Springer Nature
Browse
13014_2019_1388_MOESM1_ESM.zip (3.56 MB)

MOESM1 of Elective nodal irradiation versus involved-field irradiation in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis

Download (3.56 MB)
dataset
posted on 2019-10-17, 05:01 authored by Tingting Liu, Silu Ding, Jun Dang, Hui Wang, Jun Chen, Guang Li
Additional file 1: Figure S1. Assessment of risk of bias. A: Methodological quality graph: authors’ judgment about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies; B: Methodological quality summary: authors’ judgment about each methodological quality item for each included study, “+” low risk of bias; “?” unclear risk of bias; “-” high risk of bias. Figure S2. Comparison-adjusted funnel plots of publication bias test for overall survival. nCRTS, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery; nCTS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery; S, surgery; ENI, elective nodal irradiation; IFI, involved-field irradiation. Figure S3. Inconsistency evaluation by node-splitting analyses. (a) overall survival; (b) locoregional recurrence; (c) distant metastases; (d) R0 resection; (e) post-operative mortality. nCRTS, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery; nCTS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery; S, surgery; ENI, elective nodal irradiation; IFI, involved-field irradiation. Table S1. PRISMA NMA Checklist. Table S2. Search strategy. Table S3. Details of radiation fields.

History

Usage metrics

    Radiation Oncology

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC