ArticleJournal of bone oncology2026
Questionable indication for postoperative radiotherapy after surgery for metastases of the major long bones: A single-centre cohort study of 552 fractures/526 patients.
Article in Journal of bone oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The use of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) as an adjunct to orthopaedic surgery of the long bones is widely recommended. Evidence of the benefits is however sparse. The primary research question of this study was whether PORT reduces the incidence of local failure after orthopaedic surgery for metastatic disease of the long bones. Method: A prospectively collected database was retrospectively reviewed. A total of 552 fractures/526 patients were included. Primary endpoint was secondary surgery due to implant failure due to local tumour progression. The main analysis used a competing risk model with death as a competing event. Results: PORT was administered in 197 cases, the median initiation time was 42 days and the most common schedule was 4 Gy × 5. 33 cases (6%) required revision attributed to tumour related implant failure. The cumulative incidence of failure was higher in the PORT group (p = 0.038). When dividing cases into subgroups depending on surgical method PORT had no effect in the osteosynthesis group and was significantly associated with a worse outcome in the prosthesis group. PORT dose and timing were not associated with failure rates. Conclusion: In this cohort, PORT was associated with a significantly increased risk of tumour related failure in patients treated with a prosthesis. There was no significant effect in the osteosynthesis subgroup. Our results indicate that there is no clear evidence for the universal use of PORT.
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.