ArticleEBioMedicine2019
RILA blood biomarker as a predictor of radiation-induced sarcoma in a matched cohort study.
Article in EBioMedicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Cellular Radiosensitivity to Precision Radiotherapy: Integrating Functional Assays, Genomics, and Clinical Modeling.Cancers · 2026Review
- Article
- The Normal, the Radiosensitive, and the Ataxic in the Era of Precision Radiotherapy: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2022Review
- Molecular Biomarkers in Cancer.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Improving Patients' Life Quality after Radiotherapy Treatment by Predicting Late Toxicities.Cancers · 2022Review
- Radiation-induced sarcomas: A single referral cancer center experience and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Review
- Functional assay to guide precision radiotherapy by assessing individual patient radiosensitivity.EBioMedicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 13 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRadiation-induced sarcoma (RIS) is a rare but serious event. Its occurrence has been discussed during the implementation of new radiation techniques and justified appropriate radioprotection requirements. New approaches targeting intrinsic radio-sensitivity have been described, such as radiation-induced CD8 T-lymphocyte apoptosis (RILA) able to predict late radio-induced toxicities. We studied the role of RILA as a predisposing factor for RIS as a late adverse event following radiation therapy (RT). PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this prospective biological study, a total of 120 patients diagnosed with RIS were matched with 240 control patients with cancer other than sarcoma, for age, sex, primary tumor location and delay after radiation. RILA was prospectively assessed from blood samples using flow cytometry.
resultsThree hundred and forty-seven patients were analyzed (118 RIS patients and 229 matched control patients). A majority (74%) were initially treated by RT for breast cancer. The mean RT dose was comparable with a similar mean (± standard deviation) for RIS (53.7 ± 16.0 Gy) and control patients (57.1 ± 15.1 Gy) (p = .053). Median RILA values were significantly lower in RIS than in control patients with respectively 18.5% [5.5-55.7] and 22.3% [3.8-52.2] (p = .0008). Thus, patients with a RILA >21.3% are less likely to develop RIS (p < .0001, OR: 0.358, 95%CI [0.221-0.599].
conclusionRILA is a promising indicator to predict an individual risk of developing RIS. Our results should be followed up and compared with molecular and genomic testing in order to better identify patients at risk. A dedicated strategy could be developed to define and inform high-risk patients who require a specific approach for primary tumor treatment and long term follow-up.
Indexed as
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.