Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26309369›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Robotic radiosurgery in pancreatic cancer: A systematic review.

Milly Buwenge, Francesco Cellini, Nicola Silvestris, Savino Cilla, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Gian C Mattiucci, Vincenzo Valentini, Alessio G Morganti

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Individually optimized stereotactic radiotherapy for pancreatic head tumors: A planning feasibility study.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology
    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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Milly BuwengeMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Francesco CelliniMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Nicola SilvestrisMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Savino CillaMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Francesco DeodatoMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Gabriella MacchiaMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Gian C MattiucciMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Vincenzo ValentiniMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
Alessio G MorgantiMilly Buwenge, Francesco Deodato, Gabriella Macchia, Department of Radiation Oncology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 86100 Campobasso, Italy.
University of Bologna · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo present a systematic review of techniques and clinical results.

methodsA systematic review of published literature was performed. Only studies reporting patient outcome after radiosurgery (single fraction) delivered with robotic devices [i.e., robotic radiosurgery (RRS)] have been analyzed.

resultsA total of 96 patients from 5 studies were included. The studies are characterized by small series and different methods in terms of dose, target definition, combination with chemotherapy and/or standard fractionated radiotherapy and evaluation modalities. Preliminary results are positive in terms of tumor response (ORR = 56%) and local control of the tumor (crude rate of local progressions: 19.5%). Results for median overall survival (11.4 mo) seem comparable with the ones of prolonged chemoradiation (range: 8.6-13.0 mo). However, gastrointestinal toxicity seems to be the main limitation of RRS, especially at the duodenal level.

conclusionRRS allows for local treatment in a shortened time (1 fraction) compared to traditional treatments (about 1 mo), providing the possibility for an easy integration with systemic therapies. Preliminary results did not show any outcome differences compared to standard chemoradiation. Thus, further efforts to reduce gastrointestinal toxicity are strongly needed.

Indexed as

RadiosurgeryRobotic Surgical ProceduresChemoradiotherapyDose Fractionation, RadiationHumansPancreatic NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomePancreasPancreatic neoplasmsRadiosurgeryReviewRoboticStereotactic radiotherapySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID26309369
PMCPMC4541395
OpenAlexW2217454136

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.