21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy and a hypofractionated radiation regimen with or without image guided radiotherapy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          To evaluate the efficacy of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HyRT) with or without image guided radiotherapy (IGRT) in intermediate risk prostate cancer.

          Methods

          105 patients were treated with HyRT, 43,8 Gy and 54,75 Gy were delivered to the seminal vescicles and to the prostate, respectively; 3,65 Gy/fraction three times weekly. All patients underwent 9 months hormonal therapy. Patient position was verified with daily kV cone beam CT in 69 patients (IGRT group). Acute and late toxicities were evaluated according to RTOG scale. Biochemical relapse was defined using PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL. The data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the efficacy of IGRT.

          Results

          After a median follow-up of 31 months the actuarial 3-year bNED was 93,7%. During RT, 10.5% and 7.6% of patients developed ≥Grade 2 rectal and urinary toxicities, respectively. The cumulative incidence of ≥Grade 2 late rectal and urinary toxicities at 3 years were 6,9%, and 10,8%, respectively. The incidence of ≥Grade 2 late rectal toxicities was significant reduced in the IGRT group (1,6% vs. 14,5%, p=0,021). Two patients developed Grade 3 urethral obstruction and one patient developed grade 3 rectal bleeding.

          Conclusions

          HyRT represents a well-tolerated treatment able to achieve a high bNED. The use of daily IGRT is beneficial for reducing the incidence of late toxicities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference.

          In 1996 the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) sponsored a Consensus Conference to establish a definition of biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). The ASTRO definition defined prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure as occurring after three consecutive PSA rises after a nadir with the date of failure as the point halfway between the nadir date and the first rise or any rise great enough to provoke initiation of therapy. This definition was not linked to clinical progression or survival; it performed poorly in patients undergoing hormonal therapy (HT), and backdating biased the Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival. A second Consensus Conference was sponsored by ASTRO and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group in Phoenix, Arizona, on January 21, 2005, to revise the ASTRO definition. The panel recommended: (1) a rise by 2 ng/mL or more above the nadir PSA be considered the standard definition for biochemical failure after EBRT with or without HT; (2) the date of failure be determined "at call" (not backdated). They recommended that investigators be allowed to use the ASTRO Consensus Definition after EBRT alone (no hormonal therapy) with strict adherence to guidelines as to "adequate follow-up." To avoid the artifacts resulting from short follow-up, the reported date of control should be listed as 2 years short of the median follow-up. For example, if the median follow-up is 5 years, control rates at 3 years should be cited. Retaining a strict version of the ASTRO definition would allow comparisons with a large existing body of literature.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Improved clinical outcomes with high-dose image guided radiotherapy compared with non-IGRT for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.

            To compare toxicity profiles and biochemical tumor control outcomes between patients treated with high-dose image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for clinically localized prostate cancer. Between 2008 and 2009, 186 patients with prostate cancer were treated with IGRT to a dose of 86.4 Gy with daily correction of the target position based on kilovoltage imaging of implanted prostatic fiducial markers. This group of patients was retrospectively compared with a similar cohort of 190 patients who were treated between 2006 and 2007 with IMRT to the same prescription dose without, however, implanted fiducial markers in place (non-IGRT). The median follow-up time was 2.8 years (range, 2-6 years). A significant reduction in late urinary toxicity was observed for IGRT patients compared with the non-IGRT patients. The 3-year likelihood of grade 2 and higher urinary toxicity for the IGRT and non-IGRT cohorts were 10.4% and 20.0%, respectively (p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis identifying predictors for grade 2 or higher late urinary toxicity demonstrated that, in addition to the baseline Internatinoal Prostate Symptom Score, IGRT was associated with significantly less late urinary toxicity compared with non-IGRT. The incidence of grade 2 and higher rectal toxicity was low for both treatment groups (1.0% and 1.6%, respectively; p = 0.81). No differences in prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival outcomes were observed for low- and intermediate-risk patients when treated with IGRT and non-IGRT. For high-risk patients, a significant improvement was observed at 3 years for patients treated with IGRT compared with non-IGRT. IGRT is associated with an improvement in biochemical tumor control among high-risk patients and a lower rate of late urinary toxicity compared with high-dose IMRT. These data suggest that, for definitive radiotherapy, the placement of fiducial markers and daily tracking of target positioning may represent the preferred mode of external-beam radiotherapy delivery for the treatment of prostate cancer. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Higher-than-conventional radiation doses in localized prostate cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

              To determine in a meta-analysis whether the outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer treated with high-dose radiotherapy (HDRT) are better than those in men treated with conventional-dose radiotherapy (CDRT), by quantifying the effect of the total dose of radiotherapy on biochemical control (BC). The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CANCERLIT, and Cochrane Library databases, as well as the proceedings of annual meetings, were systematically searched to identify randomized, controlled studies comparing HDRT with CDRT for localized prostate cancer. To evaluate the dose-response relationship, we conducted a meta-regression analysis of BC ratios by means of weighted linear regression. Seven RCTs with a total patient population of 2812 were identified that met the study criteria. Pooled results from these RCTs showed a significant reduction in the incidence of biochemical failure in those patients with prostate cancer treated with HDRT (p 2 gastrointestinal toxicity after HDRT than after CDRT. In the subgroup analysis, patients classified as being at low (p = 0.007), intermediate (p < 0.0001), and high risk (p < 0.0001) of biochemical failure all showed a benefit from HDRT. The meta-regression analysis also detected a linear correlation between the total dose of radiotherapy and biochemical failure (BC = -67.3 + [1.8 x radiotherapy total dose in Gy]; p = 0.04). Our meta-analysis showed that HDRT is superior to CDRT in preventing biochemical failure in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk prostate cancer patients, suggesting that this should be offered as a treatment for all patients, regardless of their risk status.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiation Oncology (London, England)
                BioMed Central
                1748-717X
                2013
                7 June 2013
                : 8
                : 137
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, La Sapienza University, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, Rome, 00189, Italy
                Article
                1748-717X-8-137
                10.1186/1748-717X-8-137
                3691824
                23759081
                3866cf24-ccad-40c5-a85e-01f09f1e7c74
                Copyright © 2013 Valeriani et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 13 February 2013
                : 1 June 2013
                Categories
                Research

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                intermediate-risk prostate cancer,hypofractionated radiotherapy,igrt,3d-crt

                Comments

                Comment on this article