Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26675376›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2016

Analysis of risk and predictors of brain radiation necrosis after radiosurgery.

Hongqing Zhuang, Yi Zheng, Junjie Wang, Joe Y Chang, Xiaoguang Wang, Zhiyong Yuan, Ping Wang

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. [Expert Consensus on the Treatment of Antiangiogenic Agents for Radiation Brain Necrosis].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Single- and Multifraction Stereotactic Radiosurgery Dose/Volume Tolerances of the Brain.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2021
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Hongqing ZhuangDepartment of Radiotherapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy and Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, Tianjin, China.
Yi ZhengDaqing Oilfield General Hospital, Heilongjiang, China.
Junjie WangDepartment of Radiotherapy, Peking University 3rd Hospital, Beijing, China.
Joe Y ChangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Xiaoguang WangDepartment of Radiotherapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy and Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, Tianjin, China.
Zhiyong YuanDepartment of Radiotherapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy and Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, Tianjin, China.
Ping WangDepartment of Radiotherapy, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy and Tianjin Lung Cancer Center, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CNDaqing Oilfield General Hospital · CNPeking University Third Hospital · CNThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we examined the factors contributing to brain radiation necrosis and its predictors of patients treated with Cyberknife radiosurgery. A total of 94 patients with primary or metastatic brain tumours having been treated with Cyberknife radiotherapy from Sep. 2006 to Oct. 2011 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Skull based tracking was used to deliver radiation to 104 target sites. and the prescribed radiation doses ranged from 1200 to 4500 cGy in 1 to 8 fractions with a 60% to 87% isodose line. Radiation necrosis was confirmed by imaging or pathological examination. Associations between cerebral radiation necrosis and factors including diabetes, cardio-cerebrovascular disease, target volume, isodose line, prescribed dosage, number of fractions, combination with whole brain radiation and biologically equivalent dose (BED) were determined by logistic regression. ROC curves were created to measure the predictive accuracy of influence factors and identify the threshold for brain radiation necrosis. Our results showed that radiation necrosis occurred in 12 targets (11.54%). Brain radiation necrosis was associated by BED, combination with whole brain radiotherapy, and fractions (areas under the ROC curves = 0.892±0.0335, 0.650±0.0717, and 0.712±0.0637 respectively). Among these factors, only BED had the capability to predict brain radiation necrosis, and the threshold dose was 7410 cGy. In conclusion, BED is the most effective predictor of brain radiation necrosis, with a dose of 7410 cGy being identified as the threshold.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrain NeoplasmsChildFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNecrosisNeoplasmsNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRadiation Injuriesbiologically equivalent dose (BED)brain radiation necrosisCyberknifestereotactic radiotherapy (SRT)

Identifiers

PMID26675376
PMCPMC4884953
OpenAlexW2273903353

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.