Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39183306›Full record

ArticleBiomarker research2024

Comparison of proton therapy and photon therapy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

Junyi He, Yingxin Liu, Xiaojing Zhang, Butuo Li, Linlin Yang, Haohua Wang, Shijiang Wang, Jinming Yu, Linlin Wang

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarker research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

9 authors.

Junyi He *Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University Cancer Center, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Yingxin Liu *Shandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Xiaojing ZhangShandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Butuo LiShandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Linlin YangShandong First Medical University, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Haohua WangCheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University Cancer Center, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Shijiang WangCheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University Cancer Center, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Jinming YuCheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University Cancer Center, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Linlin WangCheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University Cancer Center, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. wanglinlinatjn@163.com.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 8203000516National Natural Science Foundation of China 82172865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of proton therapy (PT) in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC) remains controversial, with insufficient evidence to determine its superiority over photon therapy (XRT). We conducted a systematic review of PT trials in ES-NSCLC, analyzing dosimetry, efficacy, and safety across to inform clinical decision-making. Our study showed that PT reduced lung and heart dosimetric parameters compared to XRT, with significant differences in lung V5, lung V10 and mean heart dose (MHD). In terms of efficacy, there were no significant differences in 1-year OS, 3-year OS and 3-year PFS between PT and XRT. For toxicity, no significant difference was observed in treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and radiation pneumonitis (RP). Single-arm analysis of PT found that V5, V10, V20 of lung and heart V5 were 13.4%, 11.3%, 7.9% and 0.7%, respectively. The mean lung dose and MHD were 4.15 Gy and 0.17 Gy, respectively. The single-arm pooled 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-year OS rates for PT were 95.3%, 82.5%, 81.3% and 69.3%, respectively. PFS rate and local control rate at 3 years were 68.1% and 91.2%, respectively. The rates of TRAEs of grade ≥ 3 and grade ≥ 2 were 2.8% and 19.8%, respectively. The grade ≥ 2 RP occurred at a rate of 8.7%. In conclusion, PT had acceptable efficacy and safety, and was better at protecting organs at risk than XRT in ES-NSCLC. However, the survival and safety benefit of PT was not significant compared to XRT.

Indexed as

Early stageEfficacyLung cancerMeta-analysisProton therapySafety

Identifiers

PMID39183306
PMCPMC11346271

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.