Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37808453›Full record

ReviewClinical and translational radiation oncology2023

ESTRO ACROP consensus recommendation on the target volume definition for radiation therapy of macroscopic prostate cancer recurrences after radical prostatectomy.

Piet Dirix, Alan Dal Pra, Vincent Khoo, Christian Carrie, Cesare Cozzarini, Valérie Fonteyne, Pirus Ghadjar, Alfonso Gomez-Iturriaga, Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann, Valeria Panebianco and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  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 12 institutions in 8 countries.

Piet DirixDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Network, Antwerp, Belgium.
Alan Dal PraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, USA.
Vincent KhooDepartment of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Christian CarrieRadiotherapy Department, Leon Bérard Center, Lyon, France.
Cesare CozzariniDepartment of Radiotherapy, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Valérie FonteyneDepartment of Radiotherapy-Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Pirus GhadjarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany.
Alfonso Gomez-IturriagaRadiation Oncology, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Spain.
Nina-Sophie Schmidt-HegemannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.
Valeria PanebiancoDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Almudena ZapateroDepartment of Radiation Oncology, La Princesa University Hospital, Health Reasearch Institute Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Alberto BossiRadiation Oncology, Centre Charlebourg, La Garenne Colombe, France.
Thomas WiegelDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
BioCruces Health research Institute · ESCentre Léon Bérard · FRGhent University Hospital · BEHospital Universitario de La Princesa · ESHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEIridium Kankernetwerk · BELMU Klinikum · DERoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversity Hospital Ulm · DEUniversity of Bern · CHVita-Salute San Raffaele University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) panel on prostate bed delineation reflected on macroscopic local recurrences in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT), a challenging situation without standardized approach, and decided to propose a consensus recommendation on target volume selection and definition. Methods: An ESTRO ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 12 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in two separate clinically relevant scenarios: a local recurrence at the seminal vesicle bed and one apically at the level of the anastomosis. Both recurrences were prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-avid and had an anatomical correlate on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: Contouring of the two cases confirmed considerable variation among the panelists. Finally, however, a consensus recommendation could be agreed upon. Firstly, it was proposed to always delineate the entire prostate bed as clinical target volume and not the local recurrence alone. The panel judged the risk of further microscopic disease outside of the visible recurrence too high to safely exclude the rest of the prostate bed from the CTV. A focused, "stereotactic" approach should be reserved for re-irradiation after previous PORT. Secondly, the option of a focal boost on the recurrence was discussed. Conclusion: Radiation oncologists are increasingly confronted with macroscopic local recurrences visible on imaging in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy. It was recommended to always delineate and irradiate the entire prostate bed, and not the local recurrence alone, whatever the exact location of that recurrence. Secondly, specific dose-escalation on the macroscopic recurrence should only be considered if an anatomic correlate is visible. Such a focal boost is probably feasible, provided that OAR constraints are prioritized. Possible dose is also dependent on the location of the recurrence. Its potential benefit should urgently be investigated in prospective clinical trials.

Indexed as

Local recurrencePostoperative radiotherapyProstate cancerTarget volume delineation

Identifiers

PMID37808453
PMCPMC10556584
OpenAlexW4386987245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.