ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
Outcomes of pelvic radiotherapy with boost strategies in high nodal-risk prostate cancer: A phase 2 prospective trial.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose/Objective: The optimal radiotherapy strategy for prostate cancer (PC) patients with high nodal risk remains debated. This prospective phase II study reports long‑term clinical outcomes, toxicity, and patient‑reported outcomes in men with PC treated with whole‑pelvis radiotherapy and dose escalation to MRI‑identified intraprostatic lesions and PET‑positive pelvic lymph nodes. Materials/Methods: Eighty‑five PC patients with high nodal risk or up to three pelvic nodal metastases were enrolled between 2013 and 2017. Radiotherapy delivered 77 Gy to the prostate and 56 Gy to pelvic nodes in 35 fractions, with escalation to 70 Gy for PET‑positive nodes and 84 Gy for MRI‑defined intraprostatic lesions when feasible. Endpoints included biochemical progression‑free survival, overall survival, toxicity, and longitudinal patient‑reported outcomes. Results: Seventy-eight patients underwent radiotherapy. Of these, 42 received an intraprostatic boost and were classified as the per-protocol population. Median follow‑up was 7.8 years, and 26% had N1 disease. For the full cohort, five‑year biochemical progression‑free survival was 76%, with poorer results among patients with RECIST‑positive nodal involvement. Five‑year overall survival was 95%. Acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities occurred in 33 and 23%, respectively, and decreased over time. No grade ≥ 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. Patient‑reported outcomes showed low long‑term urinary and bowel bother. Conclusion: Whole‑pelvis radiotherapy with targeted dose escalation was well tolerated. The high proportion of patients not receiving an intraprostatic boost underscores methodological challenges and emphasises the need for standardised imaging interpretation and delineation guidelines.
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.