ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2017
Surveillance of anal carcinoma after radiochemotherapy : A retrospective analysis of 80 patients.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improved treatment outcome and lower skin toxicity with intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs. 3D conventional radiotherapy in anal cancer.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2020Article
- Chemoradiotherapy with and without deep regional hyperthermia for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurveillance after radiochemotherapy of anal carcinoma (ACa) with curative intent is recommended in guidelines, but data regarding the effectiveness of follow-up are lacking. We aimed to assess the performance of an ACa surveillance program in a real-life setting.
methodsWe retrospectively summarized clinical history, physical findings, and follow-up investigations (endoanal ultrasound, endoscopy, CT scan) obtained during 42 months (±27 months) from 80 patients after radiochemotherapy of ACa.
resultsIn 7/80 cases (8.8%) an incomplete response to therapy was identified at or before the 6‑month time point after the end of treatment; 4 of the 7 cases were identified during scheduled follow-up. In 6 cases (7.5%), recurrent disease was found after the 6‑month time point. Recurrence was systemic in 5 cases and local/inguinal in 1 case. In 3 of the 6 cases (50%), recurrence was identified during scheduled follow-up. In one asymptomatic patient, a single liver metastasis was detected during scheduled follow-up and the patient remains free of disease 19 months after surgery. Surveillance resulted in a high rate of false-positive findings (70 findings in 604 investigations), of which only 14 could be confirmed.
conclusionScheduled follow-up after treatment of ACa detected recurrent disease at systemic sites, enabling potentially curative treatment in a single case. Effectiveness of abdominal imaging during follow-up after ACa treatment should be tested in a prospective trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28653119What 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.