PURPOSE: Permanent prostate implant brachytherapy (PPI), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and conformal proton beam radiotherapy (CPBRT) are used in the treatment of localized prostate cancer, although no head-to-head trials have compared these modalities. We studied the biochemical control (biochemical no evidence of disease [bNED]) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir achieved with contemporary PPI, and evaluated it against 3D-CRT and CPBRT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 249 patients were treated with PPI at the University of California, San Francisco, and the outcomes were compared with those from a 3D-CRT cohort and the published results of a high-dose CPBRT boost (CPBRTB) trial. For each comparison, subsets of the PPI cohort were selected with patient and disease criteria similar to those of the reference group. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the bNED rate at 5 and 7 years achieved with PPI was 92% and 86%, respectively, using the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) definition, and 93% using the PSA nadir plus 2 ng/mL definition. Using the ASTRO definition, a 5-year bNED rate of 78% was achieved for the 3D-CRT patients compared with 94% for a comparable PPI subset and 93% vs. 92%, respectively, using the PSA nadir plus 2 ng/mL definition. The median PSA nadir for patients treated with PPI and 3D-CRT was 0.10 and 0.40 ng/mL, respectively (p < .0001). For the CPBRT comparison, the 5-year bNED rate after a CPBRTB was 91% using the ASTRO definition vs. 93% for a similar group of PPI patients. A greater proportion of PPI patients achieved a lower PSA nadir compared with those achieved in the CPBRTB trial (PSA nadir < or =0.5 ng/mL, 91% vs. 59%, respectively). CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated excellent outcomes in low- to intermediate-risk patients treated with PPI, suggesting at least equivalent 5-year bNED rates and a greater proportion of men achieving lower PSA nadirs compared with 3D-CRT or CPBRTB.
PURPOSE: Permanent prostate implant brachytherapy (PPI), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and conformal proton beam radiotherapy (CPBRT) are used in the treatment of localized prostate cancer, although no head-to-head trials have compared these modalities. We studied the biochemical control (biochemical no evidence of disease [bNED]) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir achieved with contemporary PPI, and evaluated it against 3D-CRT and CPBRT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 249 patients were treated with PPI at the University of California, San Francisco, and the outcomes were compared with those from a 3D-CRT cohort and the published results of a high-dose CPBRT boost (CPBRTB) trial. For each comparison, subsets of the PPI cohort were selected with patient and disease criteria similar to those of the reference group. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the bNED rate at 5 and 7 years achieved with PPI was 92% and 86%, respectively, using the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) definition, and 93% using the PSA nadir plus 2 ng/mL definition. Using the ASTRO definition, a 5-year bNED rate of 78% was achieved for the 3D-CRT patients compared with 94% for a comparable PPI subset and 93% vs. 92%, respectively, using the PSA nadir plus 2 ng/mL definition. The median PSA nadir for patients treated with PPI and 3D-CRT was 0.10 and 0.40 ng/mL, respectively (p < .0001). For the CPBRT comparison, the 5-year bNED rate after a CPBRTB was 91% using the ASTRO definition vs. 93% for a similar group of PPI patients. A greater proportion of PPI patients achieved a lower PSA nadir compared with those achieved in the CPBRTB trial (PSA nadir < or =0.5 ng/mL, 91% vs. 59%, respectively). CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated excellent outcomes in low- to intermediate-risk patients treated with PPI, suggesting at least equivalent 5-year bNED rates and a greater proportion of men achieving lower PSA nadirs compared with 3D-CRT or CPBRTB.
Authors: George Rodrigues; Xiaomei Yao; D Andrew Loblaw; Michael Brundage; Joseph L Chin Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: James B Yu; Laura D Cramer; Jeph Herrin; Pamela R Soulos; Arnold L Potosky; Cary P Gross Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-03-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Antonio C Westphalen; Fergus V Coakley; Mack Roach; Charles E McCulloch; John Kurhanewicz Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-06-15 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Cian Hackett; Sunita Ghosh; Ron Sloboda; Kevin Martell; Lanna Lan; Nadeem Pervez; John Pedersen; Don Yee; Albert Murtha; John Amanie; Nawaid Usmani Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2014-09-05
Authors: Ben G L Vanneste; Evert J Van Limbergen; Emile N van Lin; Joep G H van Roermund; Philippe Lambin Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 3.411