Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30017104›Full record

ArticleRadiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology2018

Is there a role for salvage re-irradiation in pediatric patients with locoregional recurrent rhabdomyosarcoma? Clinical outcomes from a multi-institutional cohort.

Daniel V Wakefield, Bree R Eaton, Austin P H Dove, Chih-Yang Hsu, Thomas E Merchant, Alberto Pappo, Andrew M Davidoff, Natia Esiashvili, Matthew J Krasin, John T Lucas

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Reirradiation for locally recurrent soft tissue sarcomas: A systematic review.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Relapsed Rhabdomyosarcoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021
    Review
  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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel V WakefieldUniversity of Tennessee West Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Germantown, USA.
Bree R EatonEmory University Winship Cancer Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Atlanta, USA.
Austin P H DoveUniversity of Tennessee, College of Medicine, Memphis, USA.
Chih-Yang HsuSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memphis, USA.
Thomas E MerchantSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memphis, USA.
Alberto PappoSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Pediatric Oncology, Memphis, USA.
Andrew M DavidoffSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Surgery, Memphis, USA.
Natia EsiashviliEmory University Winship Cancer Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Atlanta, USA.
Matthew J KrasinSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memphis, USA.
John T LucasSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memphis, USA. Electronic address: john.lucas@stjude.org.
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital · USWinship Cancer InstituteUniversity of Tennessee at Knoxville · USUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center · US

Funding

Viral Vector Technology (VVTSR)P30CA021765 · NCI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI CHARLES ROBERTS · 1985 to 2026
$166.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA021765
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeLimited data exist detailing the role of salvage reirradiation following local-regional recurrence (LR) in previously irradiated pediatric patients with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe evaluated outcomes and prognostic factors in a multi-institutional cohort of 23 patients with LR-only (N = 19) or LR with distant failure (N = 4) RMS managed with (N = 12) or without (N = 11) re-irradiation who were treated from 1996 to 2012.

resultsAt a median follow-up of 4.6 years from LR, 7 (30%) patients were alive and 5 (22%) had no evidence of disease. Median OS and PFS from LR were 19.3 and 16.9 months, respectively. LFFS and DFFS at 3 years from relapse were 54% and 56%, respectively. Salvage re-irradiation occurred in 12 (52%) patients, with 9 (75%) receiving resection before re-irradiation. Patients classified as low-risk at diagnosis with favorable primary tumor location had improved 3-year PFS 80% (95% CI 51.6-100%) vs. 47.1% (95% CI 27.3-81.2%), p = 0.066], and OS 80% [(95% CI 22.4-100%) vs. 47.1% (95% CI 27.3-81.3%), p = 0.051] following LR. Median LFFS and OS in unirradiated vs. re-irradiated patients was 12.4 vs. 19.6 (p = 0.1) and 18.8 vs. 26.1 months (p = 0.46). No patients experienced ≥grade 4 acute toxicity from re-irradiation. LR failure was a component of cancer-related death in 60% vs. 40% of the unirradiated and re-irradiated group (p = 0.02).

conclusionSalvage re-irradiation appears tolerable with acceptable morbidity and may reduce the risk of subsequent LR as a component of death in patients with LR RMS.

Indexed as

Re-IrradiationAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesFemaleHumansInfantMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRhabdomyosarcomaSalvage TherapyYoung AdultPediatricsRadiationRecurrentRe-irradiationRelapseRhabdomyosarcoma

Identifiers

PMID30017104
PMCPMC8882002
OpenAlexW2883414982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.