Evidence mapping and quality assessment of systematic reviews on therapeutic interventions for oral cancer

Meisser Madera Anaya, Juan Victor Ariel Franco, Mónica Ballesteros, Ivan Solà, Gerard Urrútia Cuchí, Xavier Bonfill Cosp

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearch

    6 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    © 2019 Madera Anaya et al. Purpose: This evidence mapping aims to describe and assess the quality of available evidence in systematic reviews (SRs) on treatments for oral cancer. Materials and methods: We followed the methodology of Global Evidence Mapping. Searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos and The Cochrane Library were conducted to identify SRs on treatments for oral cancer. The methodological quality of SRs was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 tool. We organized the results according to identified Population–Intervention–Comparison–Outcome (PICO) questions and presented the evidence mapping in tables and a bubble plot. Results: Fifteen SRs met the eligibility criteria, including 118 individual reports, of which 55.1% were randomized controlled clinical trials. Ten SRs scored “Critically low” methodological quality. We extracted 30 PICOs focusing on interventions such as surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy; 18 PICOs were for resectable oral cancer, of which 8 were reported as beneficial. There were 12 PICOs for unresectable oral cancer, of which only 2 interventions were reported as beneficial. Conclusion: There is limited available evidence on treatments for oral cancer. The methodological quality of most included SRs scored “Critically low”. The main beneficial treatment reported by authors for patients with resectable oral cancer is surgery alone or in combination with radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Evidence about the benefits of the treatments for unresectable oral cancer is lacking. These findings highlight the need to address future research focused on new treatments and knowledge gaps in this field, and increased efforts are required to improve the methodology quality and reporting process of SRs on treatments for oral cancer.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)117-130
    JournalCancer Management and Research
    Volume11
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2019

    Keywords

    • Buccal tumor
    • Evidence synthesis
    • Evidence-based medicine
    • Mouth neoplasms
    • Oral carcinoma

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Evidence mapping and quality assessment of systematic reviews on therapeutic interventions for oral cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this