ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2024
Criteria for Re-Irradiation.
Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A USP8-targeting nanoamplifier synergizes with radiotherapy to remodel the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in lung cancer.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe treatment options for patients with progressive malignant tumors despite primary radiotherapy are often limited. In selected cases, re-irradiation can be offered. This article concerns the selection criteria and results of re-irradiation for certain types of cancer.
methodsThis review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, with particular attention to glio - blastoma, head and neck tumors, and prostatic carcinoma.
resultsThe published studies of re-irradiation are few in number and often of limited methodological quality. For glioblastoma, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) found that adding re-irradiation to treatment with bevacizumab yielded no significant improvement in either median progression-free survival or median overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73; p = 0.05 and HR 0.98; p = 0.46, respec - tively). Re-irradiation is a treatment option for locoregional recurrences of head and neck tumors after primary radiotherapy, but it carries a risk of serious side effects. For unresectable recurrences of nasopharyngeal carcinoma, an RCT has shown that hyperfractionated re-irradiation is more effective than normofractionated re-irradiation (overall survival: HR 0.54, p = 0.014). For locally recurrent prostatic carcinoma after radiotherapy, re-irradiation can yield good oncologic outcomes with an acceptable level of urogenital and gastrointestinal side effects (5-year recurrence-free survival: stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), 58%; high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy, 77%; versus salvage prostatectomy, 72%). RCTs on this topic are lacking.
conclusionRe-irradiation is a treatment option for selected cancer patients. As the available scientific evidence is limited, multidisciplinary collaboration and participatory decision-making are particularly important.
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.