Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42644064›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2026

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer Brain Metastases: Dose Optimization and Prognostic Prediction via Biologically Effective Dose-Based Empirical Dose-Response Modeling and Extreme Gradient Boosting-SHapley Additive Explanations Machine Learning.

Fasheng Wu, Juzheng Shi, Weishan He, Yang Tang, Guangmei Deng, Xinlan Lin, Long Kou, Yuansheng Huang, Jia Hu, Hui Zhang and 29 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in 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

39 authors.

Fasheng WuGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Juzheng ShiGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Weishan HeGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yang TangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Guangmei DengGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Xinlan LinGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Long KouGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yuansheng HuangGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Jia HuGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Hui ZhangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Jinzhou ShengGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Wenting XiGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yajing LinGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Xunxian ZhuGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Xiuping LiangGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Ying ZhouRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Ying LuRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Fangfang LongRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Huayan JiangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yuanjun MoRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Shuang LuoRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yingchuan GaoRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yanling CaiRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Xuemei LiRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yumei LiRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Xiaoping HuRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Xuquan LuRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yong HuangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Wenchuang HuangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Zhilu TangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Minyang TangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Youke XieRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Tongze CaiRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Wenya LiuGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Huiyi LiuGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Peipei YuanGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Ye ChenGraduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Hongbin LiangRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Jibing ChenRuikang Hospital, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to integrate BED-based empirical dose-response modeling (logistic regression-derived tumor control probability) with interpretable machine learning (ML) to investigate the complex interactions among biologically effective dose (BED Methods and Materials: In this retrospective study, 449 lung cancer patients with BM treated with CyberKnife between June 2006 and March 2025 were enrolled. Stratified BED-based empirical dose-response models based on maximum tumor diameter (≤2 cm, 2-3 cm, >3 cm) were established to analyze BED Results: BED-based empirical dose-response modeling revealed significant volume dependence in dose response. Tumors of 2 to 3 cm required the highest dose for 50% control (dose required for 50% tumor control [TCD Conclusions: This study confirms volume-dependent heterogeneity in dose response for BM and reveals a dual, baseline-dependent impact of BED

Identifiers

PMID42644064
PMCPMC13505368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.