ArticleContemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland)2025
Perirectal spacers in radiotherapy for prostate cancer - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Toxicity of rectal preparation strategies in ultra-hypofractionated SBRT for prostate cancer.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
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
Introduction: Perirectal spacers reduce the radiotherapy (RT) dose delivered to the rectum, but their impact on treatment toxicity remains debated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesise emerging data (PROSPERO: CRD42024506380). Material and methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched through 2024/08/18 for prospective randomised (RCT) and non-randomised trials evaluating the clinical outcomes of perirectal spacing in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Random effects generalised linear mixed models were used to pool odds ratios (OR) for rectal adverse events (AEs) from RCTs. Non-randomised trials were summarised qualitatively. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 and ROBINS-I tools. Results: Three RCTs ( Conclusions: There is evidence that perirectal spacers result in a small decrease in acute rectal toxicity. However, modern RT for clinically localised PCa is generally well-tolerated, and severe AEs are rare. Greater scrutiny of the risks and benefits associated with perirectal spacers is necessary.
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.