Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32026658›Full record

ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2020

Comparing efficacy of high-dose rate brachytherapy versus helical tomotherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer.

Seongmin Kim, Sanghoon Lee, Jin Hwa Hong, Young Je Park, Jae Yun Song, Jae Kwan Lee, Nak Woo Lee

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Seongmin KimGynecologic Cancer Center, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, CHA University Ilsan Medical Center, Goyang, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2541-8879
Sanghoon LeeDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1710-460X
Jin Hwa HongDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6905-5363
Young Je ParkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3213-6207
Jae Yun SongDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. sjyuni105@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2752-5638
Jae Kwan LeeDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3101-6403
Nak Woo LeeDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9405-7574
Korea University · KRGynecologic Oncology Group · US

Funding

Korea Ministry of Environment 2016001360007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveBoost radiation using brachytherapy (BT) is a standard treatment for local disease control in concomitant chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) for advanced cervical cancer. However, it is associated with gastrointestinal and genitourinary complications. Hence, this study investigates the feasibility of helical tomotherapy (HT) as an alternative to BT.

methodsMedical records of patients who underwent CCRT between 2000 and 2017 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with stage IIB-IVA cancers were selected based on the 2009 criteria of The International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. External beam radiation combined with chemotherapy was followed by either BT or HT. The propensity score matching of both groups was calculated using logistic regression analysis. Disease outcomes and treatment-related adverse events were compared between the 2 groups.

resultsThe matched population included 70 BT patients and 35 HT patients. The 5-year progression-free survival rates for BT and HT were 72.6% and 72.5%, respectively (p=0.721). There was no difference in the overall survival rate between the two groups (p=0.203). The presence of acute and chronic gastrointestinal complications was also similar between the groups (p=0.460 and p=0.563, respectively). The chronic genitourinary toxicities were also comparable (p=0.105).

conclusionsHT boost treatment showed comparable disease outcomes with those observed with conventional BT in patients with advanced cervical cancer. HT could be a complementary boost protocol as a single modality or hybrid with BT in selected patients. Further studies with longer follow-up periods are warranted to confirm long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultAgedCisplatinFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeCisplatinBrachytherapyCervical CancerConcomitant ChemoradiotherapyHelical Tomotherapy

Identifiers

PMID32026658
PMCPMC7286762
OpenAlexW2997839336

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.