Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27979446›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2017

Adverse Events Involving Radiation Oncology Medical Devices: Comprehensive Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration Data, 1991 to 2015.

Michael J Connor, Deborah C Marshall, Vitali Moiseenko, Kevin Moore, Laura Cervino, Todd Atwood, Parag Sanghvi, Arno J Mundt, Todd Pawlicki, Abram Recht and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Nature of Medical Malpractice Claims Against Radiation Oncologists.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2017
    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

11 authors.

Michael J ConnorDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, California.
Deborah C MarshallDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Vitali MoiseenkoDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Kevin MooreDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Laura CervinoDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Todd AtwoodDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Parag SanghviDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Arno J MundtDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Todd PawlickiDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Abram RechtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jona A Hattangadi-GluthDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California. Electronic address: jhattangadi@ucsd.edu.

Funding

VIRAL MALIGNANCYP30CA023100 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI DIANE M SIMEONE · 1985 to 2026
$124.9M
UC San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR001442 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S, HOGARTH, MICHAEL · 2015 to 2024
$88.3M
San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR000100 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S · 2012 to 2015
$19.7M
San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteKL2TR000099 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S · 2012 to 2014
$1.1M
San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteTL1TR000098 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S · 2012 to 2014
$860k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000099NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR000098NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000100NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001442NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRadiation oncology relies on rapidly evolving technology and highly complex processes. The US Food and Drug Administration collects reports of adverse events related to medical devices. We sought to characterize all events involving radiation oncology devices (RODs) from the US Food and Drug Administration's postmarket surveillance Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database, comparing these with non-radiation oncology devices. METHODS AND MATERIALS: MAUDE data on RODs from 1991 to 2015 were sorted into 4 product categories (external beam, brachytherapy, planning systems, and simulation systems) and 5 device problem categories (software, mechanical, electrical, user error, and dose delivery impact). Outcomes included whether the device was evaluated by the manufacturer, adverse event type, remedial action, problem code, device age, and time since 510(k) approval. Descriptive statistics were performed with linear regression of time-series data. Results for RODs were compared with those for other devices by the Pearson χ

resultsThere were 4234 ROD and 4,985,698 other device adverse event reports. Adverse event reports increased over time, and events involving RODs peaked in 2011. Most ROD reports involved external beam therapy (50.8%), followed by brachytherapy (24.9%) and treatment planning systems (21.6%). The top problem types were software (30.4%), mechanical (20.9%), and user error (20.4%). RODs differed significantly from other devices in each outcome (P<.001). RODs were more likely to be evaluated by the manufacturer after an event (46.9% vs 33.0%) but less likely to be recalled (10.5% vs 37.9%) (P<.001). Device age and time since 510(k) approval were shorter among RODs (P<.001).

conclusionsCompared with other devices, RODs may experience adverse events sooner after manufacture and market approval. Close postmarket surveillance, improved software design, and manufacturer-user training may help mitigate these events.

Indexed as

United States Food and Drug AdministrationBrachytherapyChi-Square DistributionDatabases, FactualDevice ApprovalEquipment Failure AnalysisEquipment SafetyHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisLinear ModelsMedical ErrorsProduct Recalls and WithdrawalsProduct Surveillance, PostmarketingRadiation OncologyRadiotherapyRadiotherapy Dosage

Identifiers

PMID27979446
PMCPMC5193217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.