Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42078815›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026

Modern proton therapy in prostate cancer: precision in practice.

Irini Yacoub, Joshua Khalil, Shouyi Wei, Kristin Hsieh, Arpit M Chhabra, Keyur J Mehta, Caroline Oska, Lifei Zhu, Jehee Isabelle Choi, Charles B Simone

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Irini YacoubNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Joshua KhalilDepartment of Biological Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.
Shouyi WeiNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Kristin HsiehNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Arpit M ChhabraNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Keyur J MehtaNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Caroline OskaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Einstein Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
Lifei ZhuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Einstein Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
Jehee Isabelle ChoiNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Charles B SimoneNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proton therapy (PT) is an advanced form of radiation therapy that exploits the physical properties of the Bragg peak to deliver highly conformal dose distributions while minimizing radiation exposure to surrounding normal tissues. This precision is particularly relevant in prostate cancer, where critical organs at risk, including the rectum, bladder, bowel, and penile bulb, are in close proximity to the target. This review summarizes the evolution of PT techniques for prostate cancer, from early passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT) to contemporary intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), and evaluates their dosimetric and clinical implications across multiple treatment settings. Dosimetric studies consistently demonstrate that PT, particularly IMPT, reduces integral dose and improves normal tissue sparing compared with photon-based modalities (XRT) such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), especially in low- to intermediate-dose regions. These advantages are most pronounced for complex target volumes, including pelvic nodal irradiation and focal intraprostatic boosting. Clinical outcomes data for prostate only treatment indicate excellent disease control with low rates of high grade gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity. Emerging evidence suggests potential benefits of PT in reducing specific rectal symptoms and lowering the risk of secondary malignancies. For high-risk prostate cancer requiring pelvic irradiation, prospective and registry-based studies demonstrate favorable toxicity profiles with IMPT, supporting its use in extended treatment fields. In the postoperative setting, PT offers dosimetric improvements, though clinical benefits over XRT remain less clearly defined. Additionally, these advancements in technology have allowed for more precise hypofractionated treatment, including proton stereotactic body radiation therapy, without significant increases in genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity. Finally, ultra-high dose rate FLASH PT may further enhance the therapeutic ratio. Overall, modern PT represents a highly precise and evolving modality in prostate cancer management, with the potential to optimize oncologic outcomes while preserving long-term quality of life. Further randomized and cost effectiveness studies are needed to fully define its role relative to advanced photon techniques.

Indexed as

passive-scatter proton beampencil beam scanningphoton radiationpost-prostatectomy radiationprostateprostate and pelvic radiationproton therapy

Identifiers

PMID42078815
PMCPMC13132783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.