Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39811358›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2025

Clinical outcomes and adverse events of Hedgehog pathway inhibitors for advanced basal cell carcinoma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Suvijak Untaaveesup, Wichapol Dendumrongsup, Pornteera Srichana, Chanamon Pongphaew, Gynna Techataweewan, Kanmanee Viratkapan, Nichanant Nampipat, Ben Ponvilawan, Chayanis Kositamongkol, Walaiorn Pratchyapruit and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Suvijak UntaaveesupPhaholpolpayuhasena Hospital, Kanchanaburi, Thailand.
Wichapol DendumrongsupFaculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pornteera SrichanaFaculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chanamon PongphaewPrincess Srisavangavadhana College of Medicine, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Gynna TechataweewanBurapha University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Burapha University, Chonburi, Thailand.
Kanmanee ViratkapanDivision of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nichanant NampipatMedical Oncology Unit, Department of Medicine, Maha Vajiralongkorn Thanyaburi Hospital, Pathum Thani, Thailand.
Ben PonvilawanDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Chayanis KositamongkolDivision of Ambulatory Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Walaiorn PratchyapruitInstitute of Dermatology, Ministry of Public Health, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pochamana PhisalprapaDivision of Ambulatory Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer and poses treatment challenges in advanced stages. Treatment options include surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic therapies, but tumor location and prior interventions can limit these methods. Hedgehog pathway inhibitors (HPIs) are used for patients unsuitable for conventional treatments. Objective: This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness and safety profile of HPIs in managing advanced BCC. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature review across Embase, Scopus, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception until March 2024. The focus was on the effectiveness and safety of HPIs, with or without adjunct surgery or radiotherapy. Pooled objective response rates (ORRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using inverse variance random-effects models. Results: The analysis comprised 16 studies, including 14 retrospective cohort studies, one prospective cohort study, and one randomized controlled trial, with 1689 participants. The pooled ORR for HPIs was 73% (95% CI 63%-82%; I Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicates that HPIs are more beneficial in treating locally advanced BCC than metastatic disease. No statistically significant differences were found in the effectiveness among various HPIs.

Indexed as

Basal cell carcinomaMeta-analysisSonidegibSystematic reviewTreatmentVismodegib

Identifiers

PMID39811358
PMCPMC11730210

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.