Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27109736›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2016

No increase in toxicity of pelvic irradiation when intensity modulation is employed: clinical and dosimetric data of 208 patients treated with post-prostatectomy radiotherapy.

Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa, Delia Ciardo, Silvia Ferrario, Piero Fossati, Giuseppe Fanetti, Dario Zerini, Davide Zannoni, Cristiana Fodor, Marianna A Gerardi, Alessia Surgo and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

14 authors.

Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Delia Ciardo1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6691-0208
Silvia Ferrario1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Piero Fossati1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe Fanetti1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Dario Zerini1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Davide Zannoni3 University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Cristiana Fodor1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Marianna A Gerardi1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Alessia Surgo1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Matteo Muto1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Raffaella Cambria4 Division of Medical Physics, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
Ottavio De Cobelli2 Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Roberto Orecchia1 Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the toxicity of image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) to the pelvis or prostate bed (PB) only. To test the hypothesis that the potentially injurious effect of pelvic irradiation can be counterbalanced by reduced irradiated normal tissue volume using IG-IMRT.

methodsBetween February 2010 and February 2012, 208 patients with prostate cancer were treated with adjuvant or salvage IG-IMRT to the PB (102 patients, Group PB) or the pelvis and prostate bed (P) (106 patients, Group P). The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria were used to evaluate toxicity.

resultsMedian follow-up was 27 months. Toxicity G ≥ 2 in Group PB: in the bowel acute and late toxicities were 11.8% and 10%, respectively; urinary acute and late toxicities were 10.8% and 15%, respectively. Toxicity G ≥ 2 in Group P: in the bowel acute and late toxicities were both 13.2%; urinary acute and late toxicities were 13.2% and 15.1%, respectively. No statistical difference in acute or late toxicity between the groups was found (bowel: p = 0.23 and p = 0.89 for acute and late toxicity, respectively; urinary: p = 0.39 and p = 0.66 for acute and late toxicity, respectively). Of the clinical variables, only previous abdominal surgery was correlated with acute bowel toxicity. Dosimetric parameters that correlated with bowel toxicity were identified.

conclusionThe toxicity rates were low and similar in both groups, suggesting that IG-IMRT allows for a safe post-operative irradiation of larger volumes. Further investigation is warranted to exclude bias owing to non-randomized character of the study. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Our report shows that modern radiotherapy technology and careful planning allow maintaining the toxicity of pelvic lymph node treatment at the acceptable level, as it is in the case of PB radiotherapy.

Indexed as

ProstatectomyAgedFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPelvisProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRadiation InjuriesRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID27109736
PMCPMC5257309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.