Literature DB >> 15718316

Randomized trial comparing iridium implant plus external-beam radiation therapy with external-beam radiation therapy alone in node-negative locally advanced cancer of the prostate.

Jinka R Sathya1, Ian R Davis, Jim A Julian, Qing Guo, Dean Daya, Ian S Dayes, Himu R Lukka, Mark Levine.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine if iridium implant (IM) and external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is better than standard EBRT in locally advanced prostate cancer.
METHODS: Patients with T2 and T3 prostate cancer with no evidence of metastatic disease were randomly assigned to EBRT of 66 Gy in 33 fractions during 6.5 weeks or to IM of 35 Gy delivered to the prostate during 48 hours plus EBRT of 40 Gy in 20 fractions during 4 weeks. The primary outcome consisted of biochemical or clinical failure (BCF). BCF was defined by biochemical failure, clinical failure, or death as a result of prostate cancer. Secondary outcomes included 2-year postradiation biopsy positivity, toxicity, and survival.
RESULTS: Between 1992 and 1997, 51 patients were randomly assigned to receive IM plus EBRT, and 53 patients were randomly assigned to receive EBRT alone. The median follow-up was 8.2 years. In the IM plus EBRT arm, 17 patients (29%) experienced BCF compared with 33 patients (61%) in the EBRT arm (hazard ratio, 0.42; P = .0024). Eighty-seven patients (84%) had a postradiation biopsy; 10 (24%) of 42 in the IM plus EBRT arm had biopsy positivity compared with 23 (51%) of 45 in the EBRT arm (odds ratio, 0.30; P = .015). Overall survival was 94% in the IM plus EBRT arm versus 92% in the EBRT arm.
CONCLUSION: The combination of IM plus EBRT was superior to EBRT alone for BCF and postradiation biopsy. This trial provides evidence that higher doses of radiation delivered in a shorter duration result in better local as well as biochemical control in locally advanced prostrate cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15718316     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  88 in total

1.  Be it resolved that in the modern era, the best method for dose escalation is brachytherapy: The con position.

Authors:  D Andrew Loblaw
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  The effect of needle number on the quality of high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy implants.

Authors:  Georgina Fröhlich; Péter Agoston; József Lövey; Csaba Polgár; Tibor Major
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2010-03-25       Impact factor: 3.201

3.  Combining radiation therapy and androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer-a critical review.

Authors:  A Dal Pra; F L Cury; L Souhami
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Dosimetric evaluation of high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy boost treatments for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Georgina Fröhlich; Péter Agoston; József Lövey; András Somogyi; János Fodor; Csaba Polgár; Tibor Major
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2010-06-24       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  BIT-ART: Multicentric Comparison of HDR-brachytherapy, Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy and Tomotherapy for Advanced Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Anna Rita Alitto; Luca Tagliaferri; Valentina Lancellotta; Andrea D'Aviero; Antonio Piras; Vincenzo Frascino; Francesco Catucci; Bruno Fionda; Christian Staackmann; Simonetta Saldi; Vincenzo Valentini; Gyorgy Kovacs; Cynthia Aristei; Giovanna Mantini
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

6.  On the impact of functional imaging accuracy on selective boosting IMRT.

Authors:  Y Kim; W A Tomé
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2008-01-18       Impact factor: 2.685

7.  Hormone use after radiotherapy failure: a survey of Canadian uro-oncology specialists.

Authors:  D Andrew Loblaw; Tom Pickles; Patrick C Cheung; Himu Lukka; Sergio Faria; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  Is it beneficial to selectively boost high-risk tumor subvolumes? A comparison of selectively boosting high-risk tumor subvolumes versus homogeneous dose escalation of the entire tumor based on equivalent EUD plans.

Authors:  Yusung Kim; Wolfgang A Tome
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.089

9.  [Brachytherapy of the prostate cancer].

Authors:  S H Stübinger; R Wilhelm; S Kaufmann; M Döring; S Hautmann; K P Jünemann; R Galalae
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 0.639

10.  [Radiotherapy in the treatment of advanced and recurrent prostate cancer].

Authors:  D Böhmer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.