Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42081701›Full record

ArticleClinical nuclear medicine2026

Outcomes of Radiotherapy With or Without Dose Escalation to Lymph Node Metastases Detected by PET PSMA or Conventional Imaging in Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: A Real-World Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched (PRIMENOD) Analysis.

Mateusz Bilski, Federico Mastroleo, Artur J Chyrek, Łukasz Kuncman, Piotr Lelek, Magdalena Stankiewicz, Alfonso Gomez-Iturriaga, Marcin Miszczyk, Wojciech Burchardt, Adam Kluska and 15 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical nuclear medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07426094 (PRO-BOOST-N), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT07426094 phase2 / phase3recruitingnot on this map

PRO-BOOST-N: A Randomized Phase II/III Trial Evaluating Prostate-First Versus Combined Prostate and Nodal Dose Escalation in PSMA PET-Staged Node-Positive Prostate Cancer Using an Ultrahypofractionated Whole-Pelvis Radiotherapy Platform

TypeinterventionalSponsorAffidea Nu-med Center of Oncological DIagnostics and TherapyRan2026 to 2035Enrolled600ConditionsProstate Cancer, Brachytherapy, Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT), Dose Escalation: Solid TumorsArmsUltrahypofractionated Whole-Pelvis Radiotherapy, SBRT-Based Prostate Radiotherapy (No Boost), Ablative Prostate Boost, Intermediate Nodal Dose Escalation, Higher Nodal Dose Escalation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

25 authors.

Mateusz BilskiDepartment of Radiotherapy, Affidea Nu-med Center of Oncology Diagnostics and Therapy, Zamosc, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4962-3028
Federico MastroleoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID 0000-0001-6580-6767
Artur J ChyrekDepartment of Brachytherapy, Greater Poland Cancer Centre.ORCID 0000-0003-3062-8395
Łukasz KuncmanDepartment of Radiotherapy, Medical University of Lodz.
Piotr LelekDepartment of Brachytherapy, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice branch, Gliwice, Poland.
Magdalena StankiewiczDepartment of Brachytherapy, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice branch, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2608-1959
Alfonso Gomez-IturriagaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cruces University Hospital, Biobizkaia Health Research Institute, Basque Country University (UPV/EHU), Bilbao, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1094-5839
Marcin MiszczykDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4375-0827
Wojciech BurchardtDepartment of Brachytherapy, Greater Poland Cancer Centre.ORCID 0000-0002-0013-8881
Adam KluskaDepartment of Brachytherapy, Greater Poland Cancer Centre.ORCID 0000-0001-9933-3646
Aleksandra NapieralskaDepartment of Radiotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Branch Gliwice, Gliwice.ORCID 0000-0002-7390-9165
Andrzej KukiełkaDepartment of Radiotherapy, NU-MED Cancer Diagnostics and Therapy Centre, Zamość.
Katarzyna Konat-BąskaDepartment of Radiotherapy, Lower Silesian Oncology, Pulmonology and Hematology Center.
Rafał Stando⁠Department of Radiotherapy, Holy Cross Cancer Center, Kielce.ORCID 0000-0002-2543-8370
Michał DecDepartment of Radiotherapy, Gdynia Oncology Center, Gdynia.ORCID 0009-0002-9245-2620
Ewelina PiliszczukDepartment of Radiotherapy, International Oncology Center, Koszalin.
Robert MatysDepartment of Radiotherapy, International Oncology Center, Koszalin.
Tomasz BajonII Department of Radiotherapy.
Maciej TrojanowskiGreater Poland Cancer Registry, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznań, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-9124-1509
Adam ChichełDepartment of Brachytherapy, Greater Poland Cancer Centre.
Piotr WojcieszekDepartment of Brachytherapy, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice branch, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-8347-4142
Jacek FijuthDepartment of Radiotherapy, Medical University of Lodz.ORCID 0000-0002-1775-5907
Thomas ZilliDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4784-9883
Amar KishanDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-FossaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the impact of PSMA PET versus conventional imaging for staging, and the effect of dose escalation (DE) to metastatic lymph nodes in cN1 prostate cancer patients treated with EBRT and ADT.

methodsA retrospective multicenter analysis included 197 propensity score-matched patients (77 staged with PSMA PET, 120 with conventional imaging) treated with EBRT and ADT, with or without DE to lymph node metastases. Matching criteria were T stage, nodal involvement, imaging modality, Gleason score, and ADT duration. Primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival (MFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), locoregional control (LRC), and toxicity.

resultsMedian follow-up was 42 months (IQR: 25-59). Median EQD2 (alpha/beta=1.5) to elective nodes was 46 Gy, and to metastatic nodes, 66 Gy (PSMA PET) and 63 Gy (conventional imaging). The 3-year MFS was 80.5% (95% CI: 71.3-90.8%) for PSMA PET and 77.2% (95% CI: 69.5-85.8%) for conventional imaging; 5-year MFS was 59.3% versus 65.8% (P=0.57). OS at 5 years was 82.2% (PSMA PET) and 77.4% (conventional imaging) (P=0.72). On multivariable analysis, ISUP grade group 3-5 predicted earlier metastasis (HR: 4.03, 95% CI: 1.61-10.06; P=0.003); higher prostate dose (EQD2 ≥113 Gy) improved MFS (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.30-0.95; P=0.033); long-term ADT (≥24 mo) improved OS (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.19-0.78; P=0.009). No significant difference in toxicity was observed between groups.

conclusionsPSMA PET staging and nodal dose escalation >60 Gy were safe but did not improve MFS, OS, or LRC. ISUP grade group 3-5 and higher prostate dose significantly influenced outcomes.

Indexed as

Antigens, SurfaceGlutamate Carboxypeptidase IIPositron-Emission TomographyPropensity ScoreProstatic NeoplasmsAgedDose-Response Relationship, RadiationHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedRadiotherapy DosageRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAntigens, SurfaceFOLH1 protein, humanGlutamate Carboxypeptidase IIboostconventional imagingdose escalationlymph node metastasisPET PSMAprostate cancerradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID42081701
PMCPMC13132049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.