↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effects of chemopreventive agents on the incidence of recurrent colorectal adenomas: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Effects of chemopreventive agents on the incidence of recurrent colorectal adenomas: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, May 2017
DOI 10.2147/ott.s127335
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sajesh K Veettil, Nattawat Teerawattanapong, Siew Mooi Ching, Kean Ghee Lim, Surasak Saokaew, Pochamana Phisalprapa, Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk

Abstract

Protective effects of several chemopreventive agents (CPAs) against colorectal adenomas have been well documented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there is uncertainty regarding which agents are the most effective. We searched for RCTs published up until September 2016. Retrieved trials were evaluated using risk of bias. We performed both pairwise analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs to compare the effects of CPAs on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas (primary outcome). Using NMA, we ranked CPAs based on efficacy. We identified 20 eligible RCTs enrolling 12,625 participants with a history of colorectal cancer or adenomas who were randomly assigned to receive either a placebo or one of 12 interventions. NMA using all trials demonstrated that celecoxib 800 mg/day (relative risk [RR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.83), celecoxib 400 mg/day (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55-0.87), low-dose aspirin (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.96) and calcium (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.96) were significantly associated with a reduction in the recurrence of any adenomas. NMA results were consistent with those from pairwise meta-analysis. The evidence indicated a high (celecoxib), moderate (low-dose aspirin) and low (calcium) Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) quality. NMA ranking showed that celecoxib 800 mg/day and celecoxib 400 mg/day were the best CPAs, followed by low-dose aspirin and calcium. Considering advanced adenoma recurrence, only celecoxib 800 mg/day and celecoxib 400 mg/day were demonstrated to have a protective effect (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.27-0.52 vs RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.38-0.60, respectively). The available evidence from NMA suggests that celecoxib is more effective in reducing the risk of recurrence of colorectal adenomas, followed by low-dose aspirin and calcium. Since cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (eg, celecoxib) are associated with important cardiovascular events and gastrointestinal harms, more attention is warranted toward CPAs with a favorable benefit-to-risk ratio, such as low-dose aspirin and calcium.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Lecturer 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Unspecified 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 13 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 August 2020.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,147
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,650
of 324,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#35
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.