ArticleJournal of medical imaging and radiation oncology2018
Effects of interruptions of external beam radiation therapy on outcomes in patients with prostate cancer.
Article in Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Asymptomatic Bladder Stones Exacerbate Acute Genitourinary Adverse Events During Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Insights From Two Case Reports.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Results of the IROCA international clinical audit in prostate cancer radiotherapy at six comprehensive cancer centres.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Treatment Interruptions During Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Optimal timing of radiotherapy in high risk prostate cancer: Do missed days matter?Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2021Article
- Treatment interruptions affect biochemical failure rates in prostate cancer patients treated with proton beam therapy: Report from the multi-institutional proton collaborative group registry.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2020Article
- [Practical update of total dose compensation in case of temporary interruption of external radiotherapy in the COVID-19 pandemic context].Cancer radiotherapie : journal de la Societe francaise de radiotherapie oncologique · 2020Review
- Twice- vs. thrice-weekly moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: does overall treatment time matter?Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2019Article
- Covert COVID-19: Cone Beam Computed Tomography Lung Changes in an Asymptomatic Patient Receiving Radiation Therapy.Advances in radiation oncologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate if interruptions of external beam radiation therapy impact outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer (PCa).
methodsWe included men with localized PCa treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) or intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of escalated dose (≥74 Gy in 1.8 or 2 Gy fractions) between 1992 and 2013 at an NCI-designated cancer centre. Men receiving androgen deprivation therapy were excluded. The non-treatment day ratio (NTDR) was defined as the number of non-treatment days divided by the total elapsed days of therapy. NTDR was analysed for each National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group.
resultsThere were 1728 men included (839 low-risk, 776 intermediate-risk and 113 high-risk), with a median follow up of 53.5 months (range 12-185.8). The median NTDR was 31% (range 23-71%), translating to approximately 2 breaks (each break represents a missed treatment that will be made up) for 8 weeks of RT with 5 treatments per week. The 75 percentile of NTDR was 33%, translating to approximately 4 breaks, which was used as the cutoff for analysis. There were no significant differences in freedom from biochemical failure, freedom from distant metastasis, cancer specific survival, or overall survival for men with NTDR ≥33% compared to NTDR<33% for each risk group. Multivariable analyses including NTDR, age, race, Gleason score, T stage, and PSA were performed using the proportional hazards regression procedure. NTDR≥33% was not significantly associated with increased hazard ratio for outcomes in each risk group compared to NTDR<33%.
conclusionUnintentional treatment breaks during dose escalated external beam radiation therapy for PCa did not cause a significant difference in outcomes, although duration of follow up limits the strength of this conclusion.
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.