ArticleCancers2023
Radiobiological Meta-Analysis of the Response of Prostate Cancer to Different Fractionations: Evaluation of the Linear-Quadratic Response at Large Doses and the Effect of Risk and ADT.
Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer Brain Metastases: Dose Optimization and Prognostic Prediction via Biologically Effective Dose-Based Empirical Dose-Response Modeling and Extreme Gradient Boosting-SHapley Additive Explanations Machine Learning.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Retrospective evaluation of high-dose-rate brachytherapy multicriteria planning using physical dose versus radiobiological criteria for prostate cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating dosimetric outcomes: a comparison of CyberKnife, VMAT FFF, and Helical Tomotherapy Radixact for treating localized prostate cancer.La Radiologia medica · 2025Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this work was to investigate the response of prostate cancer to different radiotherapy schedules, including hypofractionation, to evaluate potential departures from the linear-quadratic (LQ) response, to obtain the best-fitting parameters for low-(LR), intermediate-(IR), and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer and to investigate the effect of ADT on the radiobiological response. We constructed a dataset of the dose-response containing 87 entries/16,536 patients (35/5181 LR, 32/8146 IR, 20/3209 HR), with doses per fraction ranging from 1.8 to 10 Gy. These data were fit to tumour control probability models based on the LQ model, linear-quadratic-linear (LQL) model, and a modification of the LQ (LQmod) model accounting for increasing radiosensitivity at large doses. Fits were performed with the maximum likelihood expectation methodology, and the Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to compare the models. The AIC showed that the LQ model was superior to the LQL and LQmod models for all risks, except for IR, where the LQL model outperformed the other models. The analysis showed a low α/β for all risks: 2.0 Gy for LR (95% confidence interval: 1.7-2.3), 3.4 Gy for IR (3.0-4.0), and 2.8 Gy for HR (1.4-4.2). The best fits did not show proliferation for LR and showed moderate proliferation for IR/HR. The addition of ADT was consistent with a suppression of proliferation. In conclusion, the LQ model described the response of prostate cancer better than the alternative models. Only for IR, the LQL model outperformed the LQ model, pointing out a possible saturation of radiation damage with increasing dose. This study confirmed a low α/β for all risks.
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.