ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2017
Clinical outcome and dose volume evaluation in patients who undergo brachytherapy for angiosarcoma of the scalp and face.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Clinical outcomes following high-dose-rate surface applicator brachytherapy for angiosarcoma of scalp and face.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2021Article
- Proton Versus Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy: First Dosimetric Comparison for Total Scalp Irradiation.International journal of particle therapy · 2020Article
- Angiosarcoma of the Scalp and Face: A Dosimetric Comparison of HDR Surface Applicator Brachytherapy and VMAT.Sarcoma · 2020Article
- Individual multi-catheter mould technique in high-dose-rate brachytherapy - personalized approach in treating multifocal angiosarcoma of the face.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2019Article
- Hair disorders in cancer survivors.Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study was conducted to retrospectively evaluate survival and local control with definitive brachytherapy in patients with cutaneous angiosarcoma of the scalp and/or face, and to determine the optimal radiation dose and irradiated volume. Between November, 2009 and January, 2015, 9 consecutive patients with histologically proven angiosarcoma of the scalp and/or face who received image-guided brachytherapy were retrospectively evaluated. The median age of the patients was 83.4 years (range, 67.7-91.9 years). Of the 9 patients, 8 had no lymph node metastasis and 1 patient had cervical lymph node metastasis. The patients were irradiated with a dose of 3 Gy three times per week for varying lengths of time; 4 patients received a total dose of 60 Gy, 1 received 48 Gy and the 4 remaining patients received 45 Gy. The patient who received 48 Gy also underwent additional electron therapy of 16 Gy in 8 fractions. The overall survival, progression-free survival and local progression-free rates at 3 years were 50.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 15.6-78.1%], 37.0% (95% CI: 6.8-69.3%) and 77.8% (95% CI: 36.5-93.9%), respectively. The local progression-free rate in the 4 patients who received a total of ≥60 Gy was statistically significantly better compared with that in the 5 patients who received a dose of <60 Gy (P=0.027). A total of 7 patients had grade 2 radiation dermatitis, whereas the remaining 2 patients had grade 3 dermatitis. All the patients had grade 2 alopecia. Local disease control achieved by radiotherapy resulted in higher survival. Therefore, prescribing ≥60 Gy in 20 fractions for the gross tumor volume is recommended for angiosarcoma of the scalp and face.
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.