Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34107139›Full record

Trial reportCancer science2021

Long-term clinical outcomes after 12-fractionated carbon-ion radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Hiraku Sato, Goro Kasuya, Hitoshi Ishikawa, Akihiro Nomoto, Takashi Ono, Mio Nakajima, Yuka Isozaki, Naoyoshi Yamamoto, Yuma Iwai, Kenji Nemoto and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hiraku SatoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0210-3439
Goro KasuyaQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3719-8714
Hitoshi IshikawaQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Akihiro NomotoQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Takashi OnoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan.
Mio NakajimaQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Yuka IsozakiQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Naoyoshi YamamotoQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Yuma IwaiQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Kenji NemotoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan.
Tomohiko IchikawaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Hiroshi TsujiQuantum Medical Science Directorate, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (formerly the National Institute of Radiological Science Hospital), QST Hospital, Chiba, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1249-2546
Working Group for Genitourinary Tumors
National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology · JPYamagata University · JPChiba University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are no clinical reports of long-term follow-up after carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) using a dose of 51.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 12 fractions for localized prostate cancer, or of a comparison of clinical outcomes between passive and scanning beam irradiation. A total of 256 patients with localized prostate cancer who received CIRT at a dose of 51.6 Gy (RBE) in 12 fractions using two different beam delivery techniques (passive [n = 45] and scanning [n = 211]), and who were followed for more than 1 year, were analyzed. The biochemical relapse-free (bRF) rate was defined by the Phoenix definition, and the actuarial toxicity rates were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Of the 256 patients, 41 (16.0%), 111 (43.4%), and 104 (40.6%) were classified as low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively, after a median follow-up of 7.0 (range 1.1-10.4) years. Androgen deprivation therapy was performed in 212 patients (82.8%). The 5-year bRF rates of the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients were 95.1%, 90.9%, and 91.1%, respectively. The 5-year rates of grade 2 late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities in all patients were 0.4% and 6.3%, respectively. No grade ≥3 toxicities were observed. There were no significant differences in the rates of bRF or grade 2 toxicities in patients who received passive irradiation versus scanning irradiation. Our long-term follow-up results showed that a CIRT regimen of 51.6 Gy (RBE) in 12 fractions for localized prostate cancer yielded a good therapeutic outcome and low toxicity rates irrespective of the beam delivery technique.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAndrogen AntagonistsDisease-Free SurvivalDose Fractionation, RadiationFollow-Up StudiesHeavy Ion RadiotherapyHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedProstatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateAndrogen Antagonistsbiochemical relapse-free ratecarbon-ion radiotherapyhypofractionationprostate cancerprostate-specific antigen

Identifiers

PMID34107139
PMCPMC8409298
OpenAlexW3169513441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.