Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39090577›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

Long-term evaluation of the safety of a rectal-prostate spacer, the ProSpace® balloon, in patients treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

G Janoray, E Bruguière, J Mazurier, P Dudouet, J Guillotreau, C Tollon, P Labarthe, P Seguin, I Latorzeff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  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

9 authors.

G JanorayOncologie Radiothérapie, Groupe Orion, Clinique Pasteur, 31300, Toulouse, France. gjanoray@clinique-pasteur.com.
E BruguièreService d'Imagerie Médicale, Clinique Pasteur, 31300, Toulouse, France.
J MazurierOncologie Radiothérapie, Groupe Orion, Clinique Pasteur, 31300, Toulouse, France.
P DudouetOncologie Radiothérapie, Groupe Orion, Clinique du Pont de Chaume, 82000, Montauban, France.
J GuillotreauService d'Urologie, Clinique Pasteur, 31300, Toulouse, France.
C TollonService d'Urologie, Clinique Croix du Sud, 31130, Quint-Fonsegrives, France.
P LabartheService d'Urologie, Clinique Des Cèdres, 31700, Cornebarrieu, France.
P SeguinService d'Urologie, Clinique d'Occitanie, 31600, Muret, France.
I LatorzeffOncologie Radiothérapie, Groupe Orion, Clinique Pasteur, 31300, Toulouse, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the close proximity of the prostate and rectum, rectal toxicity remains a major problem in patient treated by radiotherapy for prostate adenocarcinoma. One method of increasing the distance between the prostate and the rectum is to use a spacer implanted into the rectoprostatic space. This report describes the long-term outcomes obtained with a new ballon spacer.

methodsPatients treated with curative radiotherapy for low- or intermediate-risk prostate adenocarcinoma, who underwent insertion of the ProSpace® (BioProtect Ltd, Tzur Yigal, Israel) rectal-prostate balloon spacer, were included. The main objective was to evaluate the dosimetric benefit of the spacer for OARs. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the feasibility and tolerability of ProSpace® balloon placement and to evaluate its long-term therapeutic efficacy and tolerance.

resultsBetween October 2013 and March 2015, 16 patients were enrolled in the Pasteur Clinic, Toulouse, France. The median follow-up was 85.5 months. From top to bottom, the space created was a mean of 16.3 mm (range: 11-20.5 mm) at the base of the prostate, 12.1 mm (range: 4-16 mm) at the middle and 8.9 mm at the apex (range: 5-15 mm). On average, rectal volumes receiving a dose of 70 Gy, 60 Gy and 50 Gy were significantly lower after balloon implantation: -4.81 cc (1.5 vs. 6.3; p < 0.0005), -8.08 cc (6.4 vs. 14.5; p = 0.002) and -9.06 cc (16.7 vs. 25.7; p = 0.003), respectively. There were significant differences in coverage after balloon implantation: Median V95% (p < 0.0005), median Dmin (p = 0.01) and median V98% (p < 0.001) were higher after balloon implantation. At 5 years, cumulative gastrointestinal toxicity was grade 1 in 6% (1/16 patients). No toxicity of grade 2 or higher was found. At 5 years, no urinary toxicity grade 3 or 4 toxicity was found. The QoL was not deteriorated.

conclusionsThe use of the ProSpace® balloon seems to be well accepted by patients, allowing a double dosimetric gain: a decrease in doses received by the rectum and an improvement in the coverage of the high-risk PTV. The long-term gastrointestinal toxicity remains low and QoL is preserved in all treated patients.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsRectumAdenocarcinomaAgedAged, 80 and overFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProstateRadiation InjuriesRadiotherapy DosageTreatment OutcomeBallonDosimetric gainProstate cancerQuality of lifeRectoprostatic spaceToxicity

Identifiers

PMID39090577
PMCPMC11292989

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.