Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39189000›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2024

Acute toxicities in proton therapy for head and neck cancer - A matched analysis of the DAHANCA 35 feasibility study.

K Nowicka-Matus, J Friborg, C R Hansen, M Bernsdorf, U V Elstrøm, M Farhadi, C Grau, J G Eriksen, J Johansen, M S Nielsen and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

15 authors.

K Nowicka-MatusDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
J FriborgDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
C R HansenDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
M BernsdorfDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
U V ElstrømDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
M FarhadiDept of Oncology, Zealand University Hospital, Naestved, Denmark.
C GrauDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
J G EriksenDept of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
J JohansenDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
M S NielsenDept of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
A HolmDept of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
E SamsøeDept of Oncology, Zealand University Hospital, Naestved, Denmark.
P SiboltDept of Oncology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.
B SmuldersDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
K JensenDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: As preparation for a national randomized study comparing proton radiotherapy to photon radiotherapy, DAHANCA 35, we performed a non-randomized pilot study to investigate patient selection, logistics, planning, and treatment delivery. With the present study, as a comprehensive safety analysis, we want to compare toxicity during and up to two months after therapy to a historically matched group of patients treated with photon radiotherapy. Materials and methods: 62 patients treated with protons were matched to 124 patients who received photon treatment outside a protocol. Available data were retrieved from the DAHANCA database. Patients were matched on treatment centre, concurrent chemotherapy, tumour site, stage, p16 status for oropharynx cancers. Selection of patients for proton therapy was based on comparative treatment plans with a NTCP reduction for dysphagia and xerostomia at six months. Results: Baseline characteristics between groups were well balanced, except for the type of drug used concurrently; more photon patients received Carboplatin (21.2 % vs 5.8 %, p = 0.01). Proton therapy was associated with significantly less weight loss at the end of treatment, mean weight loss of 3 % for protons and 5 % for photons (p < 0.001). There were more grade 3 skin reactions and grade 3 mucositis after proton treatment compared with photons at the end of treatment, Risk Ratio (RR) 1.9 (95 % CI: 1.01-3.5, p = 0.04) and RR 1.5 (95 % CI: 1.3-1.7, p < 0.001), respectively. All differences resolved at follow up two months after treatment. There were no significant differences between groups on opioid use, use of feeding tubes, or hospitalization during the observation period. Conclusion: Proton treatment resulted in excess objective mucositis and dermatitis, which was transient and did not seem to negatively influence weight or treatment compliance and intensity. Selection bias was likely especially since NTCP models were used for selection of proton treatment and photon treated patients were matched manually. We are currently including patients in a randomized controlled trial.

Indexed as

Acute toxicitiesHead and neck cancerProton therapy

Identifiers

PMID39189000
PMCPMC11345689

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.