Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27347670›Full record

ReviewCancer treatment reviews2016

Comparison of outcomes and toxicities among radiation therapy treatment options for prostate cancer.

Nicholas G Zaorsky, Talha Shaikh, Colin T Murphy, Mark A Hallman, Shelly B Hayes, Mark L Sobczak, Eric M Horwitz

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer treatment reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Hypofractionated radiation therapy for basal and squamous cell skin cancer: A meta-analysis.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Magnetic resonance-guided adaptive stereotactic radiotherapy in prostate cancer patients: a systematic literature review.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicholas G ZaorskyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: nicholaszaorsky@gmail.com.
Talha ShaikhDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Colin T MurphyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Mark A HallmanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Shelly B HayesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Mark L SobczakDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Eric M HorwitzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Fox Chase Cancer Center · US

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Dietmar J Kappes · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyDose Fractionation, RadiationHumansMaleProstatic NeoplasmsRadiosurgeryRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeBrachytherapyClinical trialsComparative effectiveness researchPersonalized medicineProstate cancerProton therapyQuality of lifeRadiation therapyTechnology

Identifiers

PMID27347670
PMCPMC7528218
OpenAlexW2443061927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.