Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37055672›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2023

Linac-based versus MR-guided SBRT for localized prostate cancer: a comparative evaluation of acute tolerability.

Luca Nicosia, Rosario Mazzola, Michele Rigo, Niccolò Giaj-Levra, Edoardo Pastorello, Francesco Ricchetti, Claudio Vitale, Vanessa Figlia, Francesco Cuccia, Ruggero Ruggieri and 1 more

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. MR-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatment
    Review
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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luca NicosiaAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy. lucanicosia.rg@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0731-8041
Rosario MazzolaAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Michele RigoAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Niccolò Giaj-LevraAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Edoardo PastorelloAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Francesco RicchettiAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Claudio VitaleAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Vanessa FigliaAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Francesco CucciaAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Ruggero RuggieriAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Filippo AlongiAdvanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Via Don Sempreboni 5, 37034, Negrar Di Valpolicella, Verona, Italy.
Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study aims to compare acute toxicity of prostate cancer (PCa) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) delivered by MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) with 1.5-T MR-linac or by volumetric modulated arc (VMAT) with conventional linac.

methodsPatients with low-to-favorable intermediate risk class PCa were treated with exclusive SBRT (35 Gy in five fractions). Patients treated with MRgRT were enrolled in an Ethical Committee (EC) approved trial (Prot. n° 23,748), while patients treated with conventional linac were enrolled in an EC approved phase II trial (n° SBRT PROG112CESC). The primary end-point was the acute toxicity. Patients were included in the analysis if they had at least 6 months of follow-up for the primary end-point evaluation. Toxicity assessment was performed according to CTCAE v5.0 scale. International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS) was also performed.

resultsA total of 135 patients were included in the analysis. Seventy-two (53.3%) were treated with MR-linac and 63 (46.7%) with conventional linac. The median initial PSA before RT was 6.1 ng/ml (range 0.49-19). Globally, acute G1, G2, and G3 toxicity occurred in 39 (28.8%), 20 (14.5%), and 5 (3.7%) patients. At the univariate analysis, acute G1 toxicity did not differ between MR-linac and conventional linac (26.4% versus 31.8%), as well as G2 toxicity (12.5% versus 17.5%; p = 0.52). Acute G2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity occurred in 7% and 12.5% of cases in MR-linac and conventional linac group, respectively (p = 0.06), while acute G2 genitourinary toxicity occurred in 11% and 12.8% in MR-linac and conventional linac, respectively (p = 0.82). The median IPSS before and after SBRT was 3 (1-16) and 5 (1-18). Acute G3 toxicity occurred in two cases in the MR-linac and three cases in the conventional linac group (p = n.s.).

conclusionProstate SBRT with 1.5-T MR-linac is feasible and safe. Compared to conventional linac, MRgRT might to potentially reduce the overall G1 acute toxicity at 6 months, and seems to show a trend toward a lower incidence of grade 2 GI toxicity. A longer follow-up is necessary to assess the late efficacy and toxicity.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal DiseasesProstatic NeoplasmsRadiosurgeryHumansMaleAdaptive radiotherapyMRgRTMR-linacProstate cancerSBRT

Identifiers

PMID37055672
OpenAlexW4365446842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.