STUDY TYPE: Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4. OBJECTIVE: To report our analysis of the oncological outcome, side-effects and complications after (125)I-brachytherapy, based on 10 years of experience, as low dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy is an accepted, effective and safe therapy for localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April 1999 and December 2006, 734 consecutive patients were treated with clinically localized prostate cancer with a follow-up of >or=30 months. No patients received external beam radiotherapy and 43% received hormonal therapy before brachytherapy; this therapy was given for 3-4 months. All patients had LDR prostate brachytherapy administered by one radiation oncologist. Biochemical failure was defined according to the 'Phoenix consensus'. RESULTS: The median follow-up for the 734 patients was 55 months; 26 had a clinical relapse and 11 died from prostate cancer; 20 patients died from other illnesses. The 10-year actuarial biochemical control was 92%, 84% and 65%, respectively (P < 0.001) for the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups. Multivariate Cox regression analyses identified Gleason score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level as independent prognostic factors for biochemical failure. The actuarial biochemical control with Gleason score was 88%, 76% and 67% for patients with a Gleason score of <or=6, 7 and >7, respectively (P < 0.001). The biochemical control was 90%, 80% and 42% for patients with a PSA level of <or=10, 10.1-20 and >20 ng/mL, respectively (P < 0.001). No patients reported incontinence after treatment. There was acute urinary retention in 22 (2.9%) patients. Logistic regression showed that the most significant factors correlating with the probability of catheterization were the pretreatment prostate volume and hormonal therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The excellent long-term results and low morbidity, and the many advantages of prostate brachytherapy over other treatments, show that brachytherapy is an effective treatment for clinically organ-confined prostate cancer.
STUDY TYPE: Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4. OBJECTIVE: To report our analysis of the oncological outcome, side-effects and complications after (125)I-brachytherapy, based on 10 years of experience, as low dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy is an accepted, effective and safe therapy for localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April 1999 and December 2006, 734 consecutive patients were treated with clinically localized prostate cancer with a follow-up of >or=30 months. No patients received external beam radiotherapy and 43% received hormonal therapy before brachytherapy; this therapy was given for 3-4 months. All patients had LDR prostate brachytherapy administered by one radiation oncologist. Biochemical failure was defined according to the 'Phoenix consensus'. RESULTS: The median follow-up for the 734 patients was 55 months; 26 had a clinical relapse and 11 died from prostate cancer; 20 patients died from other illnesses. The 10-year actuarial biochemical control was 92%, 84% and 65%, respectively (P < 0.001) for the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups. Multivariate Cox regression analyses identified Gleason score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level as independent prognostic factors for biochemical failure. The actuarial biochemical control with Gleason score was 88%, 76% and 67% for patients with a Gleason score of <or=6, 7 and >7, respectively (P < 0.001). The biochemical control was 90%, 80% and 42% for patients with a PSA level of <or=10, 10.1-20 and >20 ng/mL, respectively (P < 0.001). No patients reported incontinence after treatment. There was acute urinary retention in 22 (2.9%) patients. Logistic regression showed that the most significant factors correlating with the probability of catheterization were the pretreatment prostate volume and hormonal therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The excellent long-term results and low morbidity, and the many advantages of prostate brachytherapy over other treatments, show that brachytherapy is an effective treatment for clinically organ-confined prostate cancer.
Authors: Olga Pons-Llanas; Susana Roldan-Ortega; Francisco Celada-Alvarez; María José Perez-Calatayud; Victoria Fornes-Ferrer; Alejandro Tormo-Micó; José Perez-Calatayud; José Luis López-Torrecilla Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2018-07-26
Authors: Pedro J Prada; Javier Anchuelo; Ana Garcia Blanco; Gema Paya; Juan Cardenal; Enrique Acuna; Maria Ferri; Andres Vazquez; Maite Pacheco; Jesica Sanchez Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.541