ReviewJournal of oncology2018
Treatment-Related Adverse Effects in Lung Cancer Patients after Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy.
Review in Journal of oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-Time Dose-Guided Radiation Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2025Review
- Enhancing dosimetric precision in the treatment of cancerous tumors: Gamma Index validation and Monte Carlo simulations of 6 and 12 megavoltage photon beams from Varian Medical linear accelerators.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- The Bile Acid Membrane Receptor TGR5 in Cancer: Friend or Foe?Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Assessing organ at risk position variation and its impact on delivered dose in kidney SABR.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2022Article
- Stereotactic radiotherapy for lung oligometastases.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022Review
- Interstitial single fraction brachytherapy for malignant pulmonary tumours.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung cancer is a disease which, despite the advancements in treatment, still has a very poor 5-year survival rate. Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) is a highly advanced, sophisticated, and safe treatment which allows patients with early stage lung cancer to be treated effectively without invasive procedures and with excellent clinical outcomes. Avoiding surgery minimises morbidity and recovery time, bettering patients' quality of life. Furthermore, SABR allows patients unsuitable for surgery to still undergo curative treatment.
methodsWe aimed to review SABR-related normal tissue toxicities reported in the literature. While many studies assess safety, clinical efficacy, and disease control of SABR for lung cancer, the number of comprehensive reviews that analyse SABR-related side-effects is scarce. This integrative review summarises the toxicities reported in literature based on published clinical trials and tumour location (central or peripheral tumours) for available SABR techniques. Given that the majority of the clinical studies did not report on the statistical significance (e.g.,
resultsWhen comparing lobectomy and SABR in phase III trials, surgery resulted in increased procedure-related morbidity. In phase II trials, very few studies showed high grade toxicities/fatalities as a result of SABR for lung cancer. Gross target volume size was a significant predictor of toxicity. An ipsilateral mean lung dose larger than 9 Gy was significantly associated with radiation pneumonitis.
conclusionsBased on the studies reviewed SABR is a safe treatment technique for lung cancer; however, further well-designed phase III randomised clinical trials are required to produce timely conclusive results and to enable their comparison and statistical analysis.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.