ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Analysis of different fractionations of three-dimensional conformable radiotherapy for esophageal cancer.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of Curative Effect and Prognostic Factors of Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer Based on the CNN.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to observe and discuss the curative and side effects of three different fractionation regimen of three-dimensional conformable radiotherapy (3DCRT) for esophageal cancer. A total of 169 untreated patients of esophageal cancer were randomized into three groups: groups A (conventional group, 2.0 Gy per time), B (2.5 Gy group, 2 Gy per time), and C (3.0 Gy group, 3.0 Gy per time), respectively. Groups A, B, and C are similar in terms of partial response (P = 0.35). However, the three groups had no significant differences in terms of the complete response (P = 0.63). The three-year survival rate of group B was higher than those of the other two groups, and the difference was significant (P = 0.047). For the three-year local control rate, that of group B was also higher than those of groups A and C, but the difference was not significant (P = 0.067). The incidence rate of 3 level esophagitis and bronchitis was highest in group C (P = 0.023 and P = 0.064). The 3 level tardive radioactive esophagitis in group C was higher than those in other two groups (P = 0.037 and P = 0.04). The incidence rate of the 3 level advanced lung reaction was also the highest in the three groups (P = 0.041). The effect is better and the side effect is tolerable for the 2.5 Gy per fraction, 5 times per week; thus, it can be used clinically for 3DCRT for esophageal carcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26379915PMC4565298W2435643106What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.