Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42519814›Full record

ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2026

Early outcomes after focal high-dose-rate brachytherapy in low- and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer: promising early results from a prospective randomized trial.

Justinas Jonusas, Ausvydas Patasius, Mantas Trakymas, Kestutis Akelaitis, Mindaugas Dziugelis, Marius Burkanas, Jonas Venius, Giedre Smailyte, Marius Kincius

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 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

9 authors.

Justinas JonusasClinic of Hematology and Oncology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6457-4383
Ausvydas PatasiusLaboratory of Cancer Epidemiology, National Cancer Institute, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3874-2723
Mantas TrakymasCenter of Diagnostic Oncology, National Cancer Center, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Kestutis AkelaitisCenter of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3015-265X
Mindaugas DziugelisCenter of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2108-0241
Marius BurkanasCenter of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2055-8553
Jonas VeniusCenter of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9294-3190
Giedre SmailyteLaboratory of Cancer Epidemiology, National Cancer Institute, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8365-543X
Marius KinciusDepartment of Oncourology, National Cancer Center, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2824-9110

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the QoL of patients diagnosed with low- or favorable-intermediate-risk PCa after focal HDR brachytherapy and active surveillance. Our secondary objectives were to compare progression-free survival (PFS) between patients who underwent focal treatment and those who were actively surveilled and to assess early and late GU and GI adverse effects after the focal HDR brachytherapy. Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at the National Cancer Center located in Vilnius, Lithuania. The study was initiated after approval from the Vilnius Regional Biomedical Research Ethics Committee was obtained (Approval ID 2022/6-1438-911). Twenty-seven patients were assigned to the AS group and 28 to the focal HDR group. Results: During the median follow-up time of 14 and 17 months for AS and HDR groups, respectively, the QoL, evaluated by the EORTC QLQ-30 and PR25 instruments, showed no statistically significant differences in functional scores between the groups after baseline adjustment. Additionally, patients in the HDR group reported better urinary outcomes as measured by EORTC PR25 and IPSS scores at 6, 12, and 18 months. There were no statistically significant differences in erectile function between the groups as measured by the IIEF. Early toxicity was low (no Grade ≥3 events), and only two cases (7.1 %) of Grade 2 GU toxicity were reported in the HDR group within the first 3 months, with one case persisting for 6 months. Late toxicity was not assessed during this interim follow-up. The HDR group demonstrated a non-significant trend toward better oncological outcomes, with fewer PSA-based recurrences and a higher mean PFS than the AS. At the time of last follow-up, 49/55 (89 %) patients were censored (22/27 in the AS and 27/28 in the HDR group). Conclusions: A current study shows comparable QoL and early toxicity results between AS and HDR groups. Any domain-level signals were below MCID and did not persist after baseline adjustment. Results of PFS are underpowered at this interim analysis due to short follow-up and high censoring, and should be considered hypothesis-generating only. However, as current results are only exploratory and insufficient to assess durable disease control or late toxicity, a longer follow-up, larger cohorts, and a multicenter approach are needed to provide definitive outcomes to demonstrate the benefit of focal brachytherapy.

Indexed as

active surveillancefocal therapyhigh-dose-rate brachytherapyprostate cancerrandomised control trial

Identifiers

PMID42519814
PMCPMC13382696

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.