ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2019
Template-assisted
Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-tumor effect of local injectable hydrogel-loaded endostatin alone and in combination with radiotherapy for lung cancer.Drug delivery · 2021Article
- Stereotactic Ablative Brachytherapy: Recent Advances in Optimization of Radiobiological Cancer Therapy.Cancers · 2021Review
- Iodine-125 seed implantation treatment of lung metastases < 2.5 cm using 5-ml syringe as a guide.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate safety, feasibility, and efficacy of template-assisted MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients with pathologically confirmed operable peripheral NSCLC, who underwent template-assisted SABT (30 Gy delivered in one fraction) and were scheduled for tumor resection 4-6 weeks after SABT were included in this study. The perioperative adverse reactions of SABT were recorded to evaluate safety and feasibility of SABT for neoadjuvant therapy. Dosimetric data from both simulated and actual plans were collected and compared. Imaging with
resultsPatients did not experience any serious adverse events. None of the patients had a delay in receiving surgery. After 4-6 weeks, the indicators for the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy significantly decreased in all patients: gross tumor volume (
conclusionsThe efficacy of template-assisted SABT for neoadjuvant therapy was significant in operable peripheral NSCLC. Moreover, no serious adverse reactions were observed; when the coplanar template guidance technique was applied, dosimetric parameters were in good agreement between the actual SABT plan and the preoperative simulated plan.
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.