ReviewBrachytherapy
American Brachytherapy Task Group Report: A pooled analysis of clinical outcomes for high-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer.
Review in Brachytherapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Radiation Therapy for Cervical Cancer: Executive Summary of an ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.Practical radiation oncologyGuideline
- Trial
- Analysis of operative duration of image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Article
- Article
- Improvement in radiation techniques for locally advanced cervical cancer during the last two decades.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2023Review
- Pain in High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Improved survival in cervical cancer patients receiving care at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers.Cancer · 2022Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer interventional radiotherapy (brachytherapy): a pictorial essay focused on radiologist management.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2022Article
- Dose Summation Strategies for External Beam Radiation Therapy and Brachytherapy in Gynecologic Malignancy: A Review from the NRG Oncology and NCTN Medical Physics Subcommittees.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2021Review
- Assessment of Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Infrastructure in Belize.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Article
- Support Vector Machine Model Predicts Dose for Organs at Risk in High-Dose Rate Brachytherapy of Cervical Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Article
- Management for locally advanced cervical cancer: new trends and controversial issues.Radiation oncology journal · 2018Article
- Comparison of impact of target delineation of computed tomography- and magnetic resonance imaging-guided brachytherapy on dose distribution in cervical cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2018Article
- High dose-rate tandem and ovoid brachytherapy in cervical cancer: dosimetric predictors of adverse events.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2018Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Toxicity of CT-guided High Dose-rate Brachytherapy in Women With Locally-advanced Cervical Cancer.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAdvanced imaging used in combination with brachytherapy (BT) has revolutionized the treatment of patients with cervical cancer. We present a comprehensive review of the literature for definitive radiation with high-dose-rate (HDR) BT. In addition, we investigate potential outcome improvement with image-based brachytherapy (IBBT) compared to studies using traditional Point A dosing. This review extensively investigates acute and late toxicities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study reviews the literature from 2000 to 2015 with an emphasis on modern approaches including concurrent chemotherapy (chemoRT), radiation, and HDR BT and IBBT. Descriptive statistics and pelvic control (PC), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) outcomes were calculated using weighted means to report pooled analysis of outcomes.
resultsLiterature search yielded 16 prospective, 51 retrospective studies that reported survival outcomes, and 13 retrospective studies that focused on acute and late toxicity outcomes regardless of applicator type. There are 57 studies that report Point A dose specification with 33 having chemoRT, and 10 studies that use IBBT, 8 with chemoRT. Patients receiving radiation and chemoRT with HDR BT in the prospective studies, with >24 months followup, rates of PC were: for RT: 73%, SD: 11; CRT: 82%, SD: 8; DFS-RT: 55%, SD: 10; CRT: 65%, SD: 7; OS-RT: 66%, SD: 7; CRT: 70%, SD: 11. In the retrospective studies, the PC rates (weighted means) for the radiation and chemoradiation outcomes are 75% vs. 80%, and for DFS, the values were 55% vs. 63%, respectively. Comparing patients receiving chemoRT and IBBT to traditional Point A dose specification, there is a significant improvement in PC (p < 0.01) and DFS (p < 0.01) with IBBT. The range of genitourinary late toxicity reported for radiation was Grade 3: 1-6% and for chemoRT 2-20%. The range of late gastrointestinal toxicity for radiation was Grade 3: 4-11% and for chemoRT, 1-11%. For the late gynecologic toxicity, only 1 of the 16 prospective trials report a Grade 1-2 of 17% for radiation and 9% for chemoRT effects.
conclusionsWe present concise outcomes of PC, DFS, OS, and toxicity for cervical cancer patients treated with chemoradiation and HDR BT. Our data suggest an improvement in outcomes with the use of IBBT compared with traditional Point A dose prescriptions. In conclusion, HDR BT is a safe, effective modality when combined with IBBT.
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.