Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29370985›Full record

SynthesisRadiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology2018

Skin CanceR Brachytherapy vs External beam radiation therapy (SCRiBE) meta-analysis.

Nicholas G Zaorsky, Charles T Lee, Eddie Zhang, Thomas J Galloway

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. S2k guideline basal cell carcinoma of the skin (update 2023).Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Tailored contact brachytherapy for challenging facial basal cell carcinomas: clinical results of 3D printing technology implementation.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Additive manufacturing (3D printing) in superficial brachytherapy.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicholas G ZaorskyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, USA. Electronic address: nicholaszaorsky@gmail.com.
Charles T LeeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, USA.
Eddie ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, USA.
Thomas J GallowayDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, USA.
Fox Chase Cancer Center · US

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Eric Andrew Ross · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeTo compare cosmesis and local recurrence (LR) of definitive external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) vs brachytherapy (BT) for indolent basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin. MATERIALS AND

methodsStudies including patients with T1-2 N0 SCCs/BCCs treated with definitive EBRT/BT and ≥10 months follow-up were analyzed. The primary endpoint was post-treatment cosmesis, categorized as "good," "fair," or "poor." The secondary endpoint was LR. Mixed effects regression models were used to estimate weighted linear relationships between biologically equivalent doses with α/β = 3 (BED

resultsA total of 9965 patients received EBRT and 553 received BT across 24 studies. Mean age was 73 years, median follow-up was 36 months, and median dose was 45 Gy/10 fractions at 4.4 Gy/fraction. At BED

conclusionBT has favorable cosmesis over EBRT for skin SCCs/BCCs at common fractionation regimens. Prospective studies comparing EBRT vs BT are warranted.

Indexed as

AgedBasal Cell CarcinomaBrachytherapyCarcinoma, Squamous CellDose Fractionation, RadiationHumansRadiotherapy DosageSkin NeoplasmsBasal cell carcinomaBrachytherapyComparative effectiveness researchExternal beam radiation therapyMeta-analysisSkin cancerSquamous cell carcinomaSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29370985
PMCPMC7548033
OpenAlexW2787567671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.