Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38157016›Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2024

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) re-irradiation for local failures following radical prostatectomy and post-operative radiotherapy.

Wojciech Majewski, Marcin Miszczyk, Donata Graupner, Bartłomiej Goc, Gregor Goldner, Aleksandra Napieralska

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Isotoxic stereotactic reirradiation for recurrent pelvic cancers.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Wojciech MajewskiRadiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland. wojciech.majewski@gliwice.nio.gov.pl.ORCID 0000-0002-4000-1716
Marcin MiszczykIII Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4375-0827
Donata GraupnerIII Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID 0009-0009-8275-0422
Bartłomiej GocRadiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6123-6143
Gregor GoldnerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Aleksandra NapieralskaRadiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7390-9165
The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology · PLComprehensive Cancer Center Vienna · ATNational Institute of Oncology · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLocal recurrences after radical prostatectomy (RP) and postoperative radiotherapy (RT) are challenging for salvage treatment. Retrospective analysis of own experiences with salvage re-irradiation was performed.

methodsThe study included all consecutive patients treated with salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (sSBRT) for prostate bed recurrence following RP and postoperative RT at a single tertiary center between 2014 and 2021. Treatment toxicity defined as the occurrence of CTCAE grade ≥ 2 genito-urinary (GU) or gastro-intestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) was assessed. A PSA response, biochemical control (BC) and overall survival (OS) were also evaluated.

resultsThe study group included 32 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median follow-up of 41 months, treated with CyberKnife (53%) or Linac (47%) sSBRT. Total dose of 33.75-36.25 Gy in five fractions (72%) was applied in the majority of them. Approximately 19% patients reported grade ≥ 2 GU AEs both at baseline and at three months, and grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity increased from 0% at baseline to 6% at three months after sSBRT. There was some clinically relevant increase in late toxicity with 31% patients reporting late ≥ 2 GU, and 12.5% late ≥ 2 GI AEs. Two grade 3 AEs were recorded: recto-urinary fistulas. The majority of patients showed a PSA response (91% at one year post-sSBRT). The 3‑year BC was 40% and 3‑year OS was 87%.

conclusionsManageable toxicity profile and satisfactory biochemical response suggest that SBRT in patients with local recurrence following RP and postoperative RT might be a salvage option for selected patients.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsRadiosurgeryRe-IrradiationAgedHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProstateProstatectomyProstate-Specific AntigenRetrospective StudiesSalvage TherapyProstate-Specific AntigenLocal failurePostprostatectomyProstate cancerReirradiationSalvageSBRT

Identifiers

PMID38157016
PMCPMC10876733
OpenAlexW4390410841

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.