ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2026
Practice of radiation therapy for squamous cell esophageal cancer in Austria - a survey on behalf of the ÖGRO-GIT.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the patterns of care for chemoradiation for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the esophagus in Austria.
methodsAn anonymous questionnaire (57 items) was sent to all 14 public Austrian radiation oncology departments. Results were analyzed descriptively and compared to the latest versions of two major international guidelines.
resultsThe response rate was 93%. The median number of patients per center per year was 13 (5-30). All centers reported pretreatment multidisciplinary evaluation. Work-up generally included endoscopy and cross-sectional imaging of chest/abdomen (mainly CT). EUS was used by 61% and PET-CT by 54%. Functional lung testing was reported only by 46%. No center reported the prophylactic placement of feeding tubes or stents. All centers employed IMRT in conventional fractionation with (mostly daily) IGRT. Weekly Carboplatin/Paclitaxel was the preferred chemotherapy regimen in both neoadjuvant (85%) and definitive (69%) settings, although only SCC were included. Neoadjuvant treatment was generally preferred for locally advanced stages in suitable patients, except for those with cervical tumor locations. Median doses to the primary tumor were 41.4 Gy (41.4-50.4 Gy) in the neoadjuvant and 57.7 Gy (50.4-66 Gy) in the definitive setting. Target volumes varied considerably (roughly half of the centers preferred involved vs. elective nodal irradiation). Definition of main OARs was uniform, but dose constraints to OAR differed widely. Intensive follow-up was performed in 77% for at least 5 years.
conclusionThe use of advanced staging procedures, prescription of total (boost) doses in the definitive setting, the issue of involved vs. elective nodal irradiation, and dose constraints to OARs were identified as major areas of disagreement between Austrian centers and inconsistencies with major guidelines.
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.