Literature DB >> 20233822

Patient-reported long-term outcomes after conventional and high-dose combined proton and photon radiation for early prostate cancer.

James A Talcott1, Carl Rossi, William U Shipley, Jack A Clark, Jerry D Slater, Andrzej Niemierko, Anthony L Zietman.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Increased radiation doses improve prostate cancer control but also increase toxicity to adjacent normal tissue. Proton radiation may attenuate adverse effects.
OBJECTIVE: To determine long-term, patient-reported, dose-related toxicity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: We performed a post hoc cross-sectional survey of surviving participants in the Proton Radiation Oncology Group (PROG) 9509--a randomized trial comparing 70.2 Gy vs 79.2 Gy of combined photon and proton radiation for 393 men with clinically localized prostate cancer (stage T1b-T2b, prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/mL, and no radiographic evidence of metastasis). The estimated 10-year biochemical progression rate for patients receiving standard dose was 32% (95% confidence interval, 26%-39%) compared with 17% (95% confidence interval, 11%-23%) for patients receiving high dose (P < .001). We surveyed 280 of the surviving 337 patients (83%) from April 2007 to September 2008. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prostate Cancer Symptom Indices, a validated measure of urinary incontinence, urinary obstruction and irritation, bowel problems, and sexual dysfunction, and related quality-of-life instruments.
RESULTS: At a median of 9.4 years after treatment (range, 7.4-12.1 years), participants' demographic and clinical characteristics were similar. Patient-reported outcomes were reported as mean (SD) scale score for standard dose vs high dose: urinary obstruction/irritation (23.3 [13.7] vs 24.6 [14.0]; P = .36), urinary incontinence (10.6 [17.7] vs 9.7 [15.8]; P = .99), bowel problems (7.7 [7.8] vs 7.9 [9.1]; P = .70), sexual dysfunction (68.2 [34.6] vs 65.9 [34.7]; P = .65), and most other outcomes were also similar, although patients receiving standard dose whose cancers had more often progressed expressed less confidence that their cancers were under control (mean [SD] scale score for standard dose, 76.0 [25.4] vs high dose, 86.2 [17.9]; P < .001). Many patients characterized their urinary and bowel function as normal despite reporting symptoms that, for other prostate cancer patients before and early after cancer treatment, caused substantial distress.
CONCLUSION: Among men with clinically localized prostate cancer, treatment with higher-dose radiation compared with standard dose was not associated with an increase in patient-reported prostate cancer symptoms after a median of 9.4 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20233822     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.287

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  32 in total

1.  Prostate cancer: Patient-reported functional outcomes with radiation therapy.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Montgomery
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  [Translational uroradio-oncology].

Authors:  S E Combs; J Debus
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Pretreatment fertility counseling and fertility preservation improve quality of life in reproductive age women with cancer.

Authors:  Joseph M Letourneau; Erin E Ebbel; Patricia P Katz; Audra Katz; Wei Z Ai; A Jo Chien; Michelle E Melisko; Marcelle I Cedars; Mitchell P Rosen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  The opportunity cost of androgen suppression in locally advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  Phillip J Gray; Jason A Efstathiou; William U Shipley
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 5.  Proton beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer-is the hype (and the cost) justified?

Authors:  Phillip J Gray; Jason A Efstathiou
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  Long-term quality of life outcomes in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer after intensity-modulated radiotherapy combined with androgen deprivation.

Authors:  Hua-chun Luo; Li-ping Cheng; Hui-hua Cheng; Zhi-chao Fu; Shao-guang Liao; Dong-shi Li; Wen-fa Zheng; Gui-shan Lin; Jin-feng Zhu; Jian-feng Xu; Qin Yin; Qing-yang Yu
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 7.  Promise and pitfalls of heavy-particle therapy.

Authors:  Timur Mitin; Anthony L Zietman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 8.  Proton beam and prostate cancer: An evolving debate.

Authors:  Anthony Zietman
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2013-07-03

9.  Quality of life among men with low-risk prostate cancer during the first year following diagnosis: the PREPARE prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kathryn L Taylor; George Luta; Richard M Hoffman; Kimberly M Davis; Tania Lobo; Yingjun Zhou; Amethyst Leimpeter; Jun Shan; Roxanne E Jensen; David S Aaronson; Stephen K Van Den Eeden
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 10.  Clinical controversies: proton therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kent W Mouw; Alexei Trofimov; Anthony L Zietman; Jason A Efstathiou
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.934

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.