ReviewThoracic cancer2023
Old age and EGFR mutation status in inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving stereotactic ablative radiotherapy: A single institute experience of 71 patients in Taiwan.
Review in Thoracic cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of ground-glass component on prognosis in early-stage lung cancer treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy via Helical Tomotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Detection of EGFR mutations in patients with suspected lung cancer using paired tissue-plasma testing: a prospective comparative study with plasma ddPCR assay.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus conventional fractionated radiotherapy for clinical early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: a population-based study.Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
- Old age and EGFR mutation status in inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving stereotactic ablative radiotherapy: A single institute experience of 71 patients in Taiwan.Thoracic cancer · 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
21 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is now the standard of care for patients with inoperable early-stage lung cancer. Many of these patients are elderly. EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) mutation is also common in the Asian population.
methodsTo evaluate the effects of old age and EGFR mutation on treatment outcomes and toxicity, we reviewed the medical records of 71 consecutive patients with inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received SABR at Taipei Veterans General Hospital between 2015 and 2021.
resultsThe study revealed that median age, follow-up, Charlson comorbidity index, and ECOG score were 80 years, 2.48 years, 3, and 1, respectively. Of these patients, 37 (52.1%) were 80 years or older, and 50 (70.4%) and 21 (29.6%) had T1 and T2 diseases, respectively. EGFR mutation status was available for 33 (46.5%) patients, of whom 16 (51.5%) had a mutation. The overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 97.2, 74.9, and 58.3%, respectively. The local control rate at 1, 3, and 5 years was 97.1, 92.5, and 92.5%, respectively. Using Cox proportional hazards regression we found that male sex was a risk factor for overall survival (p = 0.036, 95% CI: 1.118-26.188). Two patients had grade 2 pneumonitis, but no other grade 2 or higher toxicity was observed. We did not find any significant differences in treatment outcomes or toxicity between patients aged 80 or older and those with EGFR mutations in this cohort.
conclusionThese findings indicate that age and EGFR mutation status do not significantly affect the effectiveness or toxicity of SABR for patients with inoperable early-stage NSCLC.
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.