Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29868486›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2018

Clinical Results of Mean GTV Dose Optimized Robotic-Guided Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Lung Tumors.

Rene Baumann, Mark K H Chan, Florian Pyschny, Susanne Stera, Bettina Malzkuhn, Stefan Wurster, Stefan Huttenlocher, Marcella Szücs, Detlef Imhoff, Christian Keller and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Harmonization of dose prescription for lung stereotactic radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Tumor-dose-rate variations during robotic radiosurgery of oligo and multiple brain metastases.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

16 authors.

Rene BaumannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Mark K H ChanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Florian PyschnyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Susanne SteraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Bettina MalzkuhnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Stefan WursterSaphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt und Norddeutschland, Güstrow, Germany.
Stefan HuttenlocherSaphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt und Norddeutschland, Güstrow, Germany.
Marcella SzücsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
Detlef ImhoffDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Christian KellerSaphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt und Norddeutschland, Güstrow, Germany.
Panagiotis BalermpasSaphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt und Norddeutschland, Güstrow, Germany.
Dirk RadesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Claus RödelDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Jürgen DunstDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Guido HildebrandtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
Oliver BlanckDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of gross tumor volume (GTV) mean dose optimized stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for primary and secondary lung tumors with and without robotic real-time motion compensation. MATERIALS AND

methodsBetween 2011 and 2017, 208 patients were treated with SBRT for 111 primary lung tumors and 163 lung metastases with a median GTV of 8.2 cc (0.3-174.0 cc). Monte Carlo dose optimization was performed prioritizing GTV mean dose at the potential cost of planning target volume (PTV) coverage reduction while adhering to safe normal tissue constraints. The median GTV mean biological effective dose (BED)

resultsMedian follow-up was 14.5 months (1-72 months). The 2-year actuarial LC, PFS, and OS rates were 93.1, 43.2, and 62.4%, and the median PFS and OS were 18.0 and 39.8 months, respectively. In univariate analysis, prior local irradiation (hazard ratio (HR) 0.18, confidence interval (CI) 0.05-0.63,

conclusionRobotic SBRT is a safe and effective treatment for lung tumors. Reducing the PTV prescription and keeping high GTV mean doses allowed the reduction of toxicity while maintaining high local tumor control. The use of real-time motion compensation is strongly advised, however, well-performed ITV motion compensation may be used alternatively when direct tracking is not feasible.

Indexed as

CyberKnife robotic radiosurgerygross tumor volume optimizationlung metastasesMonte Carlonon-small cell lung cancerstereotactic body radiation therapy

Identifiers

PMID29868486
PMCPMC5966546

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.