Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 26;2018(10):CD012301. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012301.pub2
Study Reason for exclusion
Du 2010 Prospectively examined 60 women with cervical cancer who had para‐aortic lymph node metastasis and who were undergoing whole‐pelvis radiotherapy followed by brachytherapy. The results of participants undergoing extended‐field radiotherapy using IMRT were compared with those given the 3D technique. Not a randomised study.
Kim 2016 Randomised phase II multi‐institutional study conducted by the Korean Radiation Oncology Group to determine the survival benefit of prophylactic extended‐field radiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer relative to the hypoxic level. Participants were divided into 2 comparison groups by the result of CA9 immunohistochemical staining (CA9‐positive and CA9‐negative) and then were further randomly allocated to extended‐field radiotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy arms. However, excluded because the results were reported according to the status of CA9 expression. No data available for comparing extended‐field radiotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy.
Liang 2014 Prospectively included 32 women with stage IB2–IIIB cervical cancer with positive para‐aortic lymph node and negative para‐aortic lymph node. All participants underwent low‐dose prophylactic extended‐field, IMRT + concurrent weekly cisplatin. Non‐randomised study design.
Lin 2015 Updated report of a previously published randomised trial (Tsai 2010) that was undertaken to assess the impact of FDG‐PET on the detection of extrapelvic disease and improvement of survival among people with stage I–IVA cervical cancer who had enlarged pelvic lymph node on MRI. Pelvic radiotherapy was given to participants found to have no extrapelvic findings on PET. Extended‐field radiotherapy was given for the remainder of the participants. All participants received 6 cycles of weekly intravenous infusion of cisplatin (50 mg/m² body surface area) as a concurrent chemotherapy. Thus, the comparisons in this randomised study were not the comparisons that this review aimed to evaluate.
Sood 2003 Included 54 women with biopsy‐confirmed carcinoma of the cervix using extended‐field radiotherapy and high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy. Non‐randomised study design containing a single‐arm study without a comparator arm.
Tsai 2010 Randomised trial to determine the usefulness of FDG‐PET for assessing extra‐pelvic metastases, designed radiotherapy field technique, and improved survival among people with stage I–IVA cervical cancer who had enlarged pelvic lymph node on MRI. Pelvic radiotherapy was given for participants who found to have no extrapelvic findings on PET. An extended‐field radiotherapy was given for the remainder of the participants. All participants received 6 cycles of weekly intravenous infusion of cisplatin (50 mg/m² body surface area) as a concurrent chemotherapy. Thus, the comparison in this randomised study was not the comparison that this review aimed to evaluate.
Vargo 2014 61 women with cervical cancer (stage IB1–IVA) who had PET‐positive para‐aortic nodes treated with extended‐field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Non‐randomised study design.
Varia 1998 Evaluated efficacy and safety of extended‐field radiotherapy with 5‐FU and cisplatin among 86 participants with biopsy‐confirmed para‐aortic node metastases from cervical carcinoma. It was excluded because of a non‐randomised study design. All participants underwent extended‐field radiotherapy.
Wakatsuki 2015 Evaluated efficacy and the toxicity of prophylactic extended‐field carbon‐ion radiotherapy among 26 women with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Non‐randomised study design. All participants underwent extended‐field carbon‐ion radiotherapy.
Yoon 2014 Conducted to assess the efficacy and toxicity of extended‐field radiotherapy for 101 women with stage IB–IVA cervical cancer and positive para‐aortic nodes. Retrospective descriptive study. All women underwent extended‐field radiotherapy.

3D: 3 dimensional; 5‐FU: 5‐fluorouracil; FDG‐PET: 18F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography; IMRT: intensity‐modulated radiation therapy; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; PET: positron emission tomography.