ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2024
Differential outcomes of re-stratified high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiation therapy plus high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost.
Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2024. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We report outcomes of high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients, initially classified according to a 3-tier NCCN classification system, treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (HDR-BT). Patients were analyzed based on a re-stratification of their risk grouping using CAPRA score and a newer 5-tier NCCN classification. Material and methods: 471 high-risk PCa patients treated with EBRT, HDR-BT, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) between 1999 and 2018 were included. Competing risk survival analyses to compare individuals with CAPRA scores < 6 vs. ≥ 6 for biochemical relapse (BCR) and metastasis incidence were conducted. Also, overall survival (OS) for both groups using Kaplan-Meier analysis was assessed. The same analyses were repeated using a 5-tier NCCN stratification comparing those classified as high-risk vs. very high-risk patients. Results: The median age was 71 years, and the median follow-up period was 72 months. The whole cohort received an EQD Conclusions: We showed that high-risk PCa patients classified according to the 3-tier NCCN system benefit from further stratification using the CAPRA score or the 5-tier NCCN stratification method. Patients with a CAPRA score ≥ 6 or classified as very high-risk demonstrate a higher hazard of BCR, metastasis, and death. These patients might benefit from further intensification of their investigations and treatment, based on ongoing research.
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.