ReviewCureus2024
The Efficacy and Safety of Antifungal Agents for Managing Oral Candidiasis in Oncologic Patients: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed at synthesizing the available evidence on the comparative safety and efficacy of antifungal agents for preventing or treating oral candidiasis (OC) in oncologic patients. A systematic review following international recommendations was performed (PROSPERO CRD42024507745). A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (Feb 2024) to retrieve randomized controlled trials evaluating the clinical effects of antifungal agents in the management of OC in this vulnerable population. Network meta-analyses were performed to evaluate the most prevalent outcomes, with findings reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Overall, 24 trials were included, of which 10 addressed OC treatment and 14 disease prophylaxis (n=3449 patients). Fluconazole had the most significant rates of clinical cure when compared to placebo (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.01-0.69]), amphotericin B (0.21 [95% CI 0.07-0.65]) and itraconazole (OR 0.58 [95% CI 0.34-0.99]); ketoconazole was also superior to placebo for this outcome (OR 0.10 [95% CI 0.03, 0.36]). All antifungal agents presented significantly higher rates of prophylaxis success compared to the absence of an active agent. While these therapies were generally considered safe, only four studies provided data on adverse events, primarily related to gastrointestinal issues. In oncologic patients, azoles (fluconazole, ketoconazole) should be used as a first-line approach for OC treatment. The selection of antifungal agents for disease prophylaxis should consider, among others, patients' clinical characteristics and preferences. Economic and quality of life-related outcomes should be further addressed in future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.