Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 735

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized Trial Comparing Conventional-Dose With High-Dose Conformal Radiation Therapy in Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: Long-Term Results From Proton Radiation Oncology Group/American College of Radiology 95-09

Open access
Zietman, Anthony L., Bae, Kyounghwa, Slater, Jerry D., Shipley, William U., Efstathiou, Jason A., Coen, John J., Bush, David A., Lunt, Margie, Spiegel, Daphna Y., Skowronski, Rafi, Jabola, B. Rodney, Rossi, Carl J.·2010·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that increasing radiation dose delivered to men with early-stage prostate cancer improves clinical outcomes. Patients and Methods: Men with T1b-T2b prostate cancer and prostate-specific antigen ≤ 15 ng/mL were randomly assigned to a total dose of either 70.2 Gray equivalents (GyE; conventional) or 79.2 GyE (high). No patient received androgen suppression therapy with radiation. Local failure (LF), biochemical failure (BF), and overall survival (OS) were outcomes. Results: A total of 393 men were randomly assigned, and median follow-up was 8.9 years. Men receiving high-dose radiation therapy were significantly less likely to have LF, with a hazard ratio of 0.57. The 10-year American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology BF rates were 32.4% for conventional-dose and 16.7% for high-dose radiation therapy (P < .0001). This difference held when only those with low-risk disease (n = 227; 58% of total) were examined: 28.2% for conventional and 7.1% for high dose (P < .0001). There was a strong trend in the same direction for the intermediate-risk patients (n = 144; 37% of total; 42.1% v 30.4%, P = .06). Eleven percent of patients subsequently required androgen deprivation for recurrence after conventional dose compared with 6% after high dose (P = .047). There remains no difference in OS rates between the treatment arms (78.4% v 83.4%; P = .41). Two percent of patients in both arms experienced late grade ≥ 3 genitourinary toxicity, and 1% of patients in the high-dose arm experienced late grade ≥ 3 GI toxicity. Conclusion: This randomized controlled trial shows superior long-term cancer control for men with localized prostate cancer receiving high-dose versus conventional-dose radiation. This was achieved without an increase in grade ≥ 3 late urinary or rectal morbidity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2009.25.8475

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 735

Metadata

Authors
Zietman, A. L., Bae, K., Slater, J. D., Shipley, W. U., Efstathiou, J. A., Coen, J. J., Bush, D. A., Lunt, M., Spiegel, D. Y., Skowronski, R., Jabola, B. R., & Rossi, C. J.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2010-03-01
Volume
28
Issue
7
Pages
1106-1111
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2098733695
Cited by
735
References
4
FWCI
51.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized Trial Comparing Conventional-Dose With High-Dose Conformal Radiation Therapy in Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: Long-Term Results From Proton Radiation Oncology Group/American College of Radiology 95-09. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2009.25.8475
The paper
Zietman, A. L., Bae, K., Slater, J. D., Shipley, W. U., Efstathiou, J. A., Coen, J. J., Bush, D. A., Lunt, M., Spiegel, D. Y., Skowronski, R., Jabola, B. R., & Rossi, C. J. (2010). Randomized Trial Comparing Conventional-Dose With High-Dose Conformal Radiation Therapy in Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: Long-Term Results From Proton Radiation Oncology Group/American College of Radiology 95-09. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.25.8475

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.