ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2021
High-dose rate brachytherapy in localized penile cancer: 5-Year clinical outcome analysis.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organ-sparing radiotherapy in penile cancer: therapeutic approaches.International urology and nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- Penile cancer: ESMO-EURACAN Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.ESMO open · 2024Guideline
- Article
- Unveiling the variations in penile cancer care: identifying knowledge gaps and research priorities.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
- Review
- The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates in the treatment of urogenital tumors: a review insights from phase 2 and 3 studies.Cell death & disease · 2024Review
- The role of radiotherapy in the management of squamous cell cancer of the penis.World journal of urology · 2023Review
- Article
- Updates in the use of radiotherapy in the management of primary and locally-advanced penile cancer.Asian journal of urology · 2022Review
- What Is the Most Effective Management of the Primary Tumor in Men with Invasive Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Available Treatment Options and Their Outcomes.European urology open science · 2022Review
- Brachytherapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer to the penis.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2021Article
- Does the sequence of high-dose rate brachytherapy boost and IMRT for prostate cancer impact early toxicity outcomes? Results from a single institution analysis.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze the oncological outcome and toxicity profile after conservative treatment based on multicatheter interstitial high-dose rate brachytherapy (MHB) for patients presenting a localized penile cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with histologically proven, non-metastatic (T1-T2 N0-N2 M0) localized penile cancer were treated with MHB. Needles were placed under general anesthesia into the target volume using a dedicated template. Treatment planning was performed using a post-implant CT-scan to deliver 35 Gy or 39 Gy (9f, 5d) for adjuvant or definitive treatment respectively. Five-year oncological outcome was evaluated with local relapse-free (LRFS), regional relapse-free (RRFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS), specific (SS) and overall survival (OS). In pre-treatment and follow-up consultations, skin, urinary and sexual toxicities were investigated using CTCAEv4.0 classification, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function 5-items (IIEF-5). Dosimetry data were also analyzed.
resultsFrom 03/2006 to 05/2020, with a median follow-up of 72.4 months [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], 29 pts, mainly T1 (75.9%) and N0 (89.7%), underwent MHB. Eleven (38%) and 18 pts (62%) received MHB as adjuvant or definitive treatment respectively. Five-year LRFS, RRFS, MFS, SS and OS were 82%, 82%, 89%, 88% and 73% respectively. Six patients (20.7%) experienced local relapse and underwent salvage penectomy leading to a penile preservation rate of 79.3%. Acute skin toxicity was reported 1 month after MHB, with 28% G1, 66% G2 and 6% G3. Late skin complications were telangiectasia for 5 pts (17%) and necrosis for 3 pts (10.3% requiring hyperbaric oxygen therapy). Comparing pre- and post-treatment status, no significant change was observed for skin appearance, IPSS and IIEF-5.
conclusionMHB represents an efficient first line conservative treatment option for early penile cancers. Oncological outcome and late toxicity profile appear encouraging. However, larger-scale cohorts with longer follow-up are needed to more accurately precise the features of the best candidate to MHB.
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.