Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28109631›Full record

ReviewBrachytherapy

American Brachytherapy Task Group Report: A pooled analysis of clinical outcomes for high-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

Jyoti Mayadev, Akila Viswanathan, Yu Liu, Chin-Shang Li, Kevin Albuquerque, Antonio L Damato, Sushil Beriwal, Beth Erickson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Analysis of operative duration of image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors.

Jyoti MayadevDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, CA. Electronic address: jmayadev@ucdavis.edu.
Akila ViswanathanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Yu LiuDepartment of Biostatistics, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, CA.
Chin-Shang LiDepartment of Biostatistics, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, CA.
Kevin AlbuquerqueDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
Antonio L DamatoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Sushil BeriwalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburg Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Beth EricksonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI.

Funding

Staff InvestigatorsP30CA093373 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI Laura Marcu · 2002 to 2026
$84.9M
UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000002 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI BERGLUND, LARS F · 2012 to 2015
$12.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000002NCI NIH HHS P30 CA093373
6 · The paper itself

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

Advisory CommitteesBrachytherapyChemoradiotherapyDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFemale Urogenital DiseasesHumansRadiation InjuriesRadiation OncologyRadiotherapy DosageSocieties, MedicalSurvival RateUnited StatesUterine Cervical NeoplasmsBrachytherapyCervical cancerHDRImage guidanceRadiation

Identifiers

PMID28109631
PMCPMC5497694

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.