Abstract
In this invited paper, we applied standard methods of evidence synthesis and critical appraisal to summarize the current state of clinical evidence on PDT for the treatment of different types of cancers. A total of 266 studies spanning 11,427 patients and 34 different types of cancer were reviewed. Forty-four were comparative and 222 were non-comparative. The majority of comparative studies did not assess PDT versus conventional therapy. Therefore, it was not possible to determine the incremental benefit of treatment with PDT. Most of the non-comparative studies involved small, mixed patient populations and short follow-up periods. Consequently, the quality of evidence accumulated to date was considered to be low. Well-defined, prospective, comparative trials of PDT, alone, versus conventional therapies are needed in order to determine its clinical effectiveness.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Analytical & Bioanalytical Techniques
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
