Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34694581›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology2021

Hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal vein thrombosis treated with robotic radiosurgery: Interim results of a prospective study.

Debnarayan Dutta, Tushar Tatineni, Sreenija Yarlagadda, Ajinkya Gupte, Sruthi K Reddy, Ram Madhavan, Haridas Nair, Ajay Sasidharan, Rajesh Kannan, Shibu G Pottayil and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Equity in Radiation Oncology Trials: from Knowledge Generation to Clinical Translation.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2022
    Article
  8. Editorial commentary on Indian Journal of Gastroenterology-July-August 2021.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Debnarayan DuttaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India. duttadeb07@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1513-391X
Tushar TatineniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Sreenija YarlagaddaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Ajinkya GupteDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Sruthi K ReddyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Ram MadhavanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Haridas NairDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Ajay SasidharanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Rajesh KannanDepartment of Radiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Shibu G PottayilDepartment of Radiology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Raghavendra HollaDepartment of Medical Physics, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Surendran SudhindranDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Kochi, 682 041, India.
Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is a prospective study evaluating the role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with CyberKnife (CK) in Indian patients suffering from hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis (HCC-PVT).

methodsPatients with inoperable HCC-PVT, good performance score (PS), and liver function are accrued for treatment on CK (version M6) and planned with Multiplan (iDMS V2.0). Triple-phase contrast computed tomography (CT) scan was done for contouring, and the gross tumor volume (GTV) included contrast-enhancing mass within main portal vein and adjacent parenchymal disease. Dose prescription was as per-risk stratification protocol (22-50 Gy in 5 fractions) while achieving the constraints of mean liver dose <15 Gy, 800 cc liver <8 Gy, and the duodenum max of ≤24 Gy).

resultsSeventy-two HCC-PVT accrued till date (mean age 63 years [38-76 years], 96% male; Child-Pugh [CP] A 84%, B 9%; Barcelona-Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] C 96%; PS0-1: 80%, Karnofsky performance score [KPS]>70: 88%; co-morbidities 42%; infective 12%, alcohol intake 31%, adjuvant sorafenib 39%). CP scores 5, 6, 7, and 8 were in 35%, 32%, 8%, and 18%, respectively. Focal disease with portal vein thrombus (PVT) in 21%, liver involvement >50% and <50% in 46% and 32%. Liver cancer study group of Japan staging-based portal vein invasion VP2, VP3, and VP4 in 22%, 29%, and 40%. Cancer of the Liver Italian Programm (CLIP) scores 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 were in 8%, 26%, 31%, 26%, and 7%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 7.3 months (median 6 months, standard deviation [SD] 6; range 3-30 months). Mean actuarial overall survival (OS) was 11.4 months (SE 1.587; 95% CI: 8-14.2 months). Six months and 12 months actuarial OS 55% and 38%, respectively. At last follow-up, 25/69 (36%) were alive and 44/69 (64%) were dead. Among 54 patients evaluated for response assessment, 23 (30%) had radiological confirmed PVT response, 1 (3%) had response of IVC thrombus, and 30 (42%) had no or minimal response to SBRT. Actuarial OS in responders and non-responders were 14.4 months (95% CI 9.4-19.2) and 7.4 months (95% CI 4.9-9.7), p-value: 0.022. Six and 12 months survival in responders and non-responders were 65.7% and 37% and 49% and 24.6%, respectively. Post-SBRT, 4 (12%) patients underwent transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) 3 patients (8%) and 1 patient (4%) transarterial radioembolization (TARE). Post-CK, (<4 weeks) 2 patients (4%) had decompensation.

conclusionsPVT response or recanalization after SBRT is a statistically significant prognostic factor for survival function in HCC-PVT.

Indexed as

Chemoembolization, TherapeuticRadiosurgeryRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultCarcinoma, HepatocellularFemaleHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPortal VeinProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeVenous ThrombosisChild-Pugh scoreCLIPCyberKnifeRadiation therapyRadiosurgeryRecanalizationRobotic radiosurgeryStereotactic ablative radiotherapyStereotactic body radiotherapySurvival

Identifiers

PMID34694581
OpenAlexW3210239996

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.