Critical appraisal:Murray KJ, Scott C, Greenberg HM, Emami B, Seider M, Vora NL, et al 1997

From Cancer Guidelines Wiki

Critical Appraisal

Article being appraised

Murray KJ, Scott C, Greenberg HM, Emami B, Seider M, Vora NL, et al. A randomized phase III study of accelerated hyperfractionation versus standard in patients with unresected brain metastases: a report of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9104. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997 Oct 1;39(3):571-4 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9336134.


Applicable clinical question

Key Facts

Study Design

randomised controlled trial

Number of Patients:

429


Includes an economic evaluation

no

Evidence ratings

Level of evidence

II

Risk of bias
Low risk of bias Comments: Large RCT from RTOG. Method of randomisation not stated. FU schedule not given. Standardised toxicity scales. Brain metastases diagnosed on CT.


Size of effect
1 Reason for decision: RCT of two RT fractionation schemes showing no difference in survival or toxicity.
Relevance of evidence
1 Additional comments: Main endpoint was survival.
Result of appraisal

Jutta's tick icon.png Included




Completed by

Associate Professor Shalini Vinod MBBS MD FRANZCR


Jutta's tick icon.png This appraisal has been completed.


Article
Murray KJ, Scott C, Greenberg HM, Emami B, Seider M, Vora NL, et al. A randomized phase III study of accelerated hyperfractionation versus standard in patients with unresected brain metastases: a report of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9104. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997 Oct 1;39(3):571-4 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9336134.
Assigned to
User:Shalini.vinod
Topic area
Guidelines:Lung cancer/Treatment/Non-small-cell stage IV inoperable
Clinical question
Form
Form:Critical appraisal


Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer

Edit appraisal assignment