Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36408184›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

The role of involved field irradiation versus elective nodal irradiation in definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer- a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hesong Wang, Chunyang Song, Xiaohan Zhao, Wenzhao Deng, Wenbin Shen

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Definitive chemo-radiotherapy in cervical oesophageal cancer: a comprehensive review of literature.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2024
    Review
  11. Editorial: Methods in radiation oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2024
    Article
  12. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hesong WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China.
Chunyang SongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China.
Xiaohan ZhaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China.
Wenzhao DengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China.
Wenbin ShenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China.
Hebei Medical University · CNFourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to analyze whether involved field irradiation (IFI) is associated with improving survival outcomes and reducing adverse events compared with elective nodal irradiation (ENI) in patients of esophageal cancer who underwent definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Summary background data: Radiotherapy plays an important role for not surgery patients. However, the role of radiation target size is still uncertain. Methods: We searched Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central for English and non-English publications comparing esophageal cancer patients who received radiotherapy with IFI with those with ENI. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and adverse events related to radiotherapy. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Standard for non-randomized studies. We evaluated the certainty of evidence by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Results: Totally, 23 studies with 4120 patients were included. IFI group demonstrated significant improvement in the OS rates at 5 years, but not at 1, 2, and 3 years, compared with the ENI group (pooled Risk Ratio [RR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.90; P = 0.0004; high certainty). In addition, IFI demonstrated a significant decrease in the incidence of grade ≥2 acute esophagitis (AE) (pooled RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90; P = 0.0005; high certainty) and grade ≥3 AE (pooled RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.69; P < 0.00001; high certainty) compared with ENI, but not in the incidence of grades ≥3 acute pneumonia, late esophagitis, and late pneumonia. Conclusions: Compared to ENI, IFI demonstrated significant improvement in OS at 5 years. The addition of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to IFI increased the 5-year OS; however, similar results were not observed with the addition of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to IFI and ENI. Furthermore, IFI demonstrated a significant decrease in grade ≥2 and grade ≥3 AE, while IMRT demonstrated no difference in the incidence of grade ≥3 AE. IFI and ENI do not differ in the incidence of grades ≥3 acute pneumonia, late esophagitis, and late pneumonia.

Indexed as

elective nodal irradiationENIesophageal carcinomaesophageal neoplasmsIFIinvolved field irradiationmeta-analysisradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID36408184
PMCPMC9666894
OpenAlexW4308124853

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.