Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29704788›Full record

ArticleTranslational oncology2018

Clinical Audit of the Radiotherapy Process in Rectal Cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines and Quality Certification Do Not Avert Variability in Clinical Practice.

M G Torras, E Canals, D Jurado-Bruggeman, S Marín-Borras, M Macià, J Jové, A M Boladeras, C Muñoz-Montplet, J Molero, C Picón and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Exploring disparities in adherence to colorectal cancer clinical practice guidelines and associated survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. IROCA-TES: Improving Quality in Radiation Oncology through Clinical Audits - Training and Education for Standardization.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

15 authors.

M G TorrasClinical Management Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Spain. Electronic address: gtorras@iconcologia.net.
E CanalsRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Girona, Spain.
D Jurado-BruggemanMedical Physics and Radiation Protection Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Girona, Spain.
S Marín-BorrasRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain.
M MaciàRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain.
J JovéRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Badalona, Spain.
A M BoladerasRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain.
C Muñoz-MontpletMedical Physics and Radiation Protection Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Spain.
J MoleroMedical Physics and Radiation Protection Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Badalona, Spain.
C PicónMedical Physics and Radiation Protection Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain.
M PuigdemontHospital Tumor Registry, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Girona, Spain.
L AlisteCatalonian Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Barcelona.
A TorrentsCatalonian Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Barcelona.
F GuedeaRadiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Spain.
J M BorrasCatalonian Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Barcelona; Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Spain; Clinical Sciences Department, IDIBELL, University of Barcelona.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe therapeutic approach to cancer is complex and multidisciplinary. Radiotherapy is among the essential treatments, whether used alone or in conjunction with other therapies. This study reports a clinical audit of the radiotherapy process to assess the process of care, evaluate adherence to agreed protocols and measure the variability to improve therapeutic quality for rectal cancer.

methodsMulticentre retrospective cohort study in a representative sample of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer in the Institut Català d'Oncologia, a comprehensive cancer centre with three different settings. We developed a set of indicators to assess the key areas of the radiotherapy process. The clinical audit consisted of a review of a random sample of 40 clinical histories for each centre.

resultsThe demographic profile, histology and staging of patients were similar between centres. The MRI reports did not include the distance from tumour to mesorectal fascia (rCRM) in 38.3% of the cases. 96.7% of patients received the planned dose, and 57.4% received it at the planned time. Surgery followed neoadjuvant treatment in 96.7% of the patients. Among this group, postoperative CRM was recorded in 65.5% of the cases and was negative in 93.4% of these. With regard to the 34.5% (n = 40) of cases where no CRM value was stated, there were differences between the centres. Mean follow-up was 3.4 (SD 0.6) years, and overall survival at four years was 81.7%.

conclusionsThe audit revealed a suboptimal degree of adherence to clinical practice guidelines. Significant variability between centres exists from a clinical perspective but especially with regard to organization and process.

Identifiers

PMID29704788
PMCPMC6058082

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.