Trial reportDer Urologe. Ausg. A2017
[Focal dose escalation in the treatment of prostate cancer : Long-term results of HDR brachytherapy].
Trial report in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe prospectively examined the effect and the safety of intensity-modulated HDR brachytherapy (IMBT) with focal dose escalation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 139 patients undergoing primary therapy for prostate cancer and 11 patients with recurrence were included. Data analysis focused on the following factors: date of primary diagnosis, Gleason score, initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value, PSA nadir, volume of the prostate in the transrectal ultrasound, biopsy of the prostate gland, androgen deprivation, chemotherapy, uroflowmetry, pre- and postoperative post-void residual urine (PVR), number of the needles in the prostate lobes and analysis of follow-up data.
resultsIn the primary therapy group, 87.6 % of the patients had a PSA of 0-4 ng/ml at the time of follow-up, while in the recurrence group 81.8 % of patients were within this range. Overall, 55.8 % of patients in the primary group had a PSA nadir under 0.1 ng/ml, 37.2 % under 1 ng/ml, 5.8 % under 5 ng/ml and 1.2 % (1 patient) over 5 ng/ml. In the recurrence group, 100 % had a PSA nadir under 0.1 ng/dl. Fifty patients of the primary group reported grade 1 toxicity (Common Toxicity Criteria): 29 localized to the bladder and 21 to the rectum. Seventeen patients had grade 2 toxicity of the bladder and 1 patient had grade 3 toxicity of the bladder. Finally there was one grade 4 toxicity due to perforation of the sigmoid colon. In the recurrence group, 3 patients with grade 1 toxicity were observed (2 bladder and 1 bowl). Also 3 patients had grade 2 toxicity of the bladder, 1 patient had a grade 3 bladder toxicity and 1 patient had grade 4 toxicity due to bowl fistula. There were no grade 5 toxicities.
conclusionThe modifications of the "Kiel method" with focal dose escalation was proven as effective in locally advanced prostate carcinoma and in local recurrences of the disease with low level 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.