ArticleClinical & experimental metastasis2024
Stereotactic radiotherapy for liver oligometastases: a pooled analysis following the estro/eortc consensus recommendations.
Article in Clinical & experimental metastasis, 2024. 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.
- Comparative efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for oligometastatic liver disease-radiation oncologists' perspective and practice guideline.The British journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Selective internal radiation with Y-90 resin microspheres (SIRT) for liver metastases of gastro-intestinal stromal tumors (GIST) resistant to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy.British journal of cancer · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A large pooled analysis of liver oligometastases, classified accordingly to the ESTRO/EORTC recommendations, treated by stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) was carried out. The clinical and dosimetric data of patients who underwent SBRT/SRS for liver metastases were analysed in terms of efficacy and toxicity profile. In particular, the Local Control (LC), the Distant Metastases Free Survival (DMFS), the Disease-Free Survival (DFS), the Overall Survival (OS), and the Next Systemic Therapy Free Survival (NEST-FS) rates were analysed. 113 patients (M/F: 49/64), accounting for a total of 150 hepatic lesions (March 2006-February 2023) in two Italian radiotherapy Institutions were evaluated. Median age was 67 years old (36-92) and 48 (42.5%) patients had at least one comorbidity. The majority of the lesions were induced (30.7%) or repeated oligoprogressive (12.7%) metastases. 98 lesions were treated with more than one daily fraction (mainly 50 Gy in 5 fractions), while 52 were radiosurgery treatments (mainly 32 Gy). The treatment response at 3-4 months was evaluable in 147 lesions: complete response was 32.0%, partial response 17.0%, and stable disease 32.0%. Actuarial LC, DMFS, DFS, OS, and NEST-FS at 1 year were 75.8%, 37.7%, 34.9%, 78.7%, and 59.4% respectively; while actuarial LC, DMFS, DFS, OS, and NEST-FS at 2 years were 52.1%, 24.9%, 21.9%, 51.3%, and 36.8%, respectively. The achievement of complete response, synchronous oligometastases, and no treatment interruptions correlated with a more favorable outcomes. As per the toxicity profile, we registered only two acute and one late toxicity cases higher than grade 2. Stereotactic treatment for liver metastases seems to be a safe and promising option in terms of local control. The best results in term of outcomes have been obtained in patients with complete response, synchronous oligometastases, favorable histology, and no treatment interruptions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39017807What 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.