ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
Skin Cosmesis assessment tools and methods in patients with non-melanoma skin cancers treated with radiotherapy: Systematic review on behalf of the ESTRO skin and soft tissue focus group and the GEC-ESTRO head and neck and skin working group.
Article in Clinical and translational 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
Non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSC) are highly prevalent and rarely impact mortality; post-treatment cosmesis is paramount as the sequelae of treatment are outwardly visible. There is no agreement on reporting of post-treatment cosmesis, thereby precluding standardised comparisons between treatment modalities. We conducted this systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD420251020168) on behalf of the ESTRO Skin and Soft Tissue Focus Group and the Head and Neck and Skin GEC-ESTRO Working Group to synthesise data on how cosmesis is reported. MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for original studies including cosmesis assessment following radiotherapy for NMSC. Data was collated on the methodology, cosmesis assessment items, and assessment timeframe. Eighty-five studies were included, comprising 17,231 patients treated 1955-2023. Most studies were retrospective (72;85.0%). Three, 26, 18, 2, and 15 studies employed 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 cosmesis grades; 22 (25.9%) studies did not specify cosmesis grade. Cosmesis assessment methodology was detailed in 63 studies; 25/63 provided insufficient detail to replicate the assessment. Cosmesis assessment items: pigmentation change (87.3%), telangiectasia (84.1%), deformity (66.6%), skin atrophy and fibrosis (60.3%), and epilation (33.3%). Acute (<90d) cosmesis was reported by 25 records, late (>90d) in 35 records, with 32/35 late assessments reporting cosmesis beyond 12 months; 44 (51.8%) did not specify assessment timeframe. The identified skin cosmesis assessments are limited by heterogeneity, subjectivity, and simplified compound grades. Prospective reporting will capture the temporal changes within a newly developed granular and validated skin cosmesis reporting framework.
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.