Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in metachronous oligometastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the current prospective evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In contrast to traditional views of incurability, patients with oligometastatic disease present with an opportunity for disease eradication with aggressive treatment. There is mounting evidence in support of the role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC). METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were queried for prospective cohort studies reporting the outcomes of metachronous OMPC treated with SBRT. The primary outcome was overall local control. Secondary outcomes included androgen deprivation therapy-free survival (ADTFS), biochemical recurrence free survival (BCFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). When appropriate, these endpoints were combined in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: ranging from 152 to 408. Only one Grade 3 bone toxicity was observed. Meta-analysis reported an overall local control rate of 97% (95% CI, 94-100). Median ADTFS was 24.7 months (95% CI, 20.1-29.2 months). Two-year BCFS, PFS, and ADTFS were 33% (95% CI, 11-55), 39% (95% CI, 24-54), and 52% (95%CI, 41-62), respectively. Patients treated with SBRT were half as likely to experience PSA progression than those on observation when looking at randomized control trial data alone. CONCLUSION: SBRT appears to be effective in controlling overall disease burden in metachronous OMPC patients and is associated with minimal significant toxicity. The current prospective literature is scarce, and further prospective data are needed to guide treatment recommendations. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study provides a comprehensive summary of the prospective evidence reporting the outcomes of SBRT in the management of OMPC patients. We quantify the rates of local control, biochemical-free recurrence, progression-free survival, and ADT-free survival through meta-analysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".