ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2026
Proton Therapy in the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer in Young Men.
Article in International journal of particle therapy, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We present long-term outcomes of men young aged 50 years or younger treated for localized prostatic adenocarcinoma with image-guided proton therapy (PT). Patient and Methods: We identified 85 patients with localized prostate cancer treated with PT between 2006 and 2017 at our institution. Patients were treated with double scattered PT to a median dose of 78 GyRBE (range, 78-82) delivered at 2 GyRBE/fraction. Nine (11%) received androgen deprivation therapy for a median of 6 months (range, 6-7). Biochemical control was defined by the Phoenix Definition. Physician-reported toxicity assessed according to CTCAE v5.0. Patient reported outcomes were assessed with the International Prostate Symptom Score and Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC). Freedom from Biochemical Failure (FFBF) was tabulated with Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Median follow-up was 12.3 years (range, 1.58-17.4). FFBF rates by risk category at 10 years were very low 100%, low 100%, favorable intermediate 92%, unfavorable intermediate 93%, and high 100%. Three developed disease progression at 10 years. All had biochemical progression, and one recurred with regional nodal metastases. Grade 2+ gastrointestinal toxicity occurred in 2 (2.4%), and grade 3+ urologic toxicity occurred in 2 (2.4%). Median EPIC summary scores for urinary and bowel outcomes were 97.1 and 98.1 at baseline and 95.8 and 96.4 at 10 years respectively. Median EPIC sexual summary score was 82.7 at baseline and 69.2 at 10 years respectively. Two patients developed a second cancer, and both were out-of-field. One occurred in the submandibular gland 7 years after treatment, and the other in the pancreas 10 years after treatment. Conclusion: PT provides excellent tumor control for patients 50 years or younger with localized prostate cancer and has a low risk for high-grade toxicities. No in-field secondary cancers were observed. Findings from this relatively small population should be confirmed in a larger study population.
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.