Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

31 questions · 31 findings · 2 reviews

No studies found 7 · 22.6%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 8 · 25.8%Low 10 · 32.3%Moderate 5 · 16.1%High 1 · 3.2%

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 3): chemotherapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (subcomparison 3): chemotherapy agent(s)… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 4): targeted therapy agent plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (subcomparison 4): targeted therapy agent… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 5): chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table: chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s)… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 5): chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with AC of the esophagus

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (subcomparison 5): chemotherapy or… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 5): chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with SCC of the esophagus

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (subcomparison 6): chemotherapy or… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma previously treated with chemotherapy

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Hydrogel spacer vs no intervention

Acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) · Men undergoing RT for prostate cancer

Summary of findings: Hydrogel spacer showed no clear difference in acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) compared with no intervention (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Endorectal balloon vs no intervention

Acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) · Men undergoing RT for prostate cancer

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: Endorectal balloon changes acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) compared with no intervention (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Proteolytic enzymes vs placebo or control

Acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) · People undergoing RT for pelvic cancer

Summary of findings: Proteolytic enzymes may leads to lower acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) compared with control (placebo or no intervention) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Bile acid sequestrants vs no intervention

Acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) · People with pelvic cancer

Summary of findings: Bile acid sequestrants may leads to higher acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) compared with no intervention (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review