SynthesisEye (London, England)2024
Comparing efficacy of charged-particle therapy with brachytherapy in treatment of uveal melanoma.
Synthesis in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Potential of Nanoparticle-Based Phototherapies for Future Treatment of Uveal Melanoma.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Gene therapy for uveal melanoma.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Long-term outcome after treatment of large uveal melanoma.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary ocular tumour in adults. The most used eye-preserving treatments are charged-particle therapy (CPT) and brachytherapy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare efficacies and complications of these two radiotherapies.
methodsWe searched EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library from January 2012 to December 2022. Two independent reviewers identified controlled studies comparing outcomes of CPT versus brachytherapy. Case series that utilize either treatment modality were also reviewed.
resultsOne hundred fifty studies met the eligibility criteria, including 2 randomized control trials, 5 controlled cohort studies, and 143 case series studies. We found significant reduction in local recurrence rate among patients treated with CPT compared to brachytherapy (Odds ratio[OR] 0.38, 95% Confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.60, p < 0.01). Analysis also showed a trend of increased risks of secondary glaucoma after CPT. No statistically significant differences were found in analyzing risks of mortality, enucleation, and cataract.
conclusionsOur study suggested no difference in mortality, enucleation rate and cataract formation rate comparing the two treatments. Lower local recurrence rate and possibly higher secondary glaucoma incidence was noted among patients treated with CPT. Nevertheless, the overall level of evidence is limited, and further high-quality studies are necessary to provide a more definitive conclusion.
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.