Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22513926›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Hyperbaric oxygenation for tumour sensitisation to radiotherapy.

Michael H Bennett, John Feldmeier, Robert Smee, Christopher Milross

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Molecular imaging of hypoxia in non-small-cell lung cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2015
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael H BennettDepartment of Anaesthesia, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, Australia. m.bennett@unsw.edu.au
John Feldmeier
Robert Smee
Christopher Milross
Prince of Wales Hospital · AUChris O’Brien Lifehouse · AUUniversity of Toledo Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer is a common disease and radiotherapy is one well-established treatment for some solid tumours. Hyperbaric oxygenation therapy (HBOT) may improve the ability of radiotherapy to kill hypoxic cancer cells, so the administration of radiotherapy while breathing hyperbaric oxygen may result in a reduction in mortality and recurrence.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of radiotherapy while breathing HBO. SEARCH

methodsIn March 2011 we searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, DORCTHIM and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing the outcome of malignant tumours following radiation therapy while breathing HBO versus air. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant trials and extracted the data from the included trials. MAIN

resultsNineteen trials contributed to this review (2286 patients: 1103 allocated to HBOT and 1153 to control). With HBOT, there was a reduction in mortality for head and neck cancers at both one year and five years after therapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, P = 0.03, number needed to treat (NNT) = 11; and RR 0.82, P = 0.03, NNT = 5 respectively), as well as improved local tumour control at three months (RR with HBOT 0.58, P = 0.006, NNT = 7). The effect of HBOT varied with different fractionation schemes. Local tumour recurrence was less likely with HBOT at one year (head and neck: RR 0.66, P < 0.0001, NNT = 5), two years (uterine cervix: RR 0.60, P = 0.04, NNT = 5) and five years (head and neck: (RR 0.77, P = 0.01, NNT = 6). Any advantage is achieved at the cost of some adverse effects. There was a significant increase in the rate of both severe radiation tissue injury (RR 2.35, P < 0.0001, (number needed to harm (NNH) = 8) and the chance of seizures during therapy (RR 6.76, P = 0.03, NNH = 22) with HBOT. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is some evidence that HBOT improves local tumour control and mortality for cancers of the head and neck, and local tumour recurrence in cancers of the head and neck, and uterine cervix. These benefits may only occur with unusual fractionation schemes. HBOT is associated with significant adverse effects including oxygen toxic seizures and severe tissue radiation injury. The methodological and reporting inadequacies of the studies included demand a cautious interpretation. More research is needed for head and neck cancer, but is probably not justified for bladder cancer. There is little evidence available concerning malignancies at other anatomical sites on which to base a recommendation.

Indexed as

Radiation ToleranceBronchial NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansHyperbaric OxygenationMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRectal NeoplasmsTime FactorsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID22513926
PMCPMC6457774
OpenAlexW1916114318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.