To get the low-level details you want (radiotherapy type, dose, etc.), you’ll have to research the actual clinical trials that they were reporting the results about.

I’ll leave it up you to tell the NEJM that you think their reporting is deceptive. (Don’t think you’ll get much traction with that….)

You used the word “identical” — (“….found NONE that supported the often reported mantra that two vastly different treatment techniques coincidentally yielded identical curative outcomes.” Rarely if ever will you find in scientific literature “identical” results, or even any reference to “identical” results. What you’ll find is whether there’s “statistical significance” to a result. (And, this report indicated that there is not a statistically significant difference in outcomes for localized prostate cancer.) Try to review scientific papers with a scientific mindset, not a lay mindset.

I did 9 years of researching medical literature while I was on active surveillance and more during these past 4 years since active treatment, and found many papers and many organizations and institutions reporting statistically equivalent outcomes between surgery vs radiation.

Of all the papers you said you researched, I would be interested in seeing a recent clinical, peer-reviewed paper (on par with the studies that the NEJM paper references) that indicates statistically different 15-year oncological outcomes for localized disease.