What do systematic reviews say?

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months
  No included studies addressed participant satisfaction (review-wide gap).
  0 studies
  No studies found

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months
  No included studies addressed direct and indirect costs to participants and health services (review-wide gap).
  0 studies
  No studies found

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or nimotuzumab) plus standard… probably leads to lower overall survival 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

  24 to 70 months
  HR 0.82 [0.69, 0.97]
  3 studies · 1421 participants
  Moderate

Non-specific immunotherapy (recombinant interleukin-2 or BCG cell wall preparation) plus standard therapy vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months · BCG cell wall preparation + surgery (Bier 1981)
  BCG-CWP + surgery versus surgery alone: 3-year overall survival 10/10 vs 9/10; too few participants to calculate a hazard ratio (Bier 1981, 24 participants).
  1 study · 24 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 to 70 months · Recombinant interleukin-2 + surgery (De Stefani 2002)
  HR 0.52 [0.31, 0.87]
  1 study · 201 participants
  Very low

Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

It is very uncertain whether tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus… changes overall survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  40 to 60 months
  HR 0.99 [0.62, 1.57]
  2 studies · 271 participants
  Very low

Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

It is very uncertain whether tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus… changes disease-free survival compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  40 to 60 months · Gefitinib + radiotherapy (oral cavity)
  HR 1.51 [0.61, 3.71]
  1 study · 60 participants
  Very low

Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus standard therapy (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

It is very uncertain whether tyrosine kinase inhibitor (erlotinib, gefitinib or lapatinib) plus… changes locoregional control compared with standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: targeted therapy and immunotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  40 to 60 months
  HR 0.89 [0.53, 1.49]
  2 studies · 271 participants
  Very low

Exercise therapy vs a control strategy (no treatment, placebo or waiting list controls)

It is very uncertain whether exercise therapy changes pain during activity (short‐term) Scale (0 to 10; higher scores mean… compared with a control strategy (no treatment, placebo or waiting list controls) (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  5 studies · 375 participants
  Very low

Supervised exercise therapy vs home exercises

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Supervised exercise therapy vs home exercises

It is very uncertain whether supervised exercises changes usual pain (long‐term) VAS (0 to 10; higher scores mean worse pain) compared with home exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 31 participants
  Very low
• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 59 participants
  Very low

Supervised exercise therapy vs home exercises

It is very uncertain whether supervised exercises changes functional ability (short‐term) AKPS (0 to 100; higher scores mean… compared with home exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 18 participants
  Very low
• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.34 [0.89, 2.03]
  1 study · 31 participants
  Very low

Supervised exercise therapy vs home exercises

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Closed kinetic chain exercises vs open kinetic chain exercises

It is very uncertain whether closed kinetic chain exercises changes pain during activity (short‐term) VAS (0 to 10; higher scores mean… compared with open kinetic chain exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 0.03
  2 studies · 90 participants
  Very low

Closed kinetic chain exercises vs open kinetic chain exercises

It is very uncertain whether closed kinetic chain exercises changes usual pain (short‐term) VAS (0 to 10; higher scores mean worse pain) compared with open kinetic chain exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 0.2
  3 studies · 122 participants
  Very low
• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 0.8 [0.07, 1.53]
  1 study · 49 participants
  Very low

Closed kinetic chain exercises vs open kinetic chain exercises

It is very uncertain whether closed kinetic chain exercises changes pain during activity (long‐term) VAS (0 to 10; higher scores mean… compared with open kinetic chain exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 2.1 [1.08, 3.12]
  1 study · 49 participants
  Very low

Closed kinetic chain exercises vs open kinetic chain exercises

It is very uncertain whether closed kinetic chain exercises changes functional ability (short‐term) AKPS (0 to 100; higher scores mean… compared with open kinetic chain exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 90 participants
  Very low
• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 49 participants
  Very low

Exercise therapy vs a control strategy (no treatment, placebo or waiting list controls)

It is very uncertain whether exercise therapy changes usual pain (short‐term) Scale (0 to 10; higher scores mean worse pain) compared with a control strategy (no treatment, placebo or waiting list controls) (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 41 participants
  Very low

Closed kinetic chain exercises vs open kinetic chain exercises

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Target of exercise: hip + knee vs knee exercises

It is very uncertain whether target of exercise: hip + knee changes pain during activity (short‐term) Scale (0 to 10; higher scores mean… compared with knee exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3 studies · 104 participants
  Very low

Target of exercise: hip + knee vs knee exercises

It is very uncertain whether target of exercise: hip + knee changes usual pain (short‐term) VAS (0 to 10; higher scores mean worse pain) compared with knee exercises (very low certainty).

• Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 46 participants
  Very low