Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42131451›Full record

ArticleReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology2026

Evaluation of postoperative stereotactic ablative radiotherapy

Alper Kahvecioglu, Mervenur Bay, Mustafa Cengiz, Sezin Yuce Sari, Oguz Kuscu, Ibrahim Gullu, Gozde Yazici

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alper KahveciogluDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8714-2383
Mervenur BayDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5050-6568
Mustafa CengizDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3692-8532
Sezin Yuce SariDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2395-6868
Oguz KuscuDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1906-6320
Ibrahim GulluDepartment of Medical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6000-6311
Gozde YaziciDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7430-6729

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in the postoperative management of head and neck sarcomas. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 40 patients with resected head and neck sarcomas who had received postoperative radiotherapy with either CFRT (n = 30) or SABR (n = 10). The median radiation dose was 35 Gy (range: 24-40 Gy in 3-5 fractions) for SABR and 62 Gy (range: 60-70 Gy in 30-35 fractions) for CFRT. Results: Median follow-up was 60 months. Five-year overall survival (OS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were comparable between the CFRT and SABR groups. In multivariate analysis, R2 resection was independently associated with worse OS (p = 0.02) and DMFS (p = 0.02). Both R2 resection (p = 0.009) and tumor size ≥ 5 cm (p = 0.01) were identified as independent predictors of poorer LRFS. The overall incidence of grade ≥ 3 late toxicity was 10%, with no significant difference between SABR and CFRT (p = 0.25). Notably, three of the four severe toxicity events occurred in patients with tumors involving the orbit. Conclusions: CFRT remains the established postoperative standard for head and neck sarcomas. Our findings suggest that SABR may also be considered for carefully selected patients, although its use requires caution in anatomically sensitive locations such as the orbit. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm its safety and to better define patient selection criteria.

Indexed as

head and neck sarcomahypofractionated radiotherapypostoperative radiotherapySABR

Identifiers

PMID42131451
PMCPMC13167013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.