Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39247539›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2024

Time-Related Outcome Following Palliative Spatially Fractionated Stereotactic Radiation Therapy (Lattice) of Large Tumors - A Case Series.

Gabriela Studer, David Jeller, Tino Streller, Dirk Huebner, Christoph Glanzmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes analysis of dense-lattice radiation therapy in palliative care for cancer patients´.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

5 authors.

Gabriela StuderRadiation Oncology, Lucerne Cantonal University Teaching Hospital (LUKS), Lucerne, Switzerland.
David JellerRadiation Oncology, Lucerne Cantonal University Teaching Hospital (LUKS), Lucerne, Switzerland.
Tino StrellerRadiation Oncology, Lucerne Cantonal University Teaching Hospital (LUKS), Lucerne, Switzerland.
Dirk HuebnerRadiation Oncology, Lucerne Cantonal University Teaching Hospital (LUKS), Lucerne, Switzerland.
Christoph GlanzmannRadiation Oncology, Lucerne Cantonal University Teaching Hospital (LUKS), Lucerne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Lattice radiation therapy (LRT), a form of spatially fractionated radiation therapy, holds promise for treating large tumors. Despite its introduction in clinical practice around 2010, there remains limited information on its time-related outcomes despite consistently high response rates and tolerability. We assessed the time-related outcome of our palliative LRT cohort. Methods and Materials: We conducted an analysis of our LRT program, which involved 45 palliative patients with 56 lesions larger than 7 cm, treated between January 2022 and November 2023. Prospectively defined treatment protocols included delivering 20 to 25 Gy/5 fractions to the tumor with a stereotactic simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) of 60 to 65 Gy to lattice vertices (n = 45/56) or, mainly in preirradiated lesions, single fraction stereotaxy with 1 × 15 to 20 Gy to vertices only (n = 11/56). Follow-up (FU) intervals were determined based on clinical considerations, considering the mostly highly palliative situation of included patients. Outcome assessments focused on subjective benefit and objective radiologic FU response. Results: The mean/median FU was 5.5/4.0 months (0.3-21 months). A total of 25/45 (56%) patients died after a mean/median of 3.9/2.0 months (0.3-14 months). Fourteen of 56 lesions (25%) were previously irradiated, with a mean/median of 18/13 months (4-72 months) prior to LRT. The mean/median gross tumor volume (GTV) measured 797/415 cc (54-4027 cc) and 14/13 cm (7-28 cm). Subjective statements at LRT completion were available from 37 symptomatic patients: 32/37 (87%) reported fast symptom relief, and 5/37 felt no change under LRT or at LRT completion. Early tolerance was excellent (G0-1). FU imaging was available from 40/56 lesions (71%): progression in 3/40 at first exam one at 1.5 and 4 months post-LRT, and stable disease (±10%) in 5/40 assessed at 2, 3, 3, and 4 months post-LRT. First measure shrinkage of 48%/30% (10%-100%) was found in 32/40 lesions (80%) after a mean/median of 2.8/3 months (0.3-7 months). Maximum shrinkage over time based on 21 cases with at least 1 FU imaging measured a mean/median of 62%/60% after 6.2/5.5 months. The duration of radiologic response was a mean/median of 7.4/7.0 months (1-21 months). Conclusions: Short-course LRT emerged as an effective and well-tolerated palliative option for very large lesions, whether treatment-naïve or previously irradiated. Nearly 90% of symptomatic patients reported significant subjective benefit, and 80% of assessed lesions demonstrated tumor shrinkage ≥10%, with a mean response duration of >6 months.

Identifiers

PMID39247539
PMCPMC11378109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.