Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37366917›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2023

Data Dissemination of the Role of Neoadjuvant Radiation in Retroperitoneal Sarcoma: A CTOS and CSSO Survey.

Sarah Corn, Carolyn Nessim, Christina L Roland, Alessandro Gronchi, Carolyn Freeman, Sinziana Dumitra

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 73% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Sarah CornDepartment of Surgical Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC H4A 3J1, Canada.
Carolyn NessimDepartment of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital and Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0419-3511
Christina L RolandDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3400-0087
Alessandro GronchiDepartment of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4703-3534
Carolyn FreemanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC H4A 3J1, Canada.
Sinziana DumitraDepartment of Surgical Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC H4A 3J1, Canada.
McGill University Health Centre · CAFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Kansas · USUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Consensus guidelines call for complete resection of retroperitoneal sarcoma with consideration of neoadjuvant radiation for curative-intent treatment. The 15-month delay from the initial presentation of an abstract to the final publication of the STRASS trial results assessing the impact of neoadjuvant radiation led to a dilemma of how patients should be managed in the interim. This study aims to (1) understand perspectives regarding neoadjuvant radiation for RPS during this period; and (2) assess the process of integrating data into practice. A survey was distributed to international organizations including all specialties treating RPS. Eighty clinicians responded, including surgical (60.5%), radiation (21.0%) and medical oncologists (18.5%). Low kappa correlation coefficients on a series of clinical scenarios querying individual recommendations before and after initial presentation as an abstract indicate considerable change. Over 62% of respondents identified a practice change; however, most also noted discomfort in adopting changes without a manuscript available. Of the 45 respondents indicating discomfort with practice changes without a full manuscript, 28 (62%) indicated that their practice changed in response to the abstract. There was substantial variability in recommendations for neoadjuvant radiation between the presentation of the abstract and the publication of trial results. The difference in the proportion of clinicians describing comfort with changing practice based on the presentation of the abstract versus those that had done so shows that indications for proper integration of data into practice are not clear. Endeavors to resolve this ambiguity and expedite availability of practice-changing data are warranted.

Indexed as

Retroperitoneal NeoplasmsSarcomaConsensusHumansNeoadjuvant TherapySurveys and Questionnairesknowledge disseminationneoadjuvant radiationretroperitoneal sarcomaSTRASS trial

Identifiers

PMID37366917
PMCPMC10296806
OpenAlexW4380996037

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.