Kevin S Choe1, Ashesh B Jani, Stanley L Liauw. 1. Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To characterize the bleeding toxicity associated with external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer patients receiving anticoagulation (AC) therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study cohort consisted of 568 patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate who were treated with definitive external beam radiotherapy. Of these men, 79 were receiving AC therapy with either warfarin or clopidogrel. All patients were treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Bleeding complications were recorded during treatment and subsequent follow-up visits. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 48 months, the 4-year actuarial risk of Grade 3 or worse bleeding toxicity was 15.5% for those receiving AC therapy compared with 3.6% among those not receiving AC (p < .0001). On multivariate analysis, AC therapy was the only significant factor associated with Grade 3 or worse bleeding (p < .0001). For patients taking AC therapy, the crude rate of bleeding was 39.2%. Multivariate analysis within the AC group demonstrated that a higher radiotherapy dose (p = .0408), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (p = 0.0136), and previous transurethral resection of the prostate (p = .0001) were associated with Grade 2 or worse bleeding toxicity. Androgen deprivation therapy was protective against bleeding, with borderline significance (p = 0.0599). Dose-volume histogram analysis revealed that Grade 3 or worse bleeding was minimized if the percentage of the rectum receiving >or=70 Gy was <10% or the rectum receiving >or=50 Gy was <50%. CONCLUSION: Patients taking AC therapy have a substantial risk of bleeding toxicity from external beam radiotherapy. In this setting, dose escalation or intensity-modulated radiotherapy should be used judiciously. With adherence to strict dose-volume histogram criteria and minimizing hotspots, the risk of severe bleeding might be reduced. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: To characterize the bleeding toxicity associated with external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancerpatients receiving anticoagulation (AC) therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study cohort consisted of 568 patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate who were treated with definitive external beam radiotherapy. Of these men, 79 were receiving AC therapy with either warfarin or clopidogrel. All patients were treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Bleeding complications were recorded during treatment and subsequent follow-up visits. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 48 months, the 4-year actuarial risk of Grade 3 or worse bleeding toxicity was 15.5% for those receiving AC therapy compared with 3.6% among those not receiving AC (p < .0001). On multivariate analysis, AC therapy was the only significant factor associated with Grade 3 or worse bleeding (p < .0001). For patients taking AC therapy, the crude rate of bleeding was 39.2%. Multivariate analysis within the AC group demonstrated that a higher radiotherapy dose (p = .0408), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (p = 0.0136), and previous transurethral resection of the prostate (p = .0001) were associated with Grade 2 or worse bleeding toxicity. Androgen deprivation therapy was protective against bleeding, with borderline significance (p = 0.0599). Dose-volume histogram analysis revealed that Grade 3 or worse bleeding was minimized if the percentage of the rectum receiving >or=70 Gy was <10% or the rectum receiving >or=50 Gy was <50%. CONCLUSION:Patients taking AC therapy have a substantial risk of bleeding toxicity from external beam radiotherapy. In this setting, dose escalation or intensity-modulated radiotherapy should be used judiciously. With adherence to strict dose-volume histogram criteria and minimizing hotspots, the risk of severe bleeding might be reduced. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Romain Mathieu; Juan David Ospina Arango; Véronique Beckendorf; Jean-Bernard Delobel; Taha Messai; Ciprian Chira; Alberto Bossi; Elisabeth Le Prisé; Stéphane Guerif; Jean-Marc Simon; Bernard Dubray; Jian Zhu; Jean-Léon Lagrange; Pascal Pommier; Khemara Gnep; Oscar Acosta; Renaud De Crevoisier Journal: World J Urol Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Erqi L Pollom; Lei Deng; Reetesh K Pai; J Martin Brown; Amato Giaccia; Billy W Loo; David B Shultz; Quynh Thu Le; Albert C Koong; Daniel T Chang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Susan L Tucker; Lei Dong; Walter R Bosch; Jeff Michalski; Kathryn Winter; Radhe Mohan; James A Purdy; Deborah Kuban; Andrew K Lee; M Rex Cheung; Howard D Thames; James D Cox Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-07-02 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Lee Sung Uk; Kim Young Ae; Yoon Young-Ho; Kim Yeon-Joo; Lim Myong Cheol; Park Sang-Yoon; Seo Sang-Soo; Park Ji Eun; Kim Joo-Young Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Nathan C Sheets; Gregg H Goldin; Anne-Marie Meyer; Yang Wu; YunKyung Chang; Til Stürmer; Jordan A Holmes; Bryce B Reeve; Paul A Godley; William R Carpenter; Ronald C Chen Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Corbin D Jacobs; Stephen G Chun; Jingsheng Yan; Xian-Jin Xie; David A Pistenmaa; Raquibul Hannan; Yair Lotan; Claus G Roehrborn; Kevin S Choe; D W Nathan Kim Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 4.742