ArticleSurgical oncology insight2025
Optimal surveillance for detecting sarcoma lung metastasis - A systematic review.
Article in Surgical oncology insight, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Accurate diagnosis of lung metastasis for patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) can impact overall survival, but there is considerable variability in imaging utilized to detect metastasis. Chest x-ray (CXR) or computer tomography (CT) scan of the chest are the most common studies in current practice. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed. Databases were searched from inception to January 3, 2024. Articles were reviewed to determine if CXR or CT chest was associated with improved overall or recurrence-free survival in patients with STS. Articles were also reviewed for data on cost-effectiveness of CXR versus CT chest. The quality of evidence was assessed by the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Results: 259 abstracts were screened, and twenty-seven studies were selected for full-text review. Nine studies met all inclusion criteria. Seven studies included data on survival or recurrence rates and four included data on the cost of imaging modality. The seven studies all had conflicting results on the impact of CXR versus chest CT on survival and recurrence. The four studies that looked at cost found that CXR was more cost-effective, but in certain patients, screening with chest CT could be cost-effective. Conclusion: The literature defining the optimal surveillance method for lung metastases for patients with STS is limited. Most of the studies had a low quality of evidence due to study design and significant risk of bias. Randomized controlled trials are needed to further understand the best imaging modality for lung metastasis surveillance in this patient population.
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.