ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Unanticipated Radiation Replanning for Stage III Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interfractional shifts of the carina and hilum during radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective study to identify associated factors.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Changes in Osteoblastic Bone Metastasis Detected Incidentally by Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: A Case Report.Case reports in oncologyArticle
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
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with unanticipated radiation therapy (RT) replanning in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods and Materials: Patients from a single institution with newly diagnosed stage III NSCLC treated with radical RT from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019, were retrospectively analyzed. The frequency and reasons for replanning were determined. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with replanning. Results: Of 144 patients included in this study, 11% (n = 16) required replanning after the start of RT. The reason for replanning in these 16 patients was changes in the target detected by cone beam computed tomography (shift in 10 patients, shrinkage in 5 patients, and growth in 1 patient). Larger planning target volume (primary and nodal) was statistically predictive of replanning (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.4; Conclusions: In this study, 11% of patients treated with radical RT for NSCLC required replanning due to changes in the target detected by cone beam computed tomography. A larger planning target volume predicts a higher likelihood of requiring adaptive RT. Overall survival and local control were similar between patients who were replanned compared with those who were not replanned.
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.