ArticleCureus2016
Factors Predictive of Protracted Course of Radiation Therapy in Patients Treated with Definitive Chemoradiation for Cervical Cancer.
Article in Cureus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Factors predictive of parametrial boost in patients with cervical cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Impact of Performance Status and Comorbidity on Palliative Radiation Treatment Tolerance and End-Of-Life Decision-Making.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- Treatment Outcome of the Combination Therapy of High-dose rate Intracavitary Brachytherapy and Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy With Central-shielding for Cervical Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a benefit to completing definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for cervical cancer within 56 days. However, many patients experience delays due to missed radiation treatments that prolong the overall course of therapy. In order to improve patient care, we performed a quality improvement project to determine factors predictive of protracted treatment and develop strategies to enable timely treatment completion.
methodsSeventy-one patients treated for cervical cancer with CRT were identified. Medical records were reviewed to gather demographic, clinical, and treatment data. Prolonged treatment was defined as >56 days per the American Brachytherapy Society guidelines. The following variables were evaluated using paired t-tests and univariate logistic regression: demographics, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) versus conventional radiation technique, use of a boost, time to stent placement, time to first brachytherapy (BT), and genitourinary (GU) or gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity.
resultsThe median treatment length for all patients was 59 days. Factors associated with prolonged treatment were time to cervical stent placement (p=0.001), delay ≥2 days between final external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and initial BT (p=0.0195), any grade GU toxicity (p=0.0007), or GI toxicity (p=0.0002), and the presence of a boost (p=0.0006). Age, stage, and IMRT versus conventional technique were not associated with protracted treatment.
conclusionIn this series of patients, acute toxicity, increased time to cervical stent placement, and time to first BT treatment were associated with prolonged treatment time. The patients who completed treatment in ≤56 days had a lower average time to cervical stent placement, 27 versus 31 days. Our results suggest that cervical stent placement during week four of treatment can enhance patient care and improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.