ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2026
Acute toxicity and patient-reported quality of life during daily online adaptive radiotherapy versus conventional IGRT for localized prostate cancer: a prospective parallel cohort study.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to prospectively compare clinician-reported acute toxicity and patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between daily cone-beam CT (CBCT)-based online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with moderate hypofractionation. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective study, 74 patients with localized prostate cancer received either CBCT-based oART (n = 43) or CBCT-based IGRT (n = 31) with 62/57.6/48 Gy in 20 fractions, allocated pragmatically by convenience. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity was assessed weekly using CTCAE v5.0, and HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline and the end of therapy. Between-group differences were tested using Boschloo's exact test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test and t-tests; temporal and between-group changes were evaluated based on minimally clinically important differences (MCIDs).
resultsBaseline patient and treatment characteristics were similar, except for more high-/very high-risk tumors in the oART group (40.5% vs. 9.7%; p = 0.03). Online ART was associated with more favorable gastrointestinal toxicity, reflected by lower maximum toxicity grades (p = 0.028). Maximum genitourinary toxicity was comparable between groups (p = 0.793). More IGRT patients exceeded MCID thresholds for fatigue (74% vs. 37%; p = 0.004), physical functioning (27% vs. 3%; p = 0.009), and role functioning (48.1% vs. 22.9%; p = 0.04). Differences for global health, pain, social function, and diarrhea were not statistically significant but consistently favored oART.
conclusionDaily CBCT-based oART and IGRT were both well tolerated, with low rates of high-grade acute toxicity. In this exploratory analysis, oART was associated with a more favorable GI toxicity profile and better preservation of HRQoL. These hypothesis-generating findings suggest that adaptive workflows may provide measurable patient-centered benefits during prostate radiotherapy and warrant confirmation in larger prospective studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42789071What 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.