SynthesisRadiation oncology (London, England)2026
Stereotactic body radiation therapy for ultra-central lung malignancies: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Radiation oncology (London, England), 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly effective and well-tolerated treatment modality for peripherally located early-stage non-small cell lung cancer as well as pulmonary metastases. However, its feasibility and safety remain uncertain in patients with ultra-central (UC) lung tumors. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SBRT in the management of UC lung malignancies.
methodsA systematic review of the available literature was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, incorporating studies that reported both treatment-related side effects and therapeutic efficacy associated with SBRT for UC lung malignancies. Patient characteristics, prescription doses, local control (LC), overall survival (OS), and side effects information were extracted. Clinical outcomes were analyzed using the random-effects model. Meta-regression was conducted to determine the effect of various covariates on LC and OS outcomes.
resultsTwenty-three articles with a total of 1,105 patients were included. Pooled 1- and 2-year LC rates were 93% (95% CI: 88-96%) and 84% (95% CI: 77-89%), respectively. Meta-regression demonstrated a significantly positive association between BED
conclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrates that SBRT achieves favorable LC rates and is a relatively safe treatment for UC lung malignancies. Although the pooled rate of grade 5 side effects, at 2%, was within an acceptable range, vigilance remains essential. Further prospective research is warranted to verify our conclusions.
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.