54
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Absorbable hydrogel spacer use in men undergoing prostate cancer radiotherapy: 12 month toxicity and proctoscopy results of a prospective multicenter phase II trial

      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

          Radiation therapy is one of the recommended treatment options for localized prostate cancer. In randomized trials, dose escalation was correlated with better biochemical control but also with higher rectal toxicity. A prospective multicenter phase II study was carried out to evaluate the safety, clinical and dosimetric effects of the hydrogel prostate-rectum spacer. Here we present the 12 months toxicity results of this trial.

          Methods

          Fifty two patients with localized prostate cancer received a transperineal PEG hydrogel injection between the prostate and rectum, and then received IMRT to a dose of 78 Gy. Gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were recorded during treatment and at 3, 6 and 12 months following irradiation by using the RTOG/EORTC criteria. Additionally, proctoscopy was performed 12 months after treatment and the results were scored using the Vienna Rectoscopy Scale (VRS).

          Results

          Of the patients treated 39.6% and 12.5% experienced acute Grade 1 and Grade 2 GI toxicity, respectively. There was no Grade 3 or Grade 4 acute GI toxicity experienced in the study. Only 4.3% showed late Grade 1 GI toxicity, and there was no late Grade 2 or greater GI toxicity experienced in the study. A total of 41.7%, 35.4% and 2.1% of the men experienced acute Grade 1, Grade 2 and Grade 3 GU toxicity, respectively. There was no Grade 4 acute GU toxicity experienced in the study. Late Grade 1 and Grade 2 GU toxicity was experienced in 17.0% and 2.1% of the patients, respectively. There was no late Grade 3 or greater GU toxicity experienced in the study. Seventy one percent of the patients had a VRS score of 0, and one patient (2%) had Grade 3 teleangiectasia. There was no evidence of ulceration, stricture or necrosis at 12 months.

          Conclusion

          The use of PEG spacer gel is a safe and effective method to spare the rectum from higher dose and toxicity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

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

          Long-term results of the M. D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer.

          To report the long-term results of a randomized radiotherapy dose escalation trial for prostate cancer. From 1993 to 1998, a total of 301 patients with stage T1b to T3 prostate cancer were accrued to a randomized external beam dose escalation trial using 70 Gy versus 78 Gy. The median follow-up is now 8.7 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compute rates of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure (nadir + 2), clinical failure, distant metastasis, disease-specific, and overall survival as well as complication rates at 8 years post-treatment. For all patients, freedom from biochemical or clinical failure (FFF) was superior for the 78-Gy arm, 78%, as compared with 59% for the 70-Gy arm (p = 0.004, and an even greater benefit was seen in patients with initial PSA >10 ng/ml (78% vs. 39%, p = 0.001). The clinical failure rate was significantly reduced in the 78-Gy arm as well (7% vs. 15%, p = 0.014). Twice as many patients either died of prostate cancer or are currently alive with cancer in the 70-Gy arm. Gastrointestinal toxicity of grade 2 or greater occurred twice as often in the high dose patients (26% vs. 13%), although genitourinary toxicity of grade 2 or greater was less (13% vs. 8%) and not statistically significantly different. Dose-volume histogram analysis showed that the complication rate could be significantly decreased by reducing the amount of treated rectum. Modest escalation in radiotherapy dose improved freedom from biochemical and clinical progression with the largest benefit in prostate cancer patients with PSA >10 ng/ml.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            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.

            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 /= 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.
              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
                2014
                24 April 2014
                : 9
                : 96
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
                [2 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
                [3 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, NKI-AVL Nederlands Kanker Instituut - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
                [5 ]Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
                Article
                1748-717X-9-96
                10.1186/1748-717X-9-96
                4016630
                24758224
                c6601417-afb7-4c8c-87d8-d50cde2304bc
                Copyright © 2014 Uhl 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 credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 19 October 2013
                : 15 April 2014
                Categories
                Research

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prostate cancer,radiotherapy,rectal toxicity,hydrogel,spacer,imrt
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prostate cancer, radiotherapy, rectal toxicity, hydrogel, spacer, imrt

                Comments

                Comment on this article