Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25304328›Full record

Trial reportJournal of radiation research2015

Whole-pelvic volumetric-modulated arc therapy for high-risk prostate cancer: treatment planning and acute toxicity.

Kentaro Ishii, Ryo Ogino, Yukinari Hosokawa, Chiaki Fujioka, Wataru Okada, Ryota Nakahara, Ryu Kawamorita, Takuhito Tada, Yoshiki Hayashi, Toshifumi Nakajima

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of radiation research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kentaro IshiiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan 141kentaro@gmail.com.
Ryo OginoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Yukinari HosokawaDepartment of Urology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Chiaki FujiokaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Wataru OkadaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Ryota NakaharaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Ryu KawamoritaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Takuhito TadaDepartment of Radiology, Izumi Municipal Hospital, 4-10-10 Futyu-cho, Izumi, 594-0071, Japan.
Yoshiki HayashiDepartment of Urology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Toshifumi NakajimaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka, 550-0025, Japan.
Tane General Hospital · JPIzumi City General Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to evaluate dosimetric quality and acute toxicity of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and daily image guidance in high-risk prostate cancer patients. A total of 100 consecutive high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with definitive VMAT with prophylactic whole-pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) were enrolled. All patients were treated with a double-arc VMAT plan delivering 52 Gy to the prostate planning target volume (PTV), while simultaneously delivering 46.8 Gy to the pelvic nodal PTV in 26 fractions, followed by a single-arc VMAT plan delivering 26 Gy to the prostate PTV in 13 fractions. Image-guided RT was performed with daily cone-beam computed tomography. Dose-volume parameters for the PTV and the organs at risk (OARs), total number of monitor units (MUs) and treatment time were evaluated. Acute toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. All dosimetric parameters met the present plan acceptance criteria. Mean MU and treatment time were 471 and 146 s for double-arc VMAT, respectively, and were 520 and 76 s for single-arc VMAT, respectively. No Grade 3 or higher acute toxicity was reported. Acute Grade 2 proctitis, diarrhea, and genitourinary toxicity occurred in 12 patients (12%), 6 patients (6%) and 13 patients (13%), respectively. The present study demonstrated that VMAT for WPRT in prostate cancer results in favorable PTV coverage and OAR sparing with short treatment time and an acceptable rate of acute toxicity. These findings support the use of VMAT for delivering WPRT to high-risk prostate cancer patients.

Indexed as

AgedComorbidityHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedOrgans at RiskOrgan Sparing TreatmentsPelvisPrevalenceProstatic NeoplasmsRadiation InjuriesRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedRisk Factorsacute toxicityimage-guided radiotherapyprostate cancertreatment planningvolumetric-modulated arc therapywhole-pelvic radiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID25304328
PMCPMC4572588
OpenAlexW2166970805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.