ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2017
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Direct Comparison of Two Different Definitions with Biochemical Recurrence after Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Eligibility criteria according to EAU/ESTRO/SIOG guidelines for exclusive iodine-125 brachytherapy for intermediate-risk prostate adenocarcinoma patients: impact on relapse-free survival.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2021Article
- MR-guided 125I seed implantation treatment for maxillofacial malignant tumor.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
- Characteristics of PSA Bounce after Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2020Article
- Acute and late toxicities in localized prostate cancer patients treated with low-doseJournal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2018Article
- A single institution analysis of low-dose-rate brachytherapy: 5-year reported survival and late toxicity outcomes.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2018Review
- Low-dose-rate brachytherapy as a minimally invasive curative treatment for localised prostate cancer has excellent oncological and functional outcomes: a retrospective analysis from a single centre.Central European journal of urology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate local recurrence in younger men treated with low-dose-rate (LDR) PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 192 patients (≤65-years-old) were treated with LDR
resultsMedian follow-up was 66 months. The 5‑year local recurrence-free survival was 96.1%. Biopsy-proven local recurrence developed in 13 patients, 4 had a Phoenix-defined recurrence at the last follow-up. Androgen deprivation therapy was started in 1 patient without proven recurrence. Univariable risk factors for local recurrence were: at least 50% positive biopsies, intermediate risk, treatment with neoadjuvant hormone therapy, low preimplantation volume receiving 100% of the prescribed dose, and no bounce development. Hormone-naïve patients not attaining a PSA value <0.5 ng/mL during follow-up also had a higher risk of local recurrences. Cox regression demonstrated that the variables "at least 50% positive biopsies" and "bounce" significantly impacted local failure (hazard ratio, HR 1.02 and 11.59, respectively). A bounce developed in 70 patients (36%). Younger patients and those treated with a lower activity per volume had a higher chance of developing a bounce in the Cox model (HR 0.99 and 0.04, respectively).
conclusionFor younger men, LDR BT is a valid primary curative treatment option in low-risk and is to consider in intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28488030What 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.