ArticleBMC cancer2024
CT-guided radioactive
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical efficacy of CT-guided iodine-125 seed brachytherapy in unresectable locoregionally recurrent breast cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2025Article
- Investigation into the efficiency and prognostic elements of CT-guided ¹²⁵I particle implantation for liver cancer.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- Hydrogen-Generating Magnesium Alloy Seed Strand Sensitizes Solid Tumors to Iodine-125 Brachytherapy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the safety and effectiveness of computed tomography (CT)-guided radioactive
methodsData for 144 LOs from 70 CRC patients who underwent CT-guided RISB were retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were technical success, local control rate (LCR), and complications. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. Cox model was used to identify the independent predictors of poor prognosis.
resultsThe RISB procedures were successfully performed in all patients, and the success rate was 100%. The median follow-up was 27.8 months. The median PFS was 10.0 months (95% CI: 8.9-11.1) and the 1- and 2-year PFS rates were 32.9% and 5.9%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ≤ 15 ng/ml (P = 0.048), middle-high differentiated pathological classification (P = 0.015), primary TNM stages I-III (P = 0.001), LO number ≤ 2 (P < 0.001) and cumulative gross tumor volume (GTV) ≤ 40 cm
conclusionsRISB for LO from CRC is safe and effective, and serum CEA, TNM stage, LO number, cumulative GTV, and system treatments should be emphasized for long OS.
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.