ArticleJournal of radiation research2025
Stereotactic body radiation therapy for renal cell carcinoma: a small number of initial clinical experiences.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a promising and minimally invasive treatment option for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study presents our initial clinical experiences with treatments following our center's protocol, which was formulated based on both national and international evidence. Six patients who had undergone renal SBRT at our center from January 2021 to December 2023 were included. Treatment planning used computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging, with respiratory management conducted through breath-hold or free-breathing techniques. The prescribed dose was primarily 48 Gy in three fractions, with increased fractionations when dose constraints were challenging to achieve. Dose constraints were met for all patients, and treatment planning adhered to protocol guidelines. After the confirmation of cone-beam CT (CBCT) images by physicians, radiation was delivered. Five out of six patients completed the planned treatment, whereas one discontinued the treatment midway (the causal relationship to radiation therapy was unclear). Dose-volume histogram analysis revealed that doses to organs at risk depended on the position and size of the planning target volume but remained within acceptable limits for all cases. The intrafractional patient motion was 2.7 mm, as calculated from the pre- and post-CBCT images, confirming the appropriateness of a 3-mm setup margin. Although this study provides initial insights, further clinical trials are warranted to establish standardized protocols and optimize treatment strategies for RCC. In the future, it is also necessary to generate evidence that is tailored to the current situation in Japan.
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.