Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31772961›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2016

The Evolution of Radiation Therapy for Retinoblastoma: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience.

Ankit Agarwal, Nikhil G Thaker, Bouchra Tawk, Pamela K Allen, David R Grosshans, Cynthia E Herzog, Daniel S Gombos, Anita Mahajan

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of particle therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Update on Retinoblastoma Therapies.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025
    Review
  2. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ankit AgarwalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Nikhil G ThakerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Bouchra TawkMolecular & Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Pamela K AllenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
David R GrosshansDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Cynthia E HerzogDepartment of Pediatrics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Daniel S GombosDepartment of Ophthalmology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Anita MahajanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USGerman Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe role of radiation therapy (RT) for retinoblastoma (Rb) has significantly evolved from first-line to salvage therapy. The objectives of our study were to evaluate efficacy of proton RT (PRT) and other advanced RT techniques for Rb and to observe evolving trends in RT use. MATERIALS AND

methodsAn analysis of patients with Rb who received RT between 1990 and 2012 was conducted. Thirty-nine patients with 70 affected eyes were identified. Of these, 47 eyes were treated with RT with photon or electron RT (ERT), PRT, or brachytherapy (BRT). The clinical history, treatment details, and tumor outcomes were reviewed for all patients.

resultsRadiation therapy was first-line treatment in 14 eyes, second-line in 4, postoperative in 4, and salvage in 25. Median length of follow-up was 8 years for all patients, and 10, 3, and 5 years for ERT, PRT, and BRT, respectively. Overall survival was 97.4%. In total, 16 (34.0%) eyes required enucleation after RT. Median PRT dose was 36 Gy (RBE) (range, 36-45 Gy [RBE]), ERT dose was 45 Gy (range, 36-46 Gy), and BRT dose was 45 Gy (range, 36-45 Gy). A higher proportion of PRT patients (93.8%) than ERT patients (51.9%) were treated in the salvage setting (

conclusionThis study represents a large series of patients treated with PRT, ERT, and BRT for Rb and reports favorable efficacy and toxicity. Patients treated with salvage PRT are typically heavily pretreated and have advanced disease. Despite more advanced disease, patients treated with PRT with lower RT doses achieve comparable salvage and enucleation-free rates to ERT. Chemoreduction followed by focal treatments should be standard of care when clinically feasible, with PRT considered in the salvage setting.

Indexed as

proton therapyretinoblastomasalvage

Identifiers

PMID31772961
PMCPMC6871642
OpenAlexW2177690294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.