ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2021
A treatment planning study of urethra-sparing intensity-modulated proton therapy for localized prostate cancer.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Comparison of Beam-Specific Planning Target Volume Single-Field Uniform Dose and Robust Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy in Ultra-Hypofractionation for Prostate Cancer.International journal of particle therapy · 2026Article
- Robust Four-Field and Arc LET-Optimized Proton Prostate Cancer Treatment Plans With Urethral Sparing.International journal of particle therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Probability of normal tissue complications for hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicity in postoperative whole pelvic radiotherapy for gynecologic malignancies using intensity-modulated proton therapy with robust optimization.Journal of radiation research · 2024Article
- Optimizing Gantry Breakpoint Angles in Proton Therapy: Enhancing Efficiency and Patient Experience.International journal of particle therapy · 2024Article
- Achievements and challenges in normal tissue response modelling for proton therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeUrethra-sparing radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer can reduce the risk of radiation-induced genitourinary toxicity by intentionally underdosing the periurethral transitional zone. We aimed to compare the clinical impact of a urethra-sparing intensity-modulated proton therapy (US-IMPT) plan with that of conventional clinical plans without urethral dose reduction. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study included 13 patients who had undergone proton beam therapy. The prescribed dose was 63 GyE in 21 fractions for 99% of the clinical target volume. To compare the clinical impact of the US-IMPT plan with that of the conventional clinical plan, tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were calculated with a generalized equivalent uniform dose-based Lyman-Kutcher model using dose volume histograms. The endpoints of these model parameters for the rectum, bladder, and urethra were fistula, contraction, and urethral stricture, respectively.
resultsThe mean NTCP value for the urethra in US-IMPT was significantly lower than that in the conventional clinical plan (0.6% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the conventional and US-IMPT plans regarding the mean minimum dose for the urethra with a 3-mm margin, TCP value, and NTCP value for the rectum and bladder. Additionally, the target dose coverage of all plans in the robustness analysis was within the clinically acceptable range.
conclusionsCompared with the conventional clinically applied plans, US-IMPT plans have potential clinical advantages and may reduce the risk of genitourinary toxicities, while maintaining the same TCP and NTCP in the rectum and bladder.
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.