Meta-Analysis: The Holy Grail?

Area of Science:

• Interventional Oncology
• Evidence Synthesis
• Clinical Research Methodology

Background:

• Meta-analysis is crucial for evidence synthesis but faces challenges in interventional oncology (IO) due to study heterogeneity and limited randomized trials.
• This review examines the evidence landscape in IO, highlighting the role of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in clinical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the current state of evidence within interventional oncology.
• To assess the role and challenges of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in guiding clinical decisions in IO.

Main Methods:

• A PubMed search was conducted to identify published article types in interventional oncology over recent decades.
• Analysis focused on trends in original articles versus systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Main Results:

• The volume of original research articles in IO has remained stable over time.
• There has been a significant increase in the publication of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in IO.

Conclusions:

• The rise in meta-analyses suggests a shift towards evaluating existing research over generating new prospective studies in IO.
• Meta-analysis is a valuable methodological tool in IO, but its conclusions are contingent on the quality and relevance of the included studies.
• The discussion will cover evidence grading (e.g., GRADE), reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA), and biases (risk of bias, publication bias).