Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31357959›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

Have we achieved adequate recommendations for target volume definitions in anal cancer? A PET imaging based patterns of failure analysis in the context of established contouring guidelines.

Hendrik Dapper, Kilian Schiller, Stefan Münch, Jan C Peeken, Kai Borm, Wolfgang Weber, Stephanie E Combs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Value of PET imaging for radiation therapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Treatment outcome after radiochemotherapy in anal cancer patients staged withClinical and translational radiation oncology · 2020
    Article
  17. Additional Value of 2-[Journal of clinical medicine · 2020
    Article
  18. Patterns of recurrence in anal cancer: a detailed analysis.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020
    Article
  19. Recent advances of PET imaging in clinical radiation oncology.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020
    Review
  20. Dosimetric comparison of organs at risk using different contouring guidelines for definition of the clinical target volume in anal cancer.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2020
    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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hendrik DapperDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. hendrik-dapper@gmx.de.
Kilian SchillerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Stefan MünchDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Jan C PeekenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Kai BormDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Wolfgang WeberDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Stephanie E CombsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Klinikum rechts der Isar · DEDeutschen Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung · DEGerman Marine Research Consortium · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are different contouring guidelines for the clinical target volume (CTV) in anal cancer (AC) which vary concerning recommendations for radiation margins in different anatomical regions, especially on inguinal site. PET imaging has become more important in primary staging of AC as a very sensitive method to detect lymph node (LN) metastases. Using PET imaging, we evaluated patterns of LN spread, and examined the differences of the respective contouring guidelines on the basis of our results.

methodsWe carried out a retrospective study of thirty-seven AC patients treated with chemoradiation (CRT) who underwent FDG-PET imaging for primary staging in our department between 2011 and 2018. Patients showing PET positive LN were included in this analysis. Using a color code, LN metastases of all patients were delineated on a template with "standard anatomy" and were divided indicating whether their location was in- or out-field of the standard CTV as recommended by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) or the British National Guidance (BNG). Furthermore, a detailed analysis of the location of LN of the inguinal region was performed.

resultsTwenty-two out of thirty-seven AC patients with pre-treatment PET imaging had PET positive LN metastases, accumulating to a total of 154 LN. The most commonly affected anatomical region was inguinal (49 LN, 32%). All para-rectal, external/internal iliac, and pre-sacral LN were covered by the recommended CTVs of the three different guidelines. Of forty-nine involved inguinal LN, fourteen (29%), seven (14%) and five (10%) were situated outside of the recommended CTVs by RTOG, AGITG and BNG. Inguinal LN could be located up to 5.7 cm inferiorly to the femoral saphenous junction and 2.8 cm medial or laterally to the big femoral vessels.

conclusionPelvis-related, various recommendations are largely consistent, and all LN are covered by the recommended CTVs. LN "misses" appear generally cranially (common iliac or para-aortic) or caudally (inguinal) to the recommended CTVs. The established guidelines differ significantly, particular regarding the inguinal region. Based on our results, we presented our suggestions for CTV definition of the inguinal region. LN involvement of a larger number of patients should be investigated to enable final recommendations.

Indexed as

Tumor BurdenAnus NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Squamous CellChemoradiotherapyFemaleHumansIliac ArteryInguinal CanalLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingPelvisPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAnal cancerContouring guidelinesInguinal contouring recommendationsPET-CTPET-MRIRadiation therapyTarget volume

Identifiers

PMID31357959
PMCPMC6664500
OpenAlexW2966274183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.