Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29344136›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2017

Clinical outcome of extended-field irradiation vs. pelvic irradiation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer.

Yi Ouyang, Yanhong Wang, Kai Chen, Xinping Cao, Yiming Zeng

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yi OuyangDepartment of Radiotherapy, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510060, P.R. China.
Yanhong WangDepartment of Radiotherapy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian 362000, P.R. China.
Kai ChenDepartment of Radiotherapy, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510060, P.R. China.
Xinping CaoDepartment of Radiotherapy, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510060, P.R. China.
Yiming ZengRespiratory Department, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian 362000, P.R. China.
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaSecond Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the distinctions in survival and toxicity between patients with cervical cancer with common iliac node or para-aortic node involvement, who were treated with extended-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (EF-IMRT) and patients with or without lower involved pelvic nodes, who were treated with pelvic IMRT. A total of 55 patients treated with EF-IMRT and 52 patients treated with pelvic IMRT at the Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center (Guangzhou, China) were retrospectively analyzed. Patients treated with EF-IMRT had the highest level of lymph node involvement to the para-aortic or common iliac nodes, while patients treated with pelvic IMRT had no para-aortic or common iliac nodes involved (P<0.001). The median follow-up time was 29.5 months. The 3-year overall survival (OS) rates of EF-IMRT and pelvic IMRT were 79.4 and 82.3% (P=0.45), respectively, and the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates of EF-IMRT and pelvic IMRT were 61.0 and 73.7% (P=0.55), respectively. Cox's regression analysis revealed that EF irradiation was a protective prognostic factor for OS and DFS. A total of 16 patients in the EF-IMRT group and 13 patients in the pelvic IMRT group experienced treatment failure (P=0.67), with the patterns of failure being the same for the two groups (P=0.88). The cumulative incidence of grade 3 and 4 acute toxicities in the EF-IMRT group was 34.5%, in comparison with 19.2% in the pelvic group (P=0.048). The results of the present study suggest that patients with cervical cancer with grossly involved common iliac or para-aortic nodes should be electively subjected to EF irradiation to improve the survival and alter patterns of recurrence. Notably, EF irradiation delivered via IMRT exhibits an increased toxicity incidence, however, this remains within an acceptable range.

Indexed as

cervical cancerextended-field radiotherapyintensity-modulated radiotherapypelvic radiotherapysurvivaltoxicity

Identifiers

PMID29344136
PMCPMC5754842
OpenAlexW2756862481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.