Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30662471›Full record

ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2018

Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques.

Tiffany M Morgan, Robert H Press, Patrick K Cutrell, Chao Zhang, Zhengja Chen, Sara Rahnema, Martin Sanda, John Pattaras, Pretesh R Patel, Ashesh B Jani and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparative dosimetrical analysis of intensity-modulated arc therapy, CyberKnife therapy and image-guided interstitial HDR and LDR brachytherapy of low risk prostate cancer.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

11 authors.

Tiffany M MorganDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Robert H PressDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Patrick K CutrellDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Chao ZhangDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics.
Zhengja ChenDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics.
Sara RahnemaDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Martin SandaDepartment of Urology.
John PattarasDepartment of Urology.
Pretesh R PatelDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Ashesh B JaniDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Peter J RossiDepartment of Radiation Oncology.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo report our institutional quality of life (QOL) data for low-dose-rate (LDR) monotherapy (LDR mono), high-dose-rate (HDR) monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost). MATERIAL AND

methodsThe charts of 165 patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated with LDR monotherapy (LDR mono), HDR monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost) at a single institution between 2012 and 2015 were reviewed. All patients completed the American Urological Association symptom score (AUASS) and Expanded Prostate Index for Prostate Cancer - Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) quality of life assessments prior to treatment and at least one follow-up survey. Time points included baseline, ≤ 2 months, 2-≤ 6 months, 6-≤ 12 months, 12-≤ 18 months, 18-≤ 24 months, 24-≤ 30 months, and > 30 months. Linear mixed models were performed to test for significant changes and differences in each outcome over time.

resultsMean follow-up was 19.5 months. All major functional QOL domains were affected after treatment with brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. All domains improved over time, with the exception of sexual function scores for all groups and urinary incontinence scores for the HDR mono group. Patients treated with LDR did have higher AUA, irritability/obstructive symptoms, incontinence, bowel, and QOL scores acutely compared to the HDR and HDR + boost groups. Vitality scores were significantly worse in the HDR boost group both acutely and at the > 30-month time point.

conclusionsPatients receiving HDR brachytherapy had lower acute urinary and rectal toxicity compared to the patients receiving LDR, even when combined with EBRT. However, long-term toxicity was similar.

Indexed as

brachytherapyprostatic neoplasmsquality of life

Identifiers

PMID30662471
PMCPMC6335553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.