Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37876912›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2023

Re-irradiation for recurrent cervical cancer: A single institutional experience.

Junyun Li, Lin Huang, Haiying Wu, Jia Li, Xinping Cao, Zhimin Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Interventional radiotherapy (brachytherapy) for re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck malignancies: oncologic outcomes and morbidity.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2024
    Article
  6. Observational
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Junyun LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
Lin HuangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
Haiying WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
Jia LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
Xinping CaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
Zhimin LiuDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Salvage treatment of recurrent cervical cancer of patients with a history of radiotherapy is currently a major clinical challenge. The purpose of our study was to retrospectively analyze clinical outcomes of radiation in patients with recurrent cancer who have previously received radiotherapy at our hospital and further explore the efficacy and safety of this treatment modality. Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent re-irradiation were included in our department between January 2015 and December 2017. All the patients received Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) alone or VMAT followed by three dimensional-image-guided brachytherapy (3D-IGBT). The volume and dose for re-irradiation depended on previous radiation fields, dosimetry and recurrence sites. All patients received systemic chemotherapy before or after re-irradiation. Results: Fifty patients were included in our study. The median time from primary radiotherapy to re-irradiation was 12 months. Local recurrence, which was the most common failure following primary treatment, was present in 25 patients (50.0 %) while regional recurrence, loco-regional recurrence and distant recurrence combined in-filed recurrence was present in 8 (16.0 %), 9 (18.0 %) and 8 patients (16.0 %). Re-irradiation dose to lymph nodes was 45 Gy with or without a boost up to 55-60 Gy, and to the gross mass was 36-45 Gy with or without a boost up to 45-61 Gy. The median follow-up period was 22 (range,4-59) months. The 3-year local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were 58.0, 38.7, and 44.4 %, respectively. The median time of PFS and OS was 14 and 26 months, respectively. The interval between two successive radiotherapies beyond 12 months was significantly associated with better LC and PFS ( Conclusions: Re-irradiation with VMAT is an effective and safe salvage treatment option with a reasonably good clinical outcome and toxicity profile in selected patients. In our experience, recurrent cancer patients with an interval between two successive radiotherapy courses beyond 12 months and with a serum SCC-Ag level less than 1.5 ng/ml, had improved outcomes.

Indexed as

Cervical cancerRecurrenceRe-irradiationSalvage therapy

Identifiers

PMID37876912
PMCPMC10590764
OpenAlexW4387491815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.