8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Initial report of the genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity of post-prostatectomy proton therapy for prostate cancer patients undergoing adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

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

          Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer.

          Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an increasingly important endpoint in prostate cancer care. However, pivotal issues that are not fully assessed in existing HRQOL instruments include irritative urinary symptoms, hormonal symptoms, and multi-item scores quantifying bother between urinary, sexual, bowel, and hormonal domains. We sought to develop a novel instrument to facilitate more comprehensive assessment of prostate cancer-related HRQOL. Instrument development was based on advice from an expert panel and prostate cancer patients, which led to expanding the 20-item University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI) to the 50-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC). Summary and subscale scores were derived by content and factor analyses. Reliability and validity were assessed by test-retest correlation, Cronbach's alpha coefficient, interscale correlation, and EPIC correlation with other validated instruments. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were high for EPIC urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal domain summary scores (each r >/=0.80 and Cronbach's alpha >/=0.82) and for most domain-specific subscales. Correlations between function and bother subscales within domains were high (r >0.60). Correlations between different primary domains were consistently lower, indicating that these domains assess distinct HRQOL components. EPIC domains had weak to modest correlations with the Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), indicating rationale for their concurrent use. Moderate agreement was observed between EPIC domains relevant to the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate module (FACT-P) and the American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA-SI), providing criterion validity without excessive overlap. EPIC is a robust prostate cancer HRQOL instrument that complements prior instruments by measuring a broad spectrum of urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal symptoms, thereby providing a unique tool for comprehensive assessment of HRQOL issues important in contemporary prostate cancer management.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial.

            Extraprostatic disease will be manifest in a third of men after radical prostatectomy. We present the long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial of radiotherapy to reduce the risk of subsequent metastatic disease and death. A total of 431 men with pT3N0M0 prostate cancer were randomized to 60 to 64 Gy adjuvant radiotherapy or observation. The primary study end point was metastasis-free survival. Of 425 eligible men 211 were randomized to observation and 214 to adjuvant radiation. Of those men under observation 70 ultimately received radiotherapy. Metastasis-free survival was significantly greater with radiotherapy (93 of 214 events on the radiotherapy arm vs 114 of 211 events on observation; HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.54, 0.94; p = 0.016). Survival improved significantly with adjuvant radiation (88 deaths of 214 on the radiotherapy arm vs 110 deaths of 211 on observation; HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55, 0.96; p = 0.023). Adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for a man with pT3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces the risk of metastasis and increases survival.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911).

              We report the long-term results of a trial of immediate postoperative irradiation versus a wait-and-see policy in patients with prostate cancer extending beyond the prostate, to confirm whether previously reported progression-free survival was sustained. This randomised, phase 3, controlled trial recruited patients aged 75 years or younger with untreated cT0-3 prostate cancer (WHO performance status 0 or 1) from 37 institutions across Europe. Eligible patients were randomly assigned centrally (1:1) to postoperative irradiation (60 Gy of conventional irradiation to the surgical bed for 6 weeks) or to a wait-and-see policy until biochemical progression (increase in prostate-specific antigen >0·2 μg/L confirmed twice at least 2 weeks apart). We analysed the primary endpoint, biochemical progression-free survival, by intention to treat (two-sided test for difference at α=0.05, adjusted for one interim analysis) and did exploratory analyses of heterogeneity of effect. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00002511. 1005 patients were randomly assigned to a wait-and-see policy (n=503) or postoperative irradiation (n=502) and were followed up for a median of 10·6 years (range 2 months to 16·6 years). Postoperative irradiation significantly improved biochemical progression-free survival compared with the wait-and-see policy (198 [39·4%] of 502 patients in postoperative irradiation group vs 311 [61·8%] of 503 patients in wait-and-see group had biochemical or clinical progression or died; HR 0·49 [95% CI 0·41-0·59]; p<0·0001). Late adverse effects (any type of any grade) were more frequent in the postoperative irradiation group than in the wait-and-see group (10 year cumulative incidence 70·8% [66·6-75·0] vs 59·7% [55·3-64·1]; p=0.001). Results at median follow-up of 10·6 years show that conventional postoperative irradiation significantly improves biochemical progression-free survival and local control compared with a wait-and-see policy, supporting results at 5 year follow-up; however, improvements in clinical progression-free survival were not maintained. Exploratory analyses suggest that postoperative irradiation might improve clinical progression-free survival in patients younger than 70 years and in those with positive surgical margins, but could have a detrimental effect in patients aged 70 years or older. Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer (Comité de l'Isère, Grenoble, France) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Charitable Trust. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Acta Oncologica
                Acta Oncologica
                Informa UK Limited
                0284-186X
                1651-226X
                July 20 2018
                July 20 2018
                : 1-9
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA;
                [2 ] Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA;
                [3 ] Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA;
                [4 ] Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA;
                [5 ] Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
                Article
                10.1080/0284186X.2018.1487583
                894c56a3-60bd-4b1e-b6dc-1b31c15648f2
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article