Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32583236›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2020

PROLAPSE: survey about local prostate cancer relapse salvage treatment with external beam re-irradiation: results of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO).

Dario Zerini, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Antonella Ciabattoni, Alessandra Mirri, Filippo Bertoni, Sergio Fersino, Giuseppe D'Agostino, Frank Lohr, Gianluca Mortellaro, Luca Triggiani and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

15 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Dario ZeriniDivision of Radiotherapy, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy. dario.zerini@ieo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9990-694X
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-FossaDivision of Radiotherapy, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Antonella CiabattoniRadiotherapy Unit, San Filippo Neri Hospital, ASL Roma 1, Rome, Italy.
Alessandra MirriRadiotherapy Unit, San Filippo Neri Hospital, ASL Roma 1, Rome, Italy.
Filippo BertoniAIRO Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology, Rome, Italy.
Sergio FersinoRadiotherapy Division, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy.
Giuseppe D'AgostinoDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, IRCSS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Frank LohrDepartment of Oncology, Radiotherapy Unit, Modena, Italy.
Gianluca MortellaroDepartment of Radiation Oncology, ARNAS Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy.
Luca TriggianiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, ASST Spedali Civili di Brescia, Brescia University, Brescia, Italy.
Giulia MarvasoDivision of Radiotherapy, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Matteo PepaDivision of Radiotherapy, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Francesco CucciaAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Care Center, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy.
Filippo AlongiAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Care Center, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy.
Italian Association of Radiotherapy, Clinical Oncology (AIRO)
ASL Roma · ITIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITOspedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria · ITUniversity of Milan · ITAzienda di Rilievo Nazionale ed Alta Specializzazione · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · ITItalian Association for Cancer Research · ITOspedale Santa Chiara · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe herein present the results of the first Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) survey regarding salvage external beam re-irradiation of local prostate cancer relapse named PROLAPSE.

methodsA questionnaire with 12 items was administered to the 775 Italian radiation oncologist members of the AIRO.

resultsOne hundred of the members completed the survey. The survey highlighted that 59% of the participants are currently performing prostate re-EBRT, while nearly two-thirds (65%) affirmed that they are taking into consideration the procedure in case of intraprostatic relapse. Regarding the clinical target volume (CTV), only a minority (16%) declared to always prefer the partial prostate re-irradiation, while a consistent portion (nearly two-thirds) relied on clinical considerations of the choice towards partial or whole gland irradiation. The main techniques used for re-irradiation resulted to be intensity-modulated RT (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and SBRT, having received approximately 40% of responses each. Regarding the criteria for patients' selection, more than 75% of responders agreed on the use of positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT)-choline to exclude distant metastases and of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) to detect intraprostatic recurrence. A sufficient timeframe (> 3 years) between primary RT and reirradiation was indicated by more than half of participants as an important driver in decision-making, while histological confirmation of the relapse was considered not essential by more than two-thirds. For the use of concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), most AIRO members (79%) agreed that the prescription should be based on a case-by-case analysis. Extreme hypofractionation (> 5 Gy/fraction) was preferred by the majority (52%) of the AIRO members. In most centers (more than 74%), the planning dose-volume constraints were generally extrapolated from the published data. In half of the cases, the interviewed responders affirmed that no major gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were registered in the follow-up of their re-EBRT patients. Bladder complications represented the most commonly observed form of toxicity, with an incidence of 67%.

conclusionThis first AIRO survey about salvage prostate re-EBRT provides an interesting snapshot and suggests increasing interest in re-EBRT patients in Italy. Consensus about some aspects of patients' selection, the necessity of biopsy, fractionation, and highly selective techniques seems feasible, but other key points such as irradiated volume, dosimetry parameters, and hormonal treatment association need to be clarified.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsyDose Fractionation, RadiationHumansItalyMaleMedical OncologyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProlapseProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRecurrenceRe-IrradiationProstate cancerRadiotherapyRecurrenceRe-irradiationSurvey

Identifiers

PMID32583236
PMCPMC11804665
OpenAlexW3037526383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.