Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32529134›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Gantry-Mounted Linear Accelerator-Based Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Audrey T Dang, Rebecca G Levin-Epstein, David Shabsovich, Minsong Cao, Christopher King, Fang-I Chu, Constantine A Mantz, Kevin L Stephans, Chandana A Reddy, D Andrew Loblaw and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Monte Carlo methods to assess biological response to radiation in peripheral organs and in critical organs near the target.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2024
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Germline variants disrupting microRNAs predict long-term genitourinary toxicity after prostate cancer radiation.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2022
    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

20 authors.

Audrey T DangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Rebecca G Levin-EpsteinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
David ShabsovichDavid Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
Minsong CaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Christopher KingDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Fang-I ChuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Constantine A Mantz21st Century Oncology, Fort Myers, Florida.
Kevin L StephansDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Chandana A ReddyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
D Andrew LoblawDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto.
Patrick CheungDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto.
Marta ScorsettiHumanitas Research Hospital, Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Luca CozziHumanitas Research Hospital, Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Albert S DeNittisDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lankenau Medical Center Main Line Health, Wynnewood, Pennsylvania.
Yue WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lankenau Medical Center Main Line Health, Wynnewood, Pennsylvania.
Nicholas ZaorskyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Nicholas G NickolsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Patrick A KupelianDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Michael L SteinbergDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Amar U KishanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California.

Funding

UCLA SPORE IN PROSTATE CANCERP50CA092131 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI REITER, ROBERT E · 2002 to 2023
$42.6M
Integrative Cancer Scholars Training GrantT32CA009213 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI CAREW, JENNIFER S, CURIEL-LEWANDROWSKI, CLARA · 1985 to 2024
$8.6M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA092131NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009213
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo establish the safety and efficacy of gantry-mounted linear accelerator-based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

methodsWe pooled 921 patients enrolled on 7 single-institution prospective phase II trials of gantry-based SBRT from 2006 to 2017. The cumulative incidences of biochemical recurrence (defined by the Phoenix definition) and physician-scored genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities (defined per the original trials using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were estimated using a competing risk framework. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between late toxicity and prespecified covariates: biologically effective dose, every other day versus weekly fractionation, intrafractional motion monitoring, and acute toxicity.

resultsMedian follow-up was 3.1 years (range, 0.5-10.8 years). In addition, 505 (54.8%) patients had low-risk disease, 236 (25.6%) had favorable intermediate-risk disease, and 180 (19.5%) had unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Intrafractional motion monitoring was performed in 78.0% of patients. The 3-year cumulative incidence of biochemical recurrence was 0.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-1.7%), 2.2% (95% CI, 0-4.3%), and 5.1% (95% CI, 1.0-9.2%) for low-, favorable intermediate-, and unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Acute grade ≥2 GU and GI toxicity occurred in 14.5% and 4.6% of patients, respectively. Three-year cumulative incidence estimates of late grade 2 GU and GI toxicity were 4.1% (95% CI, 2.6-5.5%) and 1.3% (95% CI, 0.5-2.1%), respectively, with late grade ≥3 GU and GI toxicity estimates of 0.7% (95% CI, 0.1-1.3%) and 0.4% (95% CI, 0-0.8%), respectively. The only identified significant predictors of late grade ≥2 toxicity were acute grade ≥2 toxicity (

conclusionsGantry-based SBRT for prostate cancer is associated with a favorable safety and efficacy profile, despite variable intrafractional motion management techniques. These findings suggest that multiple treatment platforms can be used to safely deliver prostate SBRT.

Identifiers

PMID32529134
PMCPMC7276661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.