Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29290248›Full record

ArticleLung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2018

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for isolated hilar and mediastinal non-small cell lung cancers.

Zachary D Horne, Adam H Richman, Michael J Dohopolski, David A Clump, Steven A Burton, Dwight E Heron

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Developments in radiation techniques for thoracic malignancies.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. The evolving toxicity profile of SBRT for lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2019
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zachary D HorneDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. Electronic address: herond2@upmc.edu.
Adam H RichmanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Michael J DohopolskiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
David A ClumpDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Steven A BurtonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Dwight E HeronDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe seminal phase II trial for pulmonary stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) suggested that SBRT to central lesions resulted in unacceptable toxicity. Alternative dose-fractionation schemes have been proposed which may improve safety without compromise of efficacy. We report our institutional outcomes of SBRT for hilar/mediastinal non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective review was conducted of patients with NSCLC in a hilar or mediastinal nodal station which was treated with SBRT. Patients presented with a lesion involving the hilum or mediastinum from primary or oligorecurrent NSCLC. Kaplan-Meier with log-rank testing and Cox analysis were utilized for outcomes analysis.

resultsFrom 2008-2015, 40 patients with median age of 70 were treated with SBRT for primary/oligorecurrent hilar/mediastinal NSCLC with median follow-up of 16.4 months. 85% presented with oligorecurrent disease at a median of 22.4 months following definitive therapy. The aortico-pulmonary window was the target in 40%, the hilum in 25%, lower paratracheal in 20%, subcarinal in 10%, and prevascular in 5%. The median dose was 48Gy in 4 fractions (range: 35-48Gy in 4-5 fractions). Median overall (OS) and progression-free (PFS) survivals were 22.7 and 13.1 months, respectively. Two-year local control was 87.7% and not significantly different between hilar and mediastinal targets. Median PFS was significantly improved in patients with hilar vs mediastinal nodal targets: 33.3 vs 8.4 months, respectively (p=0.031). OS was not statistically different between hilar and mediastinal targets (p=0.359). On multivariable analysis, hilar vs mediastinal target predicted for PFS (HR 3.045 95%CI [1.044-8.833], p=0.042), as did shorter time to presentation in patients with oligorecurrence (HR 0.983 [95%CI 0.967-1.000], p=0.049). Acute grade 3+ morbidity was seen in 3 patients (hemoptysis, pericardial/pleural effusion, heart failure) and late grade 3+ morbidity (hemoptysis) in 1 patient.

conclusionHilar/mediastinal SBRT appears to be a safe technique for the local control of isolated nodal disease with limited toxicity from the fractionation schemes utilized.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungFemaleHemoptysisHumansLung NeoplasmsLymph NodesMaleMediastinumMiddle AgedRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy DosageRetrospective StudiesSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.