Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 270

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Palliative Thoracic Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review

Fairchild, Alysa, Harris, Kristin, Barnes, Elizabeth, Wong, Rebecca, Lutz, Stephen, Bezjak, Andrea, Cheung, Patrick, Chow, Edward·2008·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: The optimal dose of radiotherapy (RT) to palliate symptomatic advanced lung cancer is unclear. We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of palliative thoracic RT. Methods: RCTs comparing two or more dose fractionation schedules were reviewed using the random-effects model of a freely available information management system. The relative risk and 95% CI for each outcome were presented in Forrest plots. Exploratory analysis comparing dose schedules after conversion to the time-adjusted biologically equivalent dose (BED) was performed to investigate for a dose-response relationship. Results: A total of 13 RCTs involving 3,473 randomly assigned patients were identified. Outcomes included symptom palliation, overall survival, toxicity, and reirradiation rate. For symptom control in assessable patients, lower-dose (LD) RT was comparable with higher-dose (HD), except for the total symptom score (TSS): 65.4% of LD and 77.1% of HD patients had improved TSS (P = .003). Greater likelihood of symptom improvement was seen with schedules of 35 Gy 10 versus lower BED. At 1 year after HD and LD RT, 26.5% versus 21.7% of patients were alive, respectively (P = .002). Sensitivity analysis suggests this survival improvement was seen with 35 Gy 10 BED schedules compared with LDs. Physician-assessed dysphagia was significantly greater in the HD arm (20.5% v 14.9%; P = .01), and the likelihood of reirradiation was 1.2-fold higher after LD RT. Conclusion: No significant differences were observed for specific symptom-control end points, although improvement in survival favored HD RT. Consideration of palliative thoracic RT of at least 35 Gy 10 BED may therefore be warranted, but must be weighed against increased toxicity and greater time investment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2007.15.3312

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 270

Metadata

Authors
Fairchild, A., Harris, K., Barnes, E., Wong, R., Lutz, S., Bezjak, A., Cheung, P., & Chow, E.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2008-08-20
Volume
26
Issue
24
Pages
4001-4011
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1990811913
Cited by
270
References
14
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Palliative Thoracic Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2007.15.3312
The paper
Fairchild, A., Harris, K., Barnes, E., Wong, R., Lutz, S., Bezjak, A., Cheung, P., & Chow, E. (2008). Palliative Thoracic Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.15.3312

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.