Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak ( for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 23, Number 6, 2018

What is the evidence for the clinical value of SBRT in cancer of the cervix?

Loreto Yanez, Ana M. Ciudad, Minesh P. Mehta, Hugo Marsiglia


Aim The aim of this review is to describe and analyze indications and results of the use of SBRT in uterine cervix cancer, reviewing articles published from January 2010 up to August 2017, for any one of the four indications listed: 1 Patient refusal or anatomic impediments to interstitial or intracavitary brachytherapy (BCT), i.e. SBRT as an “alternative” for BCT; 2 Patients with voluminous tumors, or asymmetric tumors where BCT alone would not achieve curative doses, i.e. SBRT as a primary adjunct to BCT; 3 Pelvic and para aortic adenopathy where SBRT could be used as a boost, i.e. SBRT as a primary adjunct to external beam pelvic radiotherapy; 4 Small volume recurrences (postoperative or post radiotherapy), i.e. SBRT for salvage. Background Cervix cancer standard treatment involves pelvic irradiation and chemotherapy, recent advances in irradiation techniques might offer new possible approaches. Material and methods Systematic review of the English language literature about Cervix cancer, SBRT, published from January 2010 to January 2018 identified through a database search of PubMed, and Ovid MEDLINE, using pre-defined search phrases. Results The results in the literature, in general, demonstrate rather weak efficacy of SBRT. In this review, we did not find strong evidence to recommend routine SBRT as a primary treatment for cervico-uterine cancers, i.e. as a replacement for BCT; in highly selected cases it might be considered useful as salvage therapy for relapsed cervix cancer. Conclusion The existing data to not warrant recommending SBRT for the definitive treatment of cervix cancer, but may have some value in the recurrent/relapsed setting.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2018; 23(6) : 574-579

« back


Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.