ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2024
Clinical Outcomes of Proton Beam Therapy for Unresectable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safe Proton Beam Re-irradiation With a Bioabsorbable Spacer in Pancreatic Cancer: A Case Report.International journal of particle therapy · 2026Article
- Japanese Nationwide Prospective Data of Proton Therapy for Liver Metastasis From Pancreatic Cancer.International journal of particle therapy · 2026Article
- Survival benefit of particle chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Proton therapy for pancreatic cancer: real-world single-center experience of efficacy, toxicity, and predictors of outcome.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Case report: A successful case of targeted immunotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer under non-surgical conditions.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Initial Experience With Proton Beam Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer at Shonan Kamakura General Hospital.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We retrospectively researched the treatment outcome of proton beam therapy (PBT) and assessed its efficacy for inoperable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) at our institution. Methods and Materials: Fifty-four patients (28 men and 26 women, median age 67 years ranging from 40-88 years) were diagnosed with unresectable stage III LAPC and administered PBT from April 2009 to March 2020. Patients who could not complete PBT, had new distant metastases during the treatment, or did not have enough follow-up time were excluded from this study. All patients were clinically staged based on the International Union of Cancer TNM staging system (eighth edition) using computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography and were diagnosed as stage III (histologic type: 18 patients with adenocarcinoma and 36 clinically diagnosed patients). PBT was performed using the passive method, with a median total dose of 67.5 GyE (range, 50-77 GyE/25-35 fractions).Chemotherapy was used in combination during PBT in 46 patients (85.2%). Overall survival (OS), local progression-free survival (LPFS), progression-free survival, and median OS time were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for the following factors: maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), Eastern Cooperative Group performance status (PS), tumor site, total irradiation dose, concurrent chemotherapy, and primary tumor site. Cutoff values for SUVmax and tumor diameter were estimated using receiver operating characteristic curves and the area under the curve based on OS. Multivariate analysis was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards models. Adverse events were evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Results: The median observation period was 17.4 months, ranging from 4.0 to 89.7 months. The median tumor diameter was 36.5 mm, ranging from 15 to 90 mm, the median SUVmax was 5.85 (range, 2.1-27.6), and their cutoff values were estimated to be 37 mm and 4.8 mm, respectively. The 1- and 2-year OS was 77.8% and 35.2%, respectively, with a median OS time of 18.2 months, and only one patient survived >5 years. Twelve patients (22.2%) developed local recurrence, and 1- and 2-year LPFS rates were 89.7% and 74.5%, respectively; progression-free survival at 1 year was 58.8%. The PS score, tumor site, and irradiation dose were the prognostic factors related to OS that showed a significant difference. On the other hand, there was a significant difference in factors involved in LPFS, at 96.7%/77.9% in the first year and 86.6%/54.4% in the second year in the groups with tumor dose ≥67.5 GyE and <67.5 GyE, respectively ( Conclusions: PBT achieving 67.5 Gy combined with standard chemotherapy showed excellent local control for unresectable LAPC. Total irradiation dose, tumor site, and PS score at an initial diagnosis could be important prognostic factors. In this study, the dose-effect relationship was found, so an increase in dose should be considered to improve prognosis.
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.