PURPOSE: Comparing the chromosomal radiosensitivity of prostate cancer patients with that of healthy donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 81 prostate cancer patients characterised by a clinical stage of predominantly pT2c or pT3a and a median age of 67 years. As healthy donors 60 male monozygotic twin pairs were recruited with a median age of 28 years. Chromosomal radiosensitivity was measured using both G0- and G2-assay. RESULTS: No difference between healthy donors and prostate cancer patients was detected concerning G0-radiosensitivity, since medians were similar (Hodges-Lehmann estimate: -0.05, 95% CI: -0.18-0.08, p=0.4167). However, a pronounced difference was determined for G2-radiosensitivity with prostate cancer patients showing a significantly higher sensitivity compared to healthy donors (Hodges-Lehmann estimate: -0.41, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.30, p=1.75(-9)). Using the 90% quantile of G2-radiosensitivity in healthy donors as a threshold for discrimination the fraction of prostate cancer patients with elevated radiosensitivity increased to 49%. CONCLUSION: G2-, but not G0-radiosensitivity is a promising marker for predisposition of prostate cancer. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: Comparing the chromosomal radiosensitivity of prostate cancerpatients with that of healthy donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 81 prostate cancerpatients characterised by a clinical stage of predominantly pT2c or pT3a and a median age of 67 years. As healthy donors 60 male monozygotic twin pairs were recruited with a median age of 28 years. Chromosomal radiosensitivity was measured using both G0- and G2-assay. RESULTS: No difference between healthy donors and prostate cancerpatients was detected concerning G0-radiosensitivity, since medians were similar (Hodges-Lehmann estimate: -0.05, 95% CI: -0.18-0.08, p=0.4167). However, a pronounced difference was determined for G2-radiosensitivity with prostate cancerpatients showing a significantly higher sensitivity compared to healthy donors (Hodges-Lehmann estimate: -0.41, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.30, p=1.75(-9)). Using the 90% quantile of G2-radiosensitivity in healthy donors as a threshold for discrimination the fraction of prostate cancerpatients with elevated radiosensitivity increased to 49%. CONCLUSION: G2-, but not G0-radiosensitivity is a promising marker for predisposition of prostate cancer. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.