Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28662680›Full record

SynthesisRadiation oncology (London, England)2017

Systematic review of patient reported quality of life following stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for primary and metastatic liver cancer.

Adam Mutsaers, Jeffrey Greenspoon, Cindy Walker-Dilks, Anand Swaminath

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Unravelling oligometastatic disease from the perspective of radiation and medical oncology. Part II: prostate cancer and colorectal cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in a multimodal treatment setting.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Adam MutsaersDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4 L8, Canada. adam.mutsaers@medportal.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2185-6874
Jeffrey GreenspoonJuravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Cindy Walker-DilksProgram in Evidence Based Care, McMaster University, Juravinski Hospital, 60 (G) Wing, 2nd Floor, 711 Concession Street, Hamilton, ON, L8V 1C3, Canada.
Anand SwaminathJuravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Juravinski Cancer Centre · CAJuravinski Hospital · CAMcMaster University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a safe and effective modality in patients with liver cancer who are ineligible for other local therapies. However SABR is not current standard of practice and requires further validation. Patient reported quality of life (QOL) is key to this validation, yet no systematic reviews to date have been performed to analyse QOL following liver SABR. QOL is a critical part of therapy evaluation, particularly in disease states with short life expectancy. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of QOL outcomes for liver SABR. MATERIALS AND

methodsMEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1996 to October 2015 were queried to obtain English language studies analysing QOL following liver SABR. Included studies described patient-reported QOL as either a primary or secondary endpoint, and analysed QOL change over time. Studies were screened, and relevant data were abstracted and analysed.

resultsOf 2181 initially screened studies, 5 met all inclusion criteria. Extracted studies included a total of 392 eligible patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, liver metastases and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Four studies were prospective in design, and only one study was a conference abstract. Extracted studies were heterogeneous in dose prescription used (11-70 Gy in 3-30 fractions), in addition to reported QOL metrics (EORTC QLQ C-15 PAL,/C-30/LM-21, EuroQol 5D, FACT-Hep, FLIC) and final endpoints (range 6 weeks to 12 months). Despite this there were few statistically significant declines in QOL scores following SABR. Four studies demonstrated transient fatigue in the first 1-4 weeks, while 2 studies showed transient worsening of appetite at 1 month. In all but one instance (loss of appetite at 6 weeks), levels returned to insignificant difference baseline by the final endpoints. All studies showed no significant QOL decline in any domain at their respective endpoints. In studies with overlapping QOL tools, estimates of 3-month post SABR global QOL were similar.

conclusionResults of this systematic review demonstrate well-preserved post liver SABR QOL. These findings strengthen the argument for liver SABR, and should aim to support future comparative effectiveness trials with other local modalities including surgery, chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation, with a focus on QOL outcomes as an important endpoint.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeRadiosurgeryCarcinoma, HepatocellularHumansLiver NeoplasmsPrognosisHepatocellular carcinomaLiver metastasesQOLQuality of lifeSABRSBRTStereotacticSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28662680
PMCPMC5492951
OpenAlexW2726327114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.