Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29195507›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2017

Expert consensus on re-irradiation for recurrent glioma.

Andra V Krauze, Albert Attia, Steve Braunstein, Michael Chan, Stephanie E Combs, Rainer Fietkau, John Fiveash, John Flickinger, Anca Grosu, Steven Howard and 6 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readCase ReportsConsensus Statement
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Re-irradiation for high-grade gliomas: Has anything changed?World journal of clinical oncology · 2021
    Review
  11. High-dose salvage re-irradiation for recurrent/progressive adult diffuse glioma: healing or hurting?Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Andra V KrauzeRadiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA. andra.oprea@gmail.com.
Albert AttiaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Steve BraunsteinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Michael ChanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Stephanie E CombsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
Rainer FietkauDepartment of Radiotherapy Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
John FiveashDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
John FlickingerUPMC Presbyterian-Shadyside, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Anca GrosuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Steven HowardDepartment of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Carsten NiederDepartment of Oncology and Palliative Medicine, Hospital Trust, 8092, Bodø, Nordland, Norway.
Maximilian NiyaziDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Lindsay RoweRadiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Dee Dee SmartRadiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Christina TsienDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Kevin CamphausenRadiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.

Funding

Pre-clinical Development of Radiation Sensitizers for Patients with GlioblastomaZIASC010372 · NCI · DIVISION OF CLINICAL SCIENCES - NCI · PI CAMPHAUSEN, KEVIN · 2009 to 2025
$12.0M
Centers for Cancer Research #ZIASC 010372Intramural NIH HHS ZIA SC010372
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate radiation oncologists' opinions on important considerations to offering re-irradiation (re-RT) as a treatment option for recurrent glioma. MATERIALS AND

methodsA survey was conducted with 13 radiation oncologists involved in the care of central nervous system tumor patients. The survey was comprised of 49 questions divided into 2 domains: a demographic section (10 questions) and a case section (5 re-RT cases with 5 to 6 questions representing one or several re-RT treatment dilemmas as may be encountered in the clinic). Respondents were asked to rate the relevance of various factors to offering re-RT, respond to the cases with a decision to offer re-RT vs. not, volume to be treated, margins to be employed, dose/fractionation suggested and any additional comments with respect to rationale in each scenario.

resultsSixty nine percent of responders have been practicing for greater than 10 years and 61% have re-RT 20 to 100 patients to date, with 54% seeing 2-5 re-RT cases per month and retreating 1-2 patients per month. Recurrent tumor volume, time since previous radiation therapy, previously administered dose to organs at risk and patient performance status were rated by the majority of responders (85%, 92%, 77%, and 69% respectively) as extremely relevant or very relevant to offering re-RT as an option.

conclusionThe experts' practice of re-RT is still heterogeneous, reflecting the paucity of high-quality prospective data available for decision-making. Nevertheless, practicing radiation oncologists can support own decisions by referring to the cases found suitable for re-RT in this survey.

Indexed as

ConsensusRe-IrradiationAdultAgedDose Fractionation, RadiationExpert TestimonyGliomaHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Surveys and QuestionnairesTumor Burden

Identifiers

PMID29195507
PMCPMC5709844

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.