Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25952979›Full record

Trial reportBMC research notes2015

First interim analysis of a randomised trial of whole brain radiotherapy in melanoma brain metastases confirms high data quality.

Gerald B Fogarty, Angela Hong, Kari Dolven-Jacobsen, Claudius H Reisse, Bryan Burmeister, Lauren H Haydu, Haryana Dhillon, Victoria Steel, Brindha Shivalingam, Kate Drummond and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. The Treatment of Melanoma Brain Metastases.Current oncology reports · 2016
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

16 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Gerald B FogartyMelanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia. gerald.fogarty@cancer.com.au.
Angela HongMelanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia. Angela.Hong@melanoma.org.au.
Kari Dolven-JacobsenOslo University Hospital HF, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway. KDJ@ous-hf.no.
Claudius H ReisseOslo University Hospital HF, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway. clarei@ous-hf.no.
Bryan BurmeisterTrans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG), Newcastle, Australia. Bryan.Burmeister@health.qld.gov.au.
Lauren H HayduMelanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia. LEHaydu@mdanderson.org.
Haryana DhillonCentre for Medical Psychology & Evidence-based Decision-making, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia. haryana.dhillon@sydney.edu.au.
Victoria SteelAustralia and New Zealand Melanoma Trials Group (ANZMTG), North Sydney, Australia. Victoria.Steel@melanoma.org.au.
Brindha ShivalingamRoyal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia. brindha@brain-surgeon.com.au.
Kate DrummondThe Royal Melbourne Hospital & University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia. Kate.Drummond@mh.org.au.
Janette VardySydney Medical School, |The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. janette.vardy@sydney.edu.au.
Anna NowakSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia. anna.nowak@uwa.edu.au.
George HrubySydney Medical School, |The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. ghruby@email.cs.nsw.gov.au.
Richard A ScolyerMelanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia. richard.scolyer@sswahs.nsw.gov.au.
Catherine MandelPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre East Melbourne & University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia. mandel@ausdoctors.net.
John F ThompsonMelanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia. John.Thompson@melanoma.org.au.
University of Sydney · AUMelanoma Institute Australia · AUOslo University Hospital · NOAustralia and New Zealand Melanoma Trials Group · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUTrans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrain metastases are a common cause of death in patients with melanoma. The role of adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) following local treatment of intracranial melanoma metastases is controversial. The Australian and New Zealand Melanoma Trials Group (ANZMTG) and the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) are leading the first ever single histology randomised trial investigating this question. The primary endpoint is distant intracranial failure on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) within twelve months of randomisation. The first planned interim analysis was performed twelve months after randomisation of the 100(th) patient. The analysis was an opportunity to review completeness of the trial data to date.

methodsAll data received up to the end of twelve months after randomisation of the 100th patient was reviewed.

resultsReview of pathology reports confirmed that all 100 patients had stage IV melanoma and were appropriately entered into the study. Of the 47 distant intracranial events, 34 occurred in isolation (i.e. only distant failure was identified), whilst 13 were accompanied by local failure. Data review showed compliance with the protocol mandated MRI schedule and accuracy of intracranial failure reporting was very high. The Quality of Life (QoL) component of the study achieved a 91% completion rate. For the neurocognitive function (NCF) assessments, a high completion rate was maintained throughout the 12 month period. Where assessments were not performed at expected time points, valid reasons were noted. Radiotherapy quality was high. Of 50 patients who received WBRT, 32 were reviewed as per protocol design and there was only one major variation out of 308 data points reviewed (0.3%). There were minimal trial related adverse events (AEs) and no serious adverse events (SAEs). Pre-specified protocol stopping rules were not met.

conclusionsThe Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) recommended the trial continue recruitment after reviewing the unblinded data. The data provision and quality to date indicates that a reliable outcome will be obtained when the final analysis is performed. Accrual is ongoing with 156 out of 200 patients randomised to date (26(th) November 2014).

Indexed as

Data AccuracyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrain NeoplasmsDemographyDisease ProgressionEndpoint DeterminationFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID25952979
PMCPMC4428505
OpenAlexW1566600962

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.