Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40539780›Full record

SynthesisJournal of virology2025

Efficacy of oncolytic virus in the treatment of intermediate-to-advanced solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jin-Zhou Xu, Jian-Xuan Sun, Chen-Qian Liu, Ruo-Yan Pan, Na Zeng, Si-Han Zhang, Ye An, Meng-Yao Xu, Xing-Yu Zhong, Si-Yang Ma and 4 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of virology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

14 authors.

Jin-Zhou Xu *Department and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2696-2238
Jian-Xuan Sun *Department and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Chen-Qian Liu *Department and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Ruo-Yan PanDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Na ZengDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Si-Han ZhangDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Ye AnDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Meng-Yao XuDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xing-Yu ZhongDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Si-Yang MaDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Hao-Dong HeDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Jia HuDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Shao-Gang WangDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3206-1495
Qi-Dong XiaDepartment and Institute of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2278-1122

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This meta-analysis assessed oncolytic virus therapy's efficacy for intermediate-to-advanced solid tumors. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until March 6, 2025. Our review included 87 studies, involving 5,385 individuals, encompassing 75 clinical trials and 12 retrospective studies. Patient response rates were as follows: complete response (CR) 11%, partial response (PR) 18%, stable disease (SD) 32%, and progressive disease (PD) 32%. The overall response rate (ORR) was 29%, and the durable response rate (DRR) was 39%. Comparing oncolytic virus therapy to alternatives, the odds ratio (OR) for overall response was 1.62, and the hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) was 0.86. This analysis emphasizes the effectiveness of oncolytic virus therapy for intermediate-to-advanced solid tumors, highlighting its promise as a treatment option. These findings offer vital insights into cancer therapy researchers and practitioners.IMPORTANCEAlthough previous meta-analyses on this topic have been published, our research addresses the limitations of previous studies by including missed and newly published studies, updating the results, and conducting extensive subgroup analyses. Our study fills a gap in the literature by providing a comprehensive evaluation of the therapeutic potential of oncolytic viruses for solid tumors.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsOncolytic VirotherapyOncolytic VirusesHumansTreatment Outcomeintermediate-to-advanced solid tumormeta-analysisoncolytic virus

Identifiers

PMID40539780
PMCPMC12282134

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.