Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33980277›Full record

Trial reportRadiation oncology (London, England)2021

Comparison of hypofractionation and standard fractionation for post-prostatectomy salvage radiotherapy in patients with persistent PSA: single institution experience.

Jure Murgic, Blanka Jaksic, Marin Prpic, Davor Kust, Amit Bahl, Mirjana Budanec, Angela Prgomet Secan, Pierfrancesco Franco, Ivan Kruljac, Borislav Spajic and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

16 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Jure MurgicDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Blanka JaksicDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Marin PrpicDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Davor KustDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Amit BahlUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Marlborough Street, Bristol, BS13NU, UK.
Mirjana BudanecDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Angela Prgomet SecanDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Pierfrancesco FrancoDepartment of Translational Medicine, University of Eastern Piedmont, 28100, Novara, Italy.
Ivan KruljacDepartment of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases "Mladen Sekso", University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Borislav SpajicDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Nenad BabicDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Bozo KruslinLjudevit Jurak Department of Pathology and Cytology, Sestre Milosrdnice University Hospital Centre, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Mario ZovakDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Eduardo ZubizarretaDivision of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Wagramer Str. 5, 1220, Vienna, Austria.
Eduardo RosenblattDivision of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Wagramer Str. 5, 1220, Vienna, Austria.
Ana FröbeDepartment of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, Vinogradska 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia. afrobe@irb.hr.
Sisters of Charity Hospital · HRInternational Atomic Energy Agency · ATUniversity of Zagreb · HRUniversità degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” · ITUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypofractionated post-prostatectomy radiotherapy is emerging practice, however with no randomized evidence so far to support it's use. Additionally, patients with persistent PSA after prostatectomy may have aggressive disease and respond less well on standard salvage treatment. Herein we report outcomes for conventionally fractionated (CFR) and hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFR) in patients with persistent postprostatectomy PSA who received salvage radiotherapy to prostate bed.

methodsSingle institution retrospective chart review was performed after Institutional Review Board approval. Between May 2012 and December 2016, 147 patients received salvage postprostatectomy radiotherapy. PSA failure-free and metastasis-free survival were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analysis was performed to test association of fractionation regimen and other clinical factors with treatment outcomes. Early and late toxicity was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0.

resultsSixty-nine patients who had persistent PSA (≥ 0.1 ng/mL) after prostatectomy were identified. Median follow-up was 67 months (95% CI 58-106 months, range, 8-106 months). Thirty-six patients (52.2%) received CFR, 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 2 Gy per fraction, and 33 patients (47.8%) received HFR, 52.5 Gy in 20 fractions, 2.63 Gy per fraction. Forty-seven (68%) patients received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). 5-year PSA failure- and metastasis-free survival rate was 56.9% and 76.9%, respectively. Thirty patients (43%) experienced biochemical failure after salvage radiotherapy and 16 patients (23%) experienced metastatic relapse. Nine patients (13%) developed metastatic castration-resistant disease and died of advanced prostate cancer. Median PSA failure-free survival was 72 months (95% CI; 41-72 months), while median metastasis-free survival was not reached. Patients in HFR group were more likely to experience shorter PSA failure-free survival when compared to CFR group (HR 2.2; 95% CI 1.0-4.6, p = 0.04). On univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with PSA failure-free survival were radiotherapy schedule (CFR vs HFR, HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.6, p = 0.04), first postoperative PSA (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.0-1.04, p = 0.03), and concomitant ADT (HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-8.6, p = 0.02). On multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with PSA failure-free survival were radiotherapy schedule (HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.37-6.74, p = 0.006) and concomitant ADT (HR 4.41, 95% CI 1.6-12.12, p = 0.004). On univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with metastasis-free survival were the first postoperative PSA (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.12, p = 0.002), seminal vesicle involvement (HR 3.48, 95% CI 1.26-9.6,p = 0.02), extracapsular extension (HR 7.02, 95% CI 1.96-25.07, p = 0.003), and surgical margin status (HR 2.86, 95% CI 1.03-7.97, p = 0.04). The first postoperative PSA (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, p = 0.02) and extracapsular extension (HR 4.24, 95% CI 1.08-16.55, p = 0.04) remained significantly associated with metastasis-free survival on multivariate analysis. Three patients in CFR arm (8%) experienced late genitourinary grade 3 toxicity.

conclusionsIn our experience, commonly used hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen was associated with lower biochemical control compared to standard fractionation in patients with persistent PSA receiving salvage radiotherapy. Reason for this might be lower biological dose in HFR compared to CFR group. However, this observation is limited due to baseline imbalances in ADT use, ADT duration and Grade Group distribution between two radiotherapy cohorts. In patients with persistent PSA post-prostatectomy, the first postoperative PSA is an independent risk factor for treatment failure. Additional studies are needed to corroborate our observations.

Indexed as

Dose Fractionation, RadiationRadiation Dose HypofractionationSalvage TherapyAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProstatectomyProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeProstate-Specific AntigenAndrogen deprivation therapyHypofractionationProstate cancerProstate-specific antigen persistenceRadical prostatectomySalvage radiotherapyStandard fractionation

Identifiers

PMID33980277
PMCPMC8115388
OpenAlexW3160301212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.