ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2017
Rectal dose to prostate cancer patients treated with proton therapy with or without rectal spacer.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical impact of spacer placement surgery with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene sheet for particle therapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Review
- Prostate Cancer Treatment with Pencil Beam Proton Therapy Using Rectal Spacers sans Endorectal Balloons.International journal of particle therapy · 2022Article
- Dataset for predicting single-spot proton ranges in proton therapy of prostate cancer.Scientific data · 2021Article
- Dosimetric effects of quality assurance-related setup errors in passive proton therapy for prostate cancer with and without a hydrogel spacer.Radiological physics and technology · 2021Article
- In silico comparison of the dosimetric impacts of a greater omentum spacer for abdominal and pelvic tumors in carbon-ion, proton and photon radiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2019Article
- Hydrogel Spacer Reduces Rectal Dose during Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Analysis.International journal of particle therapy · 2019Article
- Proton beam therapy for cancer in the era of precision medicine.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2018Review
- Expanding the Utilization of Rectal Spacer Hydrogel for Larger Prostate Glands (>80 cc): Feasibility and Dosimetric Outcomes.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- Assessment of Polyethylene Glycol Hydrogel Spacer and Its Effect on Rectal Radiation Dose in Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Proton Beam Radiation Therapy.Advances in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a spacer inserted in the prerectal space could reduce modeled rectal dose and toxicity rates for patients with prostate cancer treated in silico with pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy. A total of 20 patients were included in this study who received photon therapy (12 with rectal spacer (DuraSeal™ gel) and 8 without). Two PBS treatment plans were retrospectively created for each patient using the following beam arrangements: (1) lateral-opposed (LAT) fields and (2) left and right anterior oblique (LAO/RAO) fields. Dose volume histograms (DVH) were generated for the prostate, rectum, bladder, and right and left femoral heads. The normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for ≥grade 2 rectal toxicity was calculated using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model and compared between patients with and without the rectal spacer. A significantly lower mean rectal DVH was achieved in patients with rectal spacer compared to those without. For LAT plans, the mean rectal V70 with and without rectal spacer was 4.19 and 13.5%, respectively. For LAO/RAO plans, the mean rectal V70 with and without rectal spacer was 5.07 and 13.5%, respectively. No significant differences were found in any rectal dosimetric parameters between the LAT and the LAO/RAO plans generated with the rectal spacers. We found that ≥ 9 mm space resulted in a significant decrease in NTCP modeled for ≥grade 2 rectal toxicity. Rectal spacers can significantly decrease modeled rectal dose and predicted ≥grade 2 rectal toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated in silico with PBS. A minimum of 9 mm separation between the prostate and anterior rectal wall yields the largest benefit.
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.