ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2027
Effects of rectal retractor use on dosimetric parameters, treatment-related adverse events, and clinical outcomes of cervical cancer brachytherapy: A retrospective tertiary-centre study.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2027. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: We assessed whether rectal retractor use was associated with dose parameters, organ volumes, treatment-related adverse events, and oncological outcomes in patients who underwent cervical cancer brachytherapy. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 148 patients treated with intracavitary brachytherapy between June 2020 and June 2025. Patients treated with and without a rectal retractor were compared regarding dosimetric, volumetric, adverse event, and survival outcomes. Adverse events were graded via RTOG criteria. Cumulative dose parameters were calculated using EQD2. ROC analysis and multivariable logistic regression were performed to evaluate factors associated with grade ≥ 2 adverse events. Results: Rectal retractor use occurred in 58 patients (39.2%). Baseline demographic characteristics and tumour size were comparable between groups, although rectal retractor use differed according to applicator type. Rectal retractor use was associated with lower rectal D2cc (no retractor vs. retractor: 65.70 Gy vs. 60.79 Gy, Conclusions: Rectal retractor use was associated with rectal dose sparing and lower odds of grade ≥ 2 vaginal adverse events without compromising target coverage. However, this finding should be interpreted cautiously because rectal retractor placement was not randomised and was influenced by applicator compatibility.
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.