ArticleCancer diagnosis & prognosis
Comparison of Late Toxicity After Whole-pelvis
Article in Cancer diagnosis & prognosis. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimTo evaluate whether whole-pelvis (WP) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is associated with increased late toxicity compared with prostate-only (PO) VMAT in patients with localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsParticipants comprised 384 consecutive patients treated with definitive VMAT to 78 Gy in 39 fractions from July 2011 to August 2016. Of these, 183 patients received PO-VMAT and 201 patients received initial WP-VMAT to 46.8 Gy in 26 fractions using a simultaneous integrated boost technique. Gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were prospectively scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.
resultsMedian follow-up was 49 months (range=16-88 months) in the PO-VMAT group and 52 months (range=10-85 months) in the WP-VMAT group. Frequencies of Grade 3 late GI and GU toxicities were ≤3% across both groups. No patients experienced Grade 4+ toxicity. Cumulative incidences of Grade 2+ late GI and GU toxicities were similar between PO- and WP-VMAT groups (p=0.508 and p=0.838, respectively). Five-year cumulative incidences of Grade 2+ late GI and GU toxicities were 12.2% and 6.6% for the PO-VMAT group and 12.3% and 8.9% for the WP-VMAT group, respectively.
conclusionWP-VMAT did not increase late GI and GU toxicities. This suggests that concerns about increasing toxicity profile are insufficient reason for omitting WPRT for patients with high-risk 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.