ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2022
SBRT for Localized Prostate Cancer: CyberKnife vs. VMAT-FFF, a Dosimetric Study.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- First Results Comparing MLC Versus IRIS CyberKnife Collimators in Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in an Italian Oncology Institute.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Periodic intrafraction image-guided focal dose-escalated stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate carcinoma on a standard linear accelerator.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Evaluating dosimetric outcomes: a comparison of CyberKnife, VMAT FFF, and Helical Tomotherapy Radixact for treating localized prostate cancer.La Radiologia medica · 2025Article
- Dosimetric comparison between stereotactic body radiotherapy and carbon-ion radiation therapy for prostate cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer: a study comparing 3-year genitourinary toxicity between CyberKnife and volumetric-modulated arc therapy by propensity score analysis.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Key changes in the future clinical application of ultra-high dose rate radiotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Planning issues on linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Review
- Clinical Efficacy of an Electronic Portal Imaging Device versus a Physical Phantom Tool for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has gained popularity among clinical methods for the treatment of medium and low risk prostate cancer (PCa), mainly as an alternative to surgery. The hypo-fractionated regimen allows the administration of high doses of radiation in a small number of fractions; such a fractionation is possible by exploiting the different intrinsic prostate radiosensitivity compared with the surrounding healthy tissues. In addition, SBRT treatment guaranteed a better quality of life compared with surgery, avoiding risks, aftermaths, and possible complications. At present, most stereotactic prostate treatments are performed with the CyberKnife (CK) system, which is an accelerator exclusively dedicated for stereotaxis and it is not widely spread in every radiotherapy centre like a classic linear accelerator (LINAC). To be fair, a stereotactic treatment is achievable also by using a LINAC through Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), but some precautions must be taken. The aim of this work is to carry out a dosimetric comparison between these two methodologies. In order to pursue such a goal, two groups of patients were selected at Instituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale: the first group consisting of ten patients previously treated with a SBRT performed with CK; the second one was composed of ten patients who received a hypo-fractionated VMAT treatment and replanned in VMAT-SBRT flattening filter free mode (FFF). The two SBRT techniques were rescaled at the same target coverage and compared by normal tissue sparing, dose distribution parameters and delivery time. All organs at risk (OAR) constraints were achieved by both platforms. CK exhibits higher performances in terms of dose delivery; nevertheless, the general satisfying dosimetric results and the significantly shorter delivery time make VMAT-FFF an attractive and reasonable alternative SBRT technique for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.
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.