Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36100905›Full record

SynthesisRadiation oncology (London, England)2022

Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Kei Ito, Tetsuo Saito, Naoki Nakamura, Nobuki Imano, Peter Hoskin

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. An Update on the Management of Bone Metastases.Current oncology reports · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Percent of remaining life on palliative radiation treatment: solely a function of fractionation?Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023
    Article
  17. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Kei ItoDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan.
Tetsuo SaitoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Arao Municipal Hospital, 2600, Arao, Arao-shi, Kumamoto, 864-0041, Japan. tetsuosaito1977@gmail.com.
Naoki NakamuraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Miyamae Ward, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, 216-8511, Japan.
Nobuki ImanoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami Ward, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Peter HoskinMount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, HA6 2RN, UK.
Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute · GBHiroshima University · JPSt. Marianna University School of Medicine · JPTokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital · JP

Funding

the Health Labor Sciences Research Grant from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare of Japan 19EA1010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a promising approach in treating painful bone metastases. However, the superiority of SBRT over conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted to compare SBRT and cEBRT for the treatment of bone metastases.

methodsA search was conducted using PubMed on January 22, 2022, with the following inclusion criteria: (i) randomised controlled trials comparing SBRT with cEBRT for bone metastases and (ii) endpoint including pain response. Effect sizes across studies were pooled using random-effects models in a meta-analysis of risk ratios.

resultsA total of 1246 articles were screened, with 7 articles comprising 964 patients (522 and 442 patients in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively) meeting the inclusion criteria. The overall pain response (OR) rates of bone metastases at 3 months were 45% and 36% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively. The present analyses showed no significant difference between the two groups. In four studies included for the calculation of OR rates of spinal metastases at three months, the OR rates were 40% and 35% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of severe adverse effects and health-related quality of life outcomes were comparable between the two arms.

conclusionsThe superiority of SBRT over cEBRT for pain palliation in bone metastases was not confirmed in this meta-analysis. Although SBRT is a standard of care for bone metastases, patients receiving SBRT should be selected appropriately.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsRadiosurgeryHumansPainQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicMeta-analysisMetastasisQuality of lifeRandomised controlled trialStereotactic body radiotherapySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36100905
PMCPMC9472415
OpenAlexW4295419309

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.