Optimal and actual rates of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) utilisation for primary lung cancer in Australia.

Wsam Ghandourh, Lois Holloway, Vikneswary Batumalai, Phillip Chlap, Matthew Field, Susannah Jacob

Open access · goldAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

3citing papers in PubMed

0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

Mid-ventilation PTV approach for stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy in stage I non-small-cell lung carcinoma: Implementation of a single-system workflow.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026
Article
Setting the Benchmark: Patterns of Care and Outcomes for Early-stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Queensland, Australia, 2011-2017.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2025
Article
Utilisation of radiotherapy in lung cancer: A scoping narrative literature review with a focus on the introduction of evidence-based therapeutic approaches in Europe.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2024
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Wsam GhandourhSouth Western Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Lois HollowaySouth Western Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Vikneswary BatumalaiSouth Western Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Phillip ChlapSouth Western Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Matthew FieldSouth Western Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Susannah JacobSouth Western Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

UNSW Sydney · AUCancer Australia · AUIngham Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Radiotherapy utilisation rates considerably vary across different countries and service providers, highlighting the need to establish reliable benchmarks against which utilisation rates can be assessed. Here, optimal utilisation rates of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) for lung cancer are estimated and compared against actual utilisation rates to identify potential shortfalls in service provision. Materials and Methods: An evidence-based optimal utilisation model was constructed after reviewing practice guidelines and identifying indications for lung SABR based on the best available evidence. The proportions of patients likely to develop each indication were obtained, whenever possible, from Australian population-based studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed to account for variations in epidemiological data. Practice pattern studies were reviewed to obtain actual utilisation rates. Results: A total of 6% of all lung cancer patients were estimated to optimally require SABR at least once during the course of their illness (95% CI: 4-6%). Optimal utilisation rates were estimated to be 32% for stage I and 10% for stage II NSCLC. Actual utilisation rates for stage I NSCLC varied between 6 and 20%. For patients with inoperable stage I, 27-74% received SABR compared to the estimated optimal rate of 82%. Conclusion: The estimated optimal SABR utilisation rates for lung cancer can serve as useful benchmarks to highlight gaps in service delivery and help plan for more adequate and efficient provision of care. The model can be easily modified to determine optimal utilisation rates in other populations or updated to reflect any changes in practice guidelines or epidemiological data.

Indexed as

Lung SABROptimal utilisationPractice patternsUtilisation gaps

Identifiers

PMID35282142

DOI10.1016/j.ctro.2022.03.001

PMCPMC8907547

OpenAlexW4220950641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

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.