Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27803600›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2016

Use of low-value radiotherapy practices in Canada: an analysis of provincial cancer registry data.

K Tran, R Rahal, M Brundage, S Fung, C Louzado, M Milosevic, J Xu, H Bryant, System Performance Steering Committee and Technical Working Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

K TranCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON.
R RahalCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON.
M BrundageDepartments of Oncology and of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON.
S FungCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON.
C LouzadoCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON.
M MilosevicDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, and Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON.
J XuCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON.
H BryantCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON;; Departments of Community Health Sciences and of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB.
System Performance Steering Committee and Technical Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs part of Choosing Wisely Canada (a national campaign to encourage patient-provider conversations about unnecessary medical tests, treatments, and procedures), a list of ten oncology practices that could be low-value in some instances was developed. Of those practices, two were specific to radiation therapy (rt): conventional fractionation as part of breast-conserving therapy (bct) for women with early-stage breast cancer, and multifraction radiation for palliation of uncomplicated painful bone metastases. Here, we report baseline findings for the current utilization rates of those two rt practices in Canada.

resultsThe use of conventional fractionation as part of bct varied substantially from province to province. Of women 50 years of age and older, between 8.8% (Alberta) and 36.5% (Saskatchewan) received radiation in 25 fractions (excluding boost irradiation) as part of bct. The use of hypofractionated rt (that is, 16 fractions excluding boost irradiation)-a preferred approach for many patients-was more common in all 6 reporting provinces, ranging from 43.2% in Saskatchewan to 94.7% in Prince Edward Island. The use of multifraction rt for palliation of bone metastases also varied from province to province, ranging from 40.3% in British Columbia to 69.0% in Saskatchewan. The most common number of fractions delivered to bone metastases was 1, at 50.2%; the second most common numbers were 2-5 fractions, at 41.7%.

conclusionsUnderstanding variation in the use of potentially low-value rt practices can help to inform future strategies to promote higher-value care, which balances high-quality care with the efficient use of limited system resources. Further work is needed to understand the factors contributing to the interprovincial variation observed and to develop benchmarks for the appropriate rate of use of these rt practices.

Indexed as

appropriatenessbone metastasisBreast cancerpatterns of careradiation

Identifiers

PMID27803600
PMCPMC5081012

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.