ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2026
The transformative role of SBRT in the management of spinal metastases.
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical 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.
- Applicability of RECIST1.1, MDACC and SPINO Tumor Response Criteria After Adjuvant Stereotactic Spinal Radiosurgery in Surgically Treated Spinal Metastases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal metastases can cause disabling pain and neurological deterioration and have historically been treated with palliative intent and conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT). A fundamental shift away from the short-term palliative goals associated with cEBRT has taken place over the past two decades following the availability of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). This technique has enabled durable pain relief and local control owing to the ability to precisely deliver high radiation doses across typically up to five fractions, with level 1 evidence supporting superior complete pain response rates and local tumour control compared with cEBRT. The development of spinal SBRT has also resulted in greater multidisciplinary collaboration, with neuroradiologists, spinal surgeons, interventional radiologists, biomechanical engineers, medical physicists, medical oncologists and radiation oncologists working together with the common goal of improving our understanding of the pathophysiology and treatment of spinal metastases. As a result, substantial gains have been realized in refining patient selection and treatment sequencing, and particularly the development of less-invasive surgical procedures. In this Review, we summarize the development and role of SBRT in the management of spinal metastases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42086902What 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.