Intervention not reported
Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia · people with metastatic colorectal cancer ‐ KRAS exon 2 WT
The intervention showed no clear difference in grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia · people with metastatic colorectal cancer
The intervention showed no clear difference in grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia/granulocytopenia · Patients treated with palliative intent for inoperable advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer with chemotherapy
Oral may leads to lower grade ≥ 3 neutropenia/granulocytopenia compared with intravenous fluoropyrimidines (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia/granulocytopenia · Patients treated with curative intent for colorectal cancer with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy
Oral probably leads to lower grade ≥ 3 neutropenia/granulocytopenia compared with intravenous fluoropyrimidines (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia ‐ not reported · people > 18 years of age with a diagnosed deep vein thrombosis
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Heparin‐induced thrombocytopaenia · people > 18 years of age with a diagnosed deep vein thrombosis
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Heparin‐induced thrombocytopaenia · people > 18 years of age with a diagnosed deep vein thrombosis
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia ‐ not measured · people > 18 years of age with a diagnosed deep vein thrombosis
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Intervention not reported
Severe adverse events: neutropenia · antiretroviral‐naïve individuals
The intervention leads to lower severe adverse events: neutropenia (high certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Thrombocytopenia · All patients with a diagnosis of multiple myeloma
Bortezomib may leads to higher adverse Events: Thrombocytopenia compared with no bortezomib (low certainty).
3 findings from 1 review
OR 2.05 [1.7, 2.48]
8 studies · 3791 participants
Low
OR 1.51 [1.13, 2]
3 studies · 1196 participants
High
OR 2.6 [2.01, 3.35]
5 studies · 2595 participants
Low
Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia · Platinum‐resistant and refractory (relapsed) epithelial ovarian cancer
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
Very low
Intervention not reported
Peritoneal lavage vs. open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes peritoneal lavage vs. open necrosectomy (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Minimally invasive step‐up approach vs. open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
The intervention may leads to lower minimally invasive step‐up approach vs. open necrosectomy (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Peritoneal lavage vs. open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes peritoneal lavage vs. open necrosectomy (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Minimally invasive step‐up approach vs. open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes minimally invasive step‐up approach vs. open necrosectomy (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Delayed open necrosectomy vs. early open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes delayed open necrosectomy vs. early open necrosectomy (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Minimally invasive step‐up approach vs. open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes minimally invasive step‐up approach vs. open necrosectomy (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Peritoneal lavage vs. open necrosectomy · people with necrotising pancreatitis
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes peritoneal lavage vs. open necrosectomy (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage · patients with pancreatic pseudocysts
It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Intervention not reported
Open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage · patients with pancreatic pseudocysts
1 finding from 1 review