Single vs multiple fraction palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases: Cumulative meta-analysis.
Bone metastases
Meta-analysis
Palliative radiation
Randomized trials
Systematic review
Journal
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
ISSN: 1879-0887
Titre abrégé: Radiother Oncol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8407192
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2019
12 2019
Historique:
received:
13
04
2019
revised:
25
06
2019
accepted:
27
06
2019
pubmed:
26
8
2019
medline:
26
5
2020
entrez:
26
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There has been a long-standing debate regarding the efficacy of single fraction radiotherapy (SFRT) compared to multiple fraction radiotherapy (MFRT); many systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been conducted to resolve the debate and suggested SFRT is equally as effective as MFRT. Given the adequate amalgamated sample size that exists, it is difficult to appreciate the need for further RCTs. The aim of this paper was to conduct a cumulative meta-analysis to determine whether further trials will be of value to the meta-conclusion. This paper also assessed publication quality. A total of 29 studies were used in our meta-analysis. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 3) by Biostat was used to conduct a cumulative meta-analysis. The Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool was employed to assess study quality of the included RCTs. Funnel plots were generated using Review Manager (RevMan 5.3) by Cochrane IMS, to visually assess for publication bias. All but one endpoint, overall response rates in assessable patients, maintained the same meta-conclusion over publication time; published studies did not change the amalgamated scientific conclusion of existing literature. Additional studies have simply confirmed pre-existing conclusions and refined the point estimate of the efficacy estimate. The majority of included studies have low risk of bias. In conclusion, the meta-conclusion has remained consistent over time - SFRT is equally as efficacious as MFRT. Recent studies have had little impact on the overall conclusion, and given the vast amount of resources to execute a randomized trial, future resources should not be used to repeat these studies, and can be better allocated to test other hypotheses.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31445837
pii: S0167-8140(19)32978-0
doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.06.037
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
56-61Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.