Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30803353›Full record

Trial reportTechnology in cancer research & treatment2019

Efficacy and Tolerability of CyberKnife Stereotactic Robotic Radiotherapy for Primary or Secondary Orbital Lesions: A Single-Center Retrospective Experience.

Isacco Desideri, Giulio Francolini, Giulio Alberto Carta, Vanessa Di Cataldo, Laura Masi, Icro Meattini, Pierluigi Bonomo, Mauro Loi, Daniela Greto, Luca Visani and 6 more

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Technology in cancer research & treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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.

Isacco Desideri1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9880-8387
Giulio Francolini1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Giulio Alberto Carta1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Vanessa Di Cataldo2 CyberKnife Center, Istituto Fiorentino di Cura ed Assistenza, Florence, Italy.
Laura Masi2 CyberKnife Center, Istituto Fiorentino di Cura ed Assistenza, Florence, Italy.
Icro Meattini1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Pierluigi Bonomo1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Mauro Loi1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Daniela Greto1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Luca Visani1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7079-231X
Monica Lo Russo1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Roberta Grassi1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Maria Ausilia Teriaca1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Pietro Garlatti1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Cosimo Nardi3 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiodiagnostic Unit n. 2, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Lorenzo Livi1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Florence, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOrbital lesions are rare, but are likely to become symptomatic and can impact on patients' quality of life. Local control is often difficult to obtain, because of proximity to critical structures. CyberKnife stereotactic robotic radiotherapy could represent a viable treatment option. MATERIALS AND

methodsData on patients treated for intraorbital lesions from solid malignancies were retrospectively collected. All patients underwent treatment with CyberKnife system. We analyzed local control, response rate, symptoms control, progression-free survival and overall survival, acute and late toxicity.

resultsFrom January 2012 to May 2017, 20 treatments on 19 patients were performed, with dose ranging from 24 to 35 Gy in 1 to 5 fractions, prescribed at an average isodose line of 79.5% (range: 78-81). After a mean follow-up of 14.26 months (range: 0-58), overall response rate was 75%, with 2 and 4 patients presenting a partial and complete response, respectively. Mean time to best measured response was 15.16 months (range: 2-58). Thirteen patients were alive, with a local control rate of 79%. Mean time to local progression was 5 months (range: 3-7). Three patients reported improvement in symptoms after treatment. Mean planning target volume dose coverage was 97.2% (range: 93.5-99.7). Mean maximum dose (D max) to eye globe, optic nerve, optic chiasm, and lens was 2380.8 cGy (range: 290-3921), 1982.82 cGy (range: 777.3-2897.8), 713.14 cGy (range: 219.5-2273), and 867.9 cGy (range: 38-3118.5). Four patients presented acute toxicity.

conclusionThis current retrospective series demonstrated that CyberKnife robotic stereotactic radiotherapy is a feasible and tolerable approach for intraorbital lesions.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMaximum Tolerated DoseMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOrbital NeoplasmsPrognosisRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy DosageRetrospective StudiesCyberKnifeorbital lesionsradiotherapyrobotic stereotactic radiotherapysolid malignancies

Identifiers

PMID30803353
PMCPMC6373998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.