ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2026
No Association Between Radiation Dose and Clinical Outcomes in Merkel Cell Carcinoma in the Veteran Population.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiotherapy for Merkel cell carcinoma: recommendations from the DEGRO Dermatooncology Working Group.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Article
- One dose of adjuvant 8 Gray postoperative radiotherapy for Merkel cell carcinoma excised with narrow margins: Low toxicity and comparable efficacy to conventional radiotherapy.Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2026Article
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
Purpose: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare, aggressive skin cancer. Treatment often includes high-dose radiation therapy (RT); however, studies suggest that even 8 Gy in 1 fraction can provide local control. Methods and Materials: In this retrospective, IRB-approved study, we mined the national Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse for MCC patients treated with RT. Using a combination of manual chart review and semiautomated data extraction from free-text notes, we collected information on diagnosis, tumor site and size, treatment technique, and radiation dose/fractionation. We assessed local and distant tumor control and overall survival as a function of radiation dose. Results: We identified 324 patients with 618 treated sites that were evaluable. Of these, 386 sites were treated for microscopic disease and 232 for gross disease. Among the gross disease sites, 64 were treated with curative intent, 164 with palliative intent, and 4 with neoadjuvant intent. The 5-year local progression-free probability (LPFP) was 94.0% across the entire cohort, with 1-, 3-, and 5-year LPFP of 92%, 89%, and 86%, respectively, for patients with gross disease. Local tumor control was excellent across the entire spectrum of delivered radiation doses, ranging from 7.5 to 122.4 Gy (biologically effective dose, α/β = 10), both for sites with gross disease and those treated for microscopic disease risk. Local tumor control was 90% to 95% in both the highest and lowest RT dose groups. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard assessment of radiation dose showed no significant association with LPFP (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.97-1.01; Conclusions: MCC is generally sensitive to RT, with traditionally palliative doses demonstrating similar local and distant disease control compared with higher dose regimens. Acknowledging several caveats to this work, these data support considering dose de-escalation as a treatment option for MCC.
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.