ArticleJournal of radiation research2026
Clinical outcomes of CyberKnife stereotactic radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: comparison of 35 Gy in 5 fractions and 36 Gy in 4 fractions.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This retrospective study evaluated the clinical outcomes of two CyberKnife (CK) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) regimens in patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC). A total of 249 patients were treated, with 123 receiving 35 Gy in 5 fractions and 126 receiving 36 Gy in 4 fractions, with a median follow-up of 50 months. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade ≥2 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities, assessed using CTCAE Version 5.0. Secondary endpoints included 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). To address baseline imbalances between groups, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied. Acute grade 2 GU toxicities occurred in 19 patients (7.6%) and chronic grade 2 in 15 patients (6.0%). Acute and chronic grade 2 GI toxicities were rare, occurring in 3 (1.2%) and 2 (0.8%) patients, respectively. There were no significant differences in cumulative GU or GI toxicity rates between fractionation regimens either before or after IPTW adjustment. After IPTW, the 3-year BCRFS was 96.5% in the 5-fraction group and 96.8% in the 4-fraction groups (P = 0.571). The 3-year LRRFS rates were similarly favorable (99.2% vs. 100%). The 3-year DMFS was 100% in the 5-fraction group and 97.5% in the 4-fraction group (P = 0.058). Overall, CK-SBRT using 36 Gy in 4 fractions was well tolerated, with low rates of treatment-related toxicity and no statistically significant differences in oncologic outcomes between regimens. Longer follow-up is required to determine the long-term efficacy of this dose-escalation strategy.
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.