Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29904736›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Lung cancer specialists' opinions on treatment for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: A multidisciplinary survey.

Austin Lammers, Timur Mitin, Drew Moghanaki, Charles R Thomas, Robert Timmerman, Sara E Golden, Sujata Thakurta, Rafal Dziadziuszko, Christopher G Slatore

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Austin LammersDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Timur MitinDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University-Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon.
Drew MoghanakiRadiation Oncology Service, Hunter Holmes McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia.
Charles R ThomasDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University-Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon.
Robert TimmermanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Sara E GoldenVA Portland Health Care System, Health Services Research & Development, Portland Oregon.
Sujata ThakurtaVA Portland Health Care System, Health Services Research & Development, Portland Oregon.
Rafal DziadziuszkoDepartment of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdansk, Poland.
Christopher G SlatoreVA Portland Health Care System, Health Services Research & Development, Portland Oregon.
Health Services Research & Development · USOregon Health & Science University · USGdańsk Medical University · PLThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe current standard of care for surgically eligible stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is surgical resection, but emerging data suggest that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is potentially as effective as surgery. However, specialist views of the current evidence about SBRT and how they would incorporate a randomized controlled trial (RCT) into practice is unclear. We sought to understand specialist opinions about evidence regarding treatment of stage I NSCLC and how this translates into practice and clinical trial implementation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used a 28-item, web-based survey that invited all participating providers from the American Society for Radiation Oncology, American Thoracic Society Thoracic Oncology Assembly, and the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer to share opinions regarding practice beliefs, treatment of stage I NSCLC, and a clinical trial scenario.

resultsA total of 959 surveys were completed; 64% were from radiation oncologists (ROs) and 49% were from outside the United States. The majority of ROs (80%) reported that current evidence indicates that SBRT has the same or a better benefit compared with surgery for surgically eligible patients with stage I NSCLC; 28% of non-radiation oncologists (NROs) indicated the same (

conclusionsNROs believe that SBRT is much less effective than surgery, contrary to ROs, who believe that they are similar. Most would support an RCT, but NROs would do so less. Changes in surgical practice may be challenging even if an RCT shows better mortality and quality of life with SBRT. These results are helpful in the creation and dissemination of RCTs that are designed to understand this question.

Identifiers

PMID29904736
PMCPMC6000198
OpenAlexW2790907167

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.