ArticleOncology letters2025
Features of late local failure of early‑stage non‑small cell lung cancer treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Article in Oncology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Local failure of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) often occurs within 2 years and delayed local failure is uncommon. In the present study, features of late local failure (LLF; >2 years after SBRT) after SBRT were investigated and compared with those of early local failure (ELF; ≤2 years after SBRT) to explore whether these two local recurrence features have different prognostic implications. Patients who underwent SBRT for stage I-IIA NSCLC between July 2006 and March 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Overall, 173 patients underwent SBRT for NSCLC. The median follow-up times after SBRT were 50 and 31 months for survival and computed tomography (CT) follow-up, respectively. LLF and ELF occurred in 7 and 13 patients, respectively. The median times to LLF and ELF were 42 months (range, 31-61 months) and 13 months (range, 4-16 months), respectively. Local-only failure occurred in 14% (1/7) of LLF cases and 77% (10/13) of ELF cases, which was significantly different (Fisher's exact test, P=0.02). Curative-intent salvage treatment was impossible in all of the LLF cases and 69% (9/13) of the ELF cases, which was significantly different (Fisher's exact test, P<0.01). The median survival times after local failure were 9 and 25 months for patients with LLF and ELF, respectively. Additionally, the 1-year overall survival rates after local failure were 29 and 83% in the LLF and ELF groups, respectively, which was significantly different (log-rank test, P<0.01 at 1-year). In summary, the prognosis after LLF was significantly unfavorable compared with after ELF. Curative-intent salvage treatment is often difficult for LLF due to metastases. Therefore, it seems reasonable to decrease the frequency of follow-up CT for detecting tumor recurrence after the first 2 years post-SBRT.
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.