ArticleThe oncologist2024
Clinical outcomes of image-guided therapies in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma: a tertiary referral center retrospective study.
Article in The oncologist, 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.
- Frequent antecedent nodules and diagnostic gaps in adrenocortical carcinoma.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Article
- Association between Three-dimensional Margin Assessment and Local Tumor Control in Percutaneous Lung Cryoablation of Colorectal Metastases.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Article
- Oncological Management of Adrenocortical Carcinoma: An Update and Critical Review.Oncology and therapy · 2025Review
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
Abstract
backgroundImage-guided therapies (IGTs) are commonly used in oncology, but their role in adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is not well defined. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective review of patients with ACC treated with IGTs. We assessed response to therapy using RECIST v1.1, time to next line of systemic therapy, disease control rate (DCR), local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS), and complications of IGTs (based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] version 5.0).
resultsOur cohort included 26 patients (median age 56 years [range 38-76]; n = 18 female) who had 51 IGT sessions to treat 86 lesions. IGTs modalities included cryoablation (n = 49), microwave ablation (n = 21), combined microwave and bland trans-arterial embolization (n = 8), bland trans-arterial embolization alone (n = 3), radio-embolization (n = 3), and radiofrequency ablation (n = 2). DCR was 81.4% (70 out of 86), of which 66.3% of tumors showed complete response, 18.6% showed progressive disease, 8.1% showed partial response, and 7.0% showed stable disease. LTPFS rates were 73% and 63% at 1 and 2 years, respectively. Fourteen lesions underwent re-ablation for incomplete response on initial treatment. Sixteen patients (61.5%) received new systemic therapy following IGTs, with a median time to systemic therapy of 12.5 months (95% CI: 8.6 months upper limit not reached). There was 1 reported CTCAE grade 3 adverse event (biloma) following IGT.
conclusionsIGT use in properly selected patients with ACC is safe and associated with prolonged disease control and delay in the need for systemic therapy.
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.