ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2015
Comparing morbidity and cancer control after 3D-conformal (70/74 Gy) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (78/82 Gy) for prostate cancer.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Hyaluronic acid spacer in prostate cancer radiotherapy: dosimetric effects, spacer stability and long-term toxicity and PRO in a phase II study.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Trial
- Phase 1/2 Dose-Escalation Study of the Use of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy to Treat the Prostate and Pelvic Nodes in Patients With Prostate Cancer.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2017Trial
- SHARP hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy is well tolerated in prostate cancer : Toxicity and quality of life assessment.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2016Trial
- Long-Term Outcomes After High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Hypofractionated External Beam Radiotherapy in Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A 24-Year Follow-Up.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Focal boosted IMRT treatment of prostate cancer to 84 Gy in 28 fractions: preliminary clinical outcomes, toxicity, and dosimetry.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Gastrointestinal/genitourinary adverse event after intensity modulated versus three-dimensional primary radiation therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of Cancer · 2023Article
- Image-guided dose-escalated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer with helical tomotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2020Article
- Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for elderly patients (aged ≥75 years) with localized prostate cancer: Comparison with younger patients (aged <75 years).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2019Article
- Penile bulb sparing in prostate cancer radiotherapy : Dose analysis of an in-house MRI system to improve contouring.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2019Article
- Importance of the site of positive surgical margin in salvage external beam radiation therapy for biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.Cancer medicine · 2018Article
- Optimal timing of salvage radiotherapy for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: is ultra-early salvage radiotherapy beneficial?Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2016Article
- Common genetic variation associated with increased susceptibility to prostate cancer does not increase risk of radiotherapy toxicity.British journal of cancer · 2016Article
- Hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer: a preliminary study.Radiation oncology journal · 2016Article
- Article
- Rationale and development of image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy post-prostatectomy: the present standard of care?Cancer management and research · 2015Review
- Definitive, intensity modulated tomotherapy with a simultaneous integrated boost for prostate cancer patients - Long term data on toxicity and biochemical control.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyArticle
- Treatment outcomes and late toxicities of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for 1091 Japanese patients with localized prostate cancer.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyArticle
- Does intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) alter prostate size? Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of patients undergoing IMRT alone.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this work was to compare toxicity and cancer control between patients with prostate cancer treated using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and those treated using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 553 patients with prostate cancer were treated with 3D-CRT 70-74 Gy (3D-CRT 70, 3D-CRT 74) or IMRT 78-82 Gy (IMRT 78, IMRT/SIB 82). Late toxicity was scored according to FC-RTOG/LENT criteria. Biochemical failure was defined using the Phoenix and ASTRO definitions.
resultsThe 5-year risk of grade 2-4 genitourinary toxicity was 26.3 % (3D-CRT 70), 27.2 % (3D-CRT 74), 17.3 % (IMRT 78), and 25.1 % (IMRT/SIB 82) without statistical differences. The 5-year risk of grade 2-4 gastrointestinal toxicity was 19.4 % (3D-CRT 70), 42.1 % (3D-CRT 74), 20.5 % (IMRT 78), and 26.6 % (IMRT/SIB 82). The differences between 3D-CRT 74 and 3D-CRT 70 and between 3D-CRT 74 and IMRT 78 were statistically significant (log rank p = 0.03). The 5-year Phoenix PSA relapse-free survival (PSA-RFS) in low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients treated using 3D-CRT were 89.4, 65.5, and 57.8 %, respectively. Patients treated with IMRT achieved the following results: 90.9, 89.4, and 83.9 %. Clinical relapse-free survival (C-RFS) in patients treated using 3D-CRT vs. IMRT for the aforementioned groups were 94.7 vs. 100 %, 86.8 vs. 98.6 %, and 84.4 vs. 94.5 %. Disease-free survival (DFS) for patients treated using 3D-CRT were 83.1, 70.9, and 71.5 %. The IMRT group reached 95.8, 89.1, and 87.6 %. The PSA-RFS for intermediate- and high-risk patients were statistically significant, while C-RFS and DFS were marginally better.
conclusionDose escalation with IMRT was associated with improved cancer control in intermediate- and high-risk patients in comparison with 3D-CRT, without compromising toxicity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.