Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29761073›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2018

Radiation Oncology in the 21st Century: Prospective Randomized Trials That Changed Practice… or Didn't!

Kaveh Zakeri, C Norman Coleman, Bhadrasain Vikram

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Kaveh ZakeriRadiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, United States.
C Norman ColemanRadiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, United States.
Bhadrasain VikramRadiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, United States.

Funding

Radiation-induced molecular targetsZIABC010670 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI COLEMAN, NORMAN · 2009 to 2024
$17.3M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a two-part article published in 2009, we discussed the limitations of conventional radiation therapy, the challenges of studying new technologies in radiation oncology, and summarized the state-of-the science for various malignancies (1, 2). Here, we summarize some of the most important prospective, randomized trials that during the intervening years have attempted to improve the tumor control and/or decrease the adverse effects of radiation therapy. For consistency, we have focused here on the null and alternate hypotheses as articulated by the investigators at the onset of each trial, since the outcome of the investigational treatment should be considered clinically significant only if the null hypothesis was rejected. The readers (and patients) are of course free to make their own judgments about the clinical significance of the results when the null hypothesis was not rejected.

Indexed as

adverse eventslocal controlradiation oncologyrandomized trialssurvival

Identifiers

PMID29761073
PMCPMC5937169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.