[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-371298-105":59,"doc-detail-371298-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","efficacy-and-safety-of-newly-installed-spot-scanning-proton-beam-therapy-for-prostate-cancer","Efficacy and Safety of Newly Installed Spot Scanning Proton Beam Therapy for Prostate Cancer","","Retrospective analysis assessed initial outcomes and toxicities of spot-scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancer at Shonan‑Kamakura General Hospital. Patients received laterally opposing single-field uniform-dose spot scanning with 60 Gy/20 fractions for low‑risk disease and 63 Gy/21 fractions for intermediate/high‑risk. Genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were evaluated using CTCAE v5.0. Among 135 treated patients over two years, 51 underwent hydrogel spacer insertion; no recurrences occurred during limited follow‑up.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/efficacy-and-safety-of-newly-installed-spot-scanning-proton-beam-therapy-for-prostate-cancer/371298/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/efficacy-and-safety-of-newly-installed-spot-scanning-proton-beam-therapy-for-prostate-cancer/371298.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Ezra","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-23",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":52},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What was the purpose of this retrospective study on prostate cancer treatment?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"To analyze initial treatment outcomes and associated toxicities of newly installed spot-scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancer at the hospital.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were proton therapy doses assigned across risk groups?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Low-risk patients received 60 Gy in 20 fractions, while intermediate- and high-risk patients received 63 Gy in 21 fractions using a laterally opposing single-field uniform dose approach.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What toxicities and spacer-related effects were reported?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were assessed by CTCAE v5.0. Grade 2 GU toxicities occurred in 17 patients, and GI toxicities of grade 1 or higher occurred in seven; no patients with hydrogel spacer insertion experienced grade 1 or higher GI toxicity.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},371298,1790469621,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":52,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":39,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":46},1099514068035,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","doi: 10.21873/invivo.13888  \nEfficacy and Safety of Newly Installed Spot Scanning Proton Beam Therapy for Prostate Cancer  \nSACHIKA SHIRAISHI1,2, YUKIYASU HORIKAWA3, RYOTA UMEDA3, KAZUKI MATSUMOTO4, AKIHIRO YAMANO4, MASASHI YAMANAKA4, TAKAHIRO SHIMO4, TARO MURAI1, ICHIRO MIURA3 and KOICHI TOKUUYE1,2  \n1 Department of Radiation Oncology, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan;  \n2 Department of Radiology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan;  \n3 Department of Urology, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan; 4 Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan  \nAbstract  \nBackground/Aim: This study aimed to analyse retrospectively the initial treatment outcomes and associated toxicities of a spot scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancer at the Shonan‑Kamakura General Hospital.  \nPatients and Methods: A laterally opposing single‑field uniform dose of spot‑scanning proton beam was used. The doses were determined to be 60 Gy in 20 fractions for low‑risk prostate cancer and 63 Gy in 21 fractions for intermediate‑ and high‑risk prostate cancers. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were also evaluated. Toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0.  \nResults: A total of 135 patients were treated over two years, 51 of whom underwent hydrogel spacer insertion. During the limited observation period, no patient experienced a recurrence. Grade 2 GU toxicities were observed in 17 patients, whereas grade 1 or greater GI toxicities were observed in seven patients. None of the patients in whom ahydrogel spacer was inserted experienced grade 1 or higher GI toxicity.  \nConclusion: Proton beam therapy is safe for the treatment of prostate cancer. The insertion of a gold marker and hydrogel spacer led to a reduction in the rectal radiation dose and GI toxicity.  \nKeywords: Gold marker, hydrogel spacer, radiation dose, toxicity, retrospective study.  \nIntroduction  \nProton beam therapy (PBT) offers a superior dose concentration to the target owing to the Bragg Peak over  \nphoton therapy, as initially indicated by Robert Wilson (1). In Japan, prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer among men, with an increasing incidence (2) . The widespread use of the prostate‑specific antigen (PSA) test  \n✉  \nSachika Shiraishi (ORCID: 0009‑0004‑5249‑3705), Department of Radiation Oncology, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, 1370‑1 Okamoto, Kamakura City, Kanagawa 247‑8533, Japan. Tel: +81 467461717, e‑mail: s‑nogi@tokyo‑[med.ac.jp](med.ac.jp)  \nReceived December 9, 2024 | Revised December 19, 2024 | Accepted December 23, 2024  \nThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.  \n©2025 The Author(s) . Anticancer Research is published by the International Institute of Anticancer Research.  \nhas led to the early diagnosis of prostate cancer (3) . PBT for prostate cancer, initiated at Harvard University, aims to safely increase the dose delivered to the prostate (4) . This approach demonstrated that higher doses are more effective in controlling prostate cancer. Dose escalation and the development of new techniques have been extensively explored in photon therapy, which is more commonly used than proton therapy (5) . Intensity‑ modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was introduced to enhance the dose to the prostate while minimising exposures to the surrounding tissues, including the rectum and urinary bladder (6) . A large‑scale study of high dose PBT for prostate cancer at the Loma Linda University yielded excellent outcomes (7) . Similarly positive results have been obtained in Japan, where PBTis now considered a standard treatment (8) . Efforts to reduce treatment duration included a study comparing a standard dose of 74 Gy in 37 fractions with 60 Gy in 20 fractions using IMRT, conclud","cbCaipTrbX6kvmX2","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaipTrbX6kvmX2","pdf",459145,"English","# Abstract\n## Background/Aim\n## Patients and Methods\n## Results\n## Conclusion\n# Introduction\n# Patients and Methods","[{\"question\":\"What was the purpose of this retrospective study on prostate cancer treatment?\",\"answer\":\"To analyze initial treatment outcomes and associated toxicities of newly installed spot-scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancer at the hospital.\"},{\"question\":\"How were proton therapy doses assigned across risk groups?\",\"answer\":\"Low-risk patients received 60 Gy in 20 fractions, while intermediate- and high-risk patients received 63 Gy in 21 fractions using a laterally opposing single-field uniform dose approach.\"},{\"question\":\"What toxicities and spacer-related effects were reported?\",\"answer\":\"Genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were assessed by CTCAE v5.0. Grade 2 GU toxicities occurred in 17 patients, and GI toxicities of grade 1 or higher occurred in seven; no patients with hydrogel spacer insertion experienced grade 1 or higher GI toxicity.\"}]","Efficacy and Safety of Newly Installed Spot Scanning Proton Beam Therapy for Prostate Cancer | PDF",1790191734]