Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28620579›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2017

Delineation of the Prostate Bed: The "Invisible Target" Is Still an Issue?

Igor Latorzeff, Paul Sargos, Geneviève Loos, Stéphane Supiot, Stéphane Guerif, Christian Carrie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Asymmetrical Multi-task Attention U-Net for the Segmentation of Prostate Bed in CT Image.Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention · 2020
    Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Igor LatorzeffDepartment of Oncology Radiotherapy, Bât Atrium, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France.
Paul SargosDepartment of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France.
Geneviève LoosDepartment of Radiotherapy, Centre Jean-Perrin, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Stéphane SupiotDepartment of Radiotherapy, Institut de Cancérologie de L'Ouest René Gauducheau, Nantes, France.
Stéphane GuerifDepartment of Radiotherapy, CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Christian CarrieDepartment of Radiotherapy, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For pathological high-risk prostate cancer, adjuvant irradiation has shown a survival benefit. Phase III studies have highlighted that half men would face biochemical relapse and would be candidate for radiotherapy at adjuvant or salvage times. Despite at least four published international contouring guidelines from different collaborative groups, discrepancies remain for volumes, delineation, and margins to be considered in order to optimize radiotherapy planning. This article from "Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs UroGénitales (GETUG)" members will focus on controversies to help clinicians to create best volume delineation for adjuvant or salvage post prostatectomy radiotherapy.

Indexed as

clinical target volumepostoperativeprostate cancerradiotherapyvolume delineation

Identifiers

PMID28620579
PMCPMC5449739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.