ArticleOncotarget2018
Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of pulmonary malignancies: efficacy, safety and predictive factors.
Article in Oncotarget, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of radio-frequency ablation in treating pulmonary ground glass nodule patients and its influence on pulmonary function.African health sciences · 2024Trial
- Percutaneous Cryoablation Under Local Anesthesia for Pulmonary Metastases From Colorectal Cancer: Long-Term Outcomes From a Single-Institution Retrospective Cohort.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Survival after thermal ablation versus wedge resection for stage I non-small cell lung cancer < 1 cm and 1 to 2 cm: evidence from the US SEER database.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024Article
- Advances in study of the sequence of lung tumor biopsy and thermal ablation.Thoracic cancer · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety and predictive factors of RFA of primary and secondary lung malignancies. PATIENTS AND
methods79 patients with 129 primary and secondary lung malignancies were enrolled in a retrospective study. We treated 74 pulmonary metastases of colorectal cancer, 13 malignant melanoma lesions, 13 renal cancer metastases, 5 primary lung malignancies and 24 tumors of other different entities. All patients were considered to be unsuitable candidates for surgery, radiotherapy or chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was local tumor control, secondary endpoints were overall survival, safety and predictive factors, e.g. distance to pleura, vessels and bronchi.
resultsThe median tumor size was 1.2 cm (0.5-3.0 cm). After a median follow-up of 14 months (3-81 months), the LTC was 85.3 %. There were 34 lesions (26.4%) with complete remission, 48 (37.2 %) partial remission, 28 (21.7%) stable disease and 19 lesions (14.7%) with progressive disease. We evaluated an OS of 27 months. Pneumothorax in 19 cases (14.7%) and pleural effusion in 2 cases (1.6 %) were the leading complications (CTCAE, 5 grade III adverse events). The only significant influence regarding the outcome after RFA was the initial tumor size (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.