424 participants | Moderate |
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 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.