Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23497555›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2013

DART-bid (Dose-differentiated accelerated radiation therapy, 1.8 Gy twice daily)--a novel approach for non-resected NSCLC: final results of a prospective study, correlating radiation dose to tumor volume.

Karl Wurstbauer, Heinz Deutschmann, Karin Dagn, Peter Kopp, Franz Zehentmayr, Bernd Lamprecht, Peter Porsch, Birgit Wegleitner, Michael Studnicka, Felix Sedlmayer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors.

Karl WurstbauerDepartment of Radiation Oncology and radART-Institute for research and development on Advanced Radiation Technologies, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria. k.wurstbauer@salk.at
Heinz Deutschmann
Karin Dagn
Peter Kopp
Franz Zehentmayr
Bernd Lamprecht
Peter Porsch
Birgit Wegleitner
Michael Studnicka
Felix Sedlmayer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSequential chemo-radiotherapies with intensive radiation components deliver promising results in non-resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In general, radiation doses are determined by dose constraints for normal tissues, not by features relevant for tumor control. DART-bid targets directly the doses required for tumor control, correlating doses to tumor volume in a differentiated mode. MATERIALS/

methodsRadiation doses to primary tumors were aligned along increasing tumor size within 4 groups (<2.5 cm/2.5-4.5 cm/4.5-6.0 cm/>6.0 cm; mean number of three perpendicular diameters). ICRU-doses of 73.8 Gy/79.2 Gy/84.6 Gy/90.0 Gy, respectively, were applied. Macroscopically involved nodes were treated with a median dose of 59.4 Gy, nodal sites about 6 cm cranial to involved nodes electively with 45 Gy. Fractional doses were 1.8 Gy twice daily (bid).2 cycles chemotherapy were given before radiotherapy.Between 2004 and 2009, 160 not selected patients with 164 histologically/cytologically proven NSCLC were enrolled; Stage I: 38 patients; II: 6 pts.; IIIA: 69 pts.; IIIB: 47 pts. Weight loss >5%/3 months: 38 patients (24%).Primary endpoints are local and regional tumor control rates at 2 years (as >90% of locoregional failures occur within 2 years). Secondary endpoints are survival and toxicity. With a minimum follow-up time of 2 years for patients alive, the final results are presented.

results32 local and 10 regional recurrences occurred. The local and regional tumor control rates at 2 years are 77% and 93%, respectively.The median overall survival (OS) time is 28.0 months, the 2- and 5-year OS rates are 57% and 19%, respectively. For stage III patients, median OS amounts to 24.3 months, 2- /5-year OS rates to 51% and 18%, respectively.2 treatment-related deaths (progressive pulmonary fibrosis) occurred in patients with pre-existing pulmonary fibrosis. Further acute and late toxicity was mild.

conclusionsThis novel approach yields a high level of locoregional tumor control and survival times. In general it is well tolerated. In all outcome parameters it seems to compare favourably with simultaneous chemo-radiotherapies, at present considered 'state of the art'; and is additionally amenable for an unselected patient population.

Indexed as

ChemoradiotherapyRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarboplatinCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCarcinoma, Squamous CellCisplatinFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleCarboplatinCisplatin

Identifiers

PMID23497555
PMCPMC3606417

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.