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
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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.