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
Included
Completed by
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
Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer