Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35463376›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

A Prospective Study of High Dose-Rate Brachytherapy or Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Intra-Prostatic Recurrence: Toxicity and Long Term Clinical Outcome.

Una Ryg, Therese Seierstad, Line Brennhaug Nilsen, Taran Paulsen Hellebust, Linda Holth Djupvik, Hilde Gustafson, Jørgen Hydal, Amar U Kishan, Knut Håkon Hole, Wolfgang Lilleby

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Criteria for Re-Irradiation.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Una RygDivision of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Therese SeierstadDivision of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Line Brennhaug NilsenDepartment of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Taran Paulsen HellebustDepartment of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Linda Holth DjupvikDepartment of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Hilde GustafsonDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Jørgen HydalDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Amar U KishanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Knut Håkon HoleDivision of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Wolfgang LillebyDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NOUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Up to half of patients with localized prostate cancer experience biochemical relapse within 10 years after definitive radiotherapy. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the toxicity, dose to the organs at risk (OARs), and efficacy of dose-intensified focal salvage radiotherapy. Methods and Material: Thirty-three patients (median age 68.8 years) with histologically confirmed relapse after primary definitive radiotherapy were enrolled between 2012 and 2019. No patients had metastases at imaging or in bone marrow aspiration. Twenty-three patients were treated with high dose-rate brachytherapy to the recurrent tumor, defined at multiparametric MRI, with 3 fractions of 10 Gy with two weeks interval, and 10 patients by stereotactic body radiotherapy with 35 Gy to the local recurrence and 25 Gy to the whole prostate in 5 fractions. We used the RTOG-scoring system to grade genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal toxicity (GI) at three months (acute), and at 12, 24, and 36 months (late). Dose-volume histogram parameters to the local recurrence and the OARs were obtained and 2 Gy equivalent (EQD2) total dose was calculated using the linear-quadratic model with α/β = 3 Gy. Efficacy was assessed by the progression-free interval and overall survival. Results: Median follow-up time was 81 months (range 21-115). The cumulative moderate to severe GI and GU toxicities were 3.0% (1/33) and 15.2% (5/33). Six patients had grade 1 acute GI toxicity, none had grade 2 or 3. One patient had grade 3 acute GU toxicity, two had grade 2, and fourteen had grade 1. One patient had late GI toxicity grade 2 and eight had grade 1. Four patients had late GU toxicity grade 2 and eight had grade 1. No patients had grade 3 late toxicity. The mean total D90 to the recurrent tumor was 77.7 ± 17.0 Gy. The mean total rectum D2cc was 17.0 ± 7.9 Gy and the mean total urethra D0.1cc was 29.1 ± 8.2 Gy. Twenty-eight patients had re-irradiation without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Nine of these are still relapse-free and 10 had a recurrence-free interval longer than 2 years. Conclusion: The toxicity of salvage radiotherapy was mild to moderate. One-third of the patients achieved long-term stable disease without ADT and one-third had a recurrence-free interval longer than 2 years. Some patients progressed rapidly and probably did not benefit from re-irradiation.

Indexed as

image-guided radiotherapyprostatic neoplasmsradiation dose hypofractionationre-irradiationtoxicitytreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID35463376
PMCPMC9022104
OpenAlexW4226104781

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.