Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29141597›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2017

In response to Fogarty et al. and why adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy is not recommended routinely.

Mark B Pinkham, Arjun Sahgal, Andrew P Pullar, Matthew C Foote

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 2 countries.

Mark B PinkhamDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4102, Australia. Mark.pinkham@trinity.oxon.org.
Arjun SahgalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew P PullarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4102, Australia.
Matthew C FooteDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4102, Australia.
Princess Alexandra Hospital · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The routine use of adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy (AWBRT) after surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery is now discouraged by a number of international expert panels. Three decades of randomised studies have shown that, although AWBRT improves radiological measures of intracranial disease control, the clinical benefit is unclear and it is also associated with inferior quality of life and neurocognitive function. The number of patients with melanoma in these trials was low, but data suggesting that treatment-related side effects should vary according to histology of the primary malignancy are lacking. For metastatic melanoma, the role of AWBRT to control microscopic disease in the brain is also a less relevant concern because systemic therapies with intracranial activity are now available. Whether AWBRT is useful in select patients deemed at high risk of neurologic death remains undefined.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsClinical Decision-MakingDisease ManagementHumansRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy, AdjuvantBrain metastasesGamma knifeMelanomaRadiosurgeryWhole brain radiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID29141597
PMCPMC5688708
OpenAlexW2768939900

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.