SynthesisProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2025
Does biodegradable peri-rectal spacer mitigate treatment toxicities in radiation therapy for localised prostate cancer-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer in Patients with a History of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.Cancers · 2025Article
- Patients with a Short Distance Between the Prostate and the Rectum Are Appropriate Candidates for Hydrogel Spacer Placement to Prevent Short-Term Rectal Hemorrhage After External-Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is an increasing use of biodegradable peri-rectal spacer prior to radiation therapy for prostate cancer to reduce treatment-associated rectal toxicity. While data from individual trials and cohorts is maturing, there is a lack of an updated quantitative analysis that includes outcomes following peri-rectal spacer. We aim to delineate the clinical impact of peri-rectal spacer in localised prostate cancer patients treated with radiotherapy.
methodsIn March 2024, a systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials for publications since the year 2010. Prospective and retrospective studies reporting comparative outcomes of patients with and without peri-rectal spacer prior to radiotherapy were considered. Outcomes are reported in binary fashion. Random effect meta-analysis with the use of weighted mean difference was adopted. Early (≤3 months) and late rectal toxicity stratified according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) criteria, early and late genitourinary toxicity, quality of life in bowel, sexual and urinary domains (in terms of minimal clinically important difference) were assessed.
resultsThe systematic review included 17 studies. There are 3 RCTs, 3 prospective cohorts, and 11 retrospective cohorts. Three thousand two hundred patients were included, with 1471 patients who received peri-rectal spacer and 1729 without. The use of spacer is associated with lower likelihood of late (1.62% vs. 9.35%, RR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.15-0.42, P < 0.001) and early grade 2 or above late rectal toxicity (3.07% vs. 6.05%, RR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.33-0.86, P < 0.001). No difference is observed in significant grade 3 or above GI (acute or late) events. There is no statistical difference in bowel-related bowel QoL (risk difference = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.38-0.06, P = 0.15). The perirectal spacer is not associated with negative impact to urinary or sexual domains of QoL either.
conclusionIn localised prostate cancer patients treated with radiation therapy, the use of peri-rectal spacer is associated with reduced rectal toxicities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40148672What 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.