Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28290489›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2017

Charged-particle therapy in cancer: clinical uses and future perspectives.

Marco Durante, Roberto Orecchia, Jay S Loeffler

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 187 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
187citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Relative biological effectiveness and neural stem cell fate in carbon ion-irradiated human brain organoids.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

127 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Marco DuranteTrento Institute for Fundamental Physics and Applications (TIFPA), National Institute of Nuclear Physics (INFN), University of Trento, Via Sommarive 14, 38123 Povo, Trento, Italy.
Roberto OrecchiaNational Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), Strada dei Campeggi 53, 27100 Pavia, Italy.
Jay S LoefflerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiotherapy with high-energy charged particles has become an attractive therapeutic option for patients with several tumour types because this approach better spares healthy tissue from radiation than conventional photon therapy. The cost associated with the delivery of charged particles, however, is higher than that of even the most elaborate photon-delivery technologies. Reliable evidence of the relative cost-effectiveness of both modalities can only come from the results of randomized clinical trials. Thus, the hurdles that currently limit direct comparisons of these two approaches in clinical trials, especially those related to insurance coverage, should be removed. Herein, we review several randomized trials of charged-particle therapies that are ongoing, with results that will enable selective delivery to patients who are most likely to benefit from them. We also discuss aspects related to radiobiology, including the immune response and hypoxia, which will need to be taken into consideration in future randomized trials to fully exploit the potential of charged particles.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicElementary ParticlesHumansNeoplasmsRadiation Oncology

Identifiers

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.