Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38396380›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2024

A meta-analysis comparing efficacy and safety between proton beam therapy versus carbon ion radiotherapy.

Jeong Yun Jang, Kangpyo Kim, Miao-Fen Chen, Tetsuo Akimoto, Michael Lian Chek Wang, Min-Ji Kim, Kyunga Kim, Tae Hoon Lee, Gyu Sang Yoo, Hee Chul Park

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Advances in Radiation Therapy for Primary Bone Malignancies.Technology in cancer research & treatment
    Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Jeong Yun JangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3167-0635
Kangpyo KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Miao-Fen ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-0932-0388
Tetsuo AkimotoDivision of Radiation Oncology and Particle Therapy, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Chiba, Japan.
Michael Lian Chek WangDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Min-Ji KimBiomedical Statistics Center, Research Institute for Future Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Kyunga KimBiomedical Statistics Center, Research Institute for Future Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Tae Hoon LeeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4723-3931
Gyu Sang YooDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5542-5263
Hee Chul ParkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0385-9681
Samsung Medical Center · KRChang Gung Memorial Hospital · TWNational Cancer Center Hospital East · JPNational Cancer Centre Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to compare the outcomes of proton beam therapy (PBT) and carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) by a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing clinical evidence.

methodsA systematic literature search was performed to identify studies comparing the clinical outcomes of PBT and CIRT. The included studies were required to report oncological outcomes (local control [LC], progression-free survival [PFS], or overall survival [OS]) or adverse events.

resultsEighteen articles comprising 1857 patients (947 treated with PBT and 910 treated with CIRT) were included in the analysis. The pooled analysis conducted for the overall population yielded average hazard ratios of 0.690 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.493-0.967, p = 0.031) for LC, 0.952 (95% CI, 0.604-1.500, p = 0.590) for PFS, and 1.183 (0.872-1.607, p = 0.281) for OS with reference to CIRT. The subgroup analyses included patients treated in the head and neck, areas other than the head and neck, and patients with chordomas and chondrosarcomas. These analyses revealed no significant differences in most outcomes, except for LC in the subgroup of patients treated in areas other than the head and neck. Adverse event rates were comparable in both groups, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.097 (95% CI, 0.744-1.616, p = 0.641). Meta-regression analysis for possible heterogeneity did not demonstrate a significant association between treatment outcomes and the ratio of biologically effective doses between modalities.

conclusionThis study highlighted the comparability of PBT and CIRT in terms of oncological outcomes and adverse events.

Indexed as

Heavy Ion RadiotherapyProton TherapyChordomaHumansNeoplasmsProgression-Free SurvivalTreatment Outcomecarbon ion radiotherapymeta-analysisoncologic outcomeparticle beam radiotherapyproton beam therapytoxicity

Identifiers

PMID38396380
PMCPMC10891363
OpenAlexW4392133330

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.