ArticleRadiology and oncology2020
Prospective evaluation of probabilistic dose-escalated IMRT in prostate cancer.
Article in Radiology and oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring predictive molecules of acute adverse events in response to volumetric‑modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer using urinary metabolites.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of corrective effect of 6 degree of freedom couch on setup errors in intensity modulated radiotherapy for postoperative rectal cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The feasibility of a dose painting procedure to treat prostate cancer based on mpMR images and hierarchical clustering.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCure- and toxicity rates after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of prostate cancer are dose-and volume dependent. We prospectively studied the potential for organ at risk (OAR) sparing and compensation of tumor movement with the coverage probability (CovP) concept. PATIENTS AND
methodsTwenty-eight prostate cancer patients (median age 70) with localized disease (cT1c-2c, N0, M0) and intermediate risk features (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] < 20, Gleason score ≤ 7b) were treated in a prospective study with the CovP concept. Planning-CTs were performed on three subsequent days to capture form changes and movement of prostate and OARs. The clinical target volume (CTV) prostate and the OARs (bladder and rectum) were contoured in each CT. The union of CTV1-3 was encompassed by an isotropic margin of 7 mm to define the internal target volume (ITV). Dose prescription/escalation depended on coverage of all CTVs within the ITV. IMRT was given in 39 fractions to 78 Gy using the Monte-Carlo algorithm. Short-term androgen deprivation was recommended and given in 78.6% of patients.
resultsLong-term toxicity was evaluated in 26/28 patients after a median follow-up of 7.1 years. At last follow-up, late bladder toxicity (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, RTOG) G1 was observed in 14.3% of patients and late rectal toxicities (RTOG) of G1 (7.1%) and of G2 (3.6%) were observed. No higher graded toxicity occurred. After 7.1 years, biochemical control (biochemically no evidence of disease, bNED) was 95.5%, prostate cancer-specific survival and the distant metastasis-free survival after 7.1 years were 100% each.
conclusionsCovP-based IMRT was feasible in a clinical study. Dose escalation with the CovP concept was associated by a low rate of toxicity and a high efficacy regarding local and distant control.
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.