ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2026
Ethical considerations of prospective data collection for stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR): an overview from the STOPSTORM.eu consortium.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVentricular tachycardia (VT) is a life-threatening condition, and standard treatments are not suitable for many affected patients. Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) has emerged as a promising experimental last-resort treatment for patients with refractory VT, but it lacks clinical standardization. To address this issue, the STOPSTORM.eu consortium aims to collect data on patients treated with STAR via the development of a multicentric patient registry. The Ethics & Regulations Working Group (ERG) provides support addressing ethical and regulatory challenges.
methodsThe ERG conducted a survey to assess how prospective data on STAR are collected at the partner centres and to explore potential ethical concerns. Responses were analysed to evaluate clinical trial approval processes, adherence to STOPSTORM guidelines, and emerging ethical issues.
resultsAmong the 28 partners, there were 13 interventional clinical trials-ongoing or concluded-across seven countries; centres without ongoing trials enrolled patients under compassionate use. Most trials were single arm, with few exceptions (a randomized trial and dose escalation studies). Most ethics committees approved STAR trials without major objections, but regulatory inconsistencies were observed, resulting in approval denial or delay. Ethical concerns included potential therapeutic misconception among patients, autonomy issues due to the vulnerability of VT patients, and inequities in access to STAR. The heterogeneity in trial designs, endpoints, and follow-up strategies among participating centres posed challenges for data standardization, but using a registry to collect data from multiple local clinical trials offers an innovative approach to overcoming logistical and financial barriers in research on rare diseases.
conclusionMulticentric non-pharmaceutical trials on STAR may present ethical, regulatory, and organizational challenges. The open registry model facilitates large-scale data collection and supports future protocol standardization. However, greater intercentre collaboration and regulatory harmonization are needed to optimize STAR's integration into clinical practice while upholding ethical standards in patient care and research.
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.