Skip to main content
. 2016 Oct 11;2016(10):CD002142. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002142.pub4

Korea 2007.

Methods 1989 to 1998
RCT
Participants 111 patients
 Stages II, III
Trial data used in subgroup analyses for sex, age, histology, stage and nodal status
Interventions Surgery + radiotherapy vs surgery alone
 RT details
 50.4 to 55.8 Gy in 1.8 to 2 Gy fractions, 5 times a week
 Prescription technique: at midplane
 Average field size: defined inferiorly by a point 5 cm below the carina and superiorly by the suprasternal notch
 Clinical target volume: tumour bed, bronchial stump, ipsilateral hilum, vascular shadows of the bilateral mediastinum
 Technique: combination of parallel opposed, and anterior and posterior oblique fields, or any combination chosen at the discretion of the chest radiation oncologist
Outcomes Survival
Notes Abstract only
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Comment: stated as randomised in paper; checks run on IPD suggest adequate sequence generation
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: insufficient information provided in abstract, but collection of IPD and correspondence with those who supplied the data reassured that data were adequate
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Comment: trial not blinded owing to the nature of the intervention; outcome not likely influenced by lack of blinding
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Comment: individual participant data obtained and checked for all outcomes
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: individual participant data obtained and checked for all outcomes
Other bias Low risk Comment: study apparently free of other sources of bias