ArticleScientific reports2022
Influence of radiation treatment technique (IMRT vs. 3D-RT) on acute toxicity and prognostic factors for survival for anal cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From clinic to couch: a pilot study of home-use photobiomodulation for radiation-induced oral mucositis and dermatitis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Trial
- A feasibility study of sexual organ-dose sparing volumetric modulated arc therapy in female low rectal cancer patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Diversity and inclusivity in oncology: A narrative review and orientation for institutional measures in Germany.Translational oncology · 2025Review
- Anal carcinoma - exploring the epidemiology, risk factors, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment.World journal of experimental medicine · 2024Review
- Recent Advances in the Management of Anal Cancer.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared our institutional experience with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-RT) for definitive treatment of primary anal cancer. We performed a single-institution retrospective review of all patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma treated with definitive (chemo) radiotherapy with curative intent from 2004 through 2018. We assessed several prognostic factors in respect to relevant survival endpoints. In addition, acute toxicities were determined and compared between IMRT and 3D-RT patients. This study included 94 patients (58 IMRT, 36 3D-RT). Mean follow up for all patients, for IMRT and 3D-RT patients was 61 months (range 6-176), 46 months (range 6-118), and 85 months (range 6-176), respectively. 5-year overall survival (OS) was 86%, disease-free survival (DFS) was 72%, and colostomy-free survival (CFS) was 75% in the IMRT cohort. In the 3D-RT cohort, OS was 87%, DFS was 71%, and CFS was 81% (all p > 0.05). Male gender and Karnofsky Index (KI) were revealed as independent prognostic factors for 5-year OS (p = 0.017; p = 0.023). UICC stage was an independent prognostic factor for DFS and CFS (p = 0.023; p = 0.042). In addition, the pre-treatment leukocyte count was an independent prognostic factor for CFS (p = 0.042). Acute grade ≥ 3 toxicity was not significantly different between IMRT and 3D-RT patients, but the IMRT cohort had favorable outcomes. This study confirmed IMRT as the primary definitive treatment of anal cancer. With similar survival rates, IMRT had the potential to reduce acute toxicity by sparing organs at risk. Promising prognostic factors such as BMI, KI, and leucocyte and hemoglobin levels should be further investigated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.