Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35774493›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2022

Prostate Cancer Treatment with Pencil Beam Proton Therapy Using Rectal Spacers sans Endorectal Balloons.

Matthew Forsthoefel, Ryan Hankins, Elizabeth Ballew, Cara Frame, David DeBlois, Dalong Pang, Pranay Krishnan, Keith Unger, Keith Kowalczyk, John Lynch and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of particle therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew ForsthoefelDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Ryan HankinsDepartment of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Elizabeth BallewDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Cara FrameDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
David DeBloisDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Dalong PangDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Pranay KrishnanDepartment of Radiology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Keith UngerDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Keith KowalczykDepartment of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
John LynchDepartment of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Anatoly DritschiloDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Sean P CollinsDepartment of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Jonathan W LischalkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Hospital - Long Island, New York, NY, USA.
Georgetown University · USNYU Langone Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) has been used for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer with low rates of high-grade toxicity and excellent patient-reported quality-of-life metrics. Technological advances such as pencil beam scanning (PBS), Monte Carlo dose calculations, and polyethylene glycol gel rectal spacers have optimized prostate proton therapy. Here, we report the early clinical outcomes of patients treated for localized prostate cancer using modern PBS-PBT with hydrogel rectal spacing and fiducial tracking without the use of endorectal balloons. Materials and Methods: This is a single institutional review of consecutive patients treated with histologically confirmed localized prostate cancer. Prior to treatment, all patients underwent placement of fiducials into the prostate and insertion of a hydrogel rectal spacer. Patients were typically given a prescription dose of 7920 cGy at 180 cGy per fraction using a Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm. Acute and late toxicity were evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 5. Biochemical failure was defined using the Phoenix definition. Results: From July 2018 to April 2020, 33 patients were treated (median age, 75 years). No severe acute toxicities were observed. The most common acute toxicity was urinary frequency. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there were no high-grade genitourinary late toxicities; however, one grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. Late erectile dysfunction was common. One treatment failure was observed at 21 months in a patient treated for high-risk prostate cancer. Conclusion: Early clinical outcomes of patients treated with PBS-PBT using Monte Carlo-based planning, fiducial placement, and rectal spacers sans endorectal balloons demonstrate minimal treatment-related toxicity with good oncologic outcomes. Rectal spacer stabilization without the use of endorectal balloons is feasible for the use of PBS-PBT.

Indexed as

endorectal balloonprostate cancerproton therapyradiation therapyrectal spacer

Identifiers

PMID35774493
PMCPMC9238133
OpenAlexW4226376047

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.