Changhoon Song1, Hyun-Cheol Kang1,2, Jae-Sung Kim3, Keun-Yong Eom1, In Ah Kim1, Jin-Beom Chung1, Sung Kyu Hong4, Seok-Soo Byun4, Sang Eun Lee4. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-ro 173 beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-707, Seongnam, Korea/Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dongnam Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Busan, Korea. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-ro 173 beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-707, Seongnam, Korea/Republic of Korea. jskim@snubh.org. 4. Department of Urology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the impact of elective whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) versus prostate bed-only radiotherapy (PBRT) on biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) in prostate cancer patients treated with salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In our database, 163 lymph node-negative prostate cancer patients who had undergone salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for biochemical relapse after RP between September 2004 and April 2012 were identified. PBRT was administered to 134 patients (the PBRT group), while the remaining 29 patients (the WPRT group) received WPRT. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 57 months (range 18-122 months). In the propensity score-matched cohort, the 4-year bRFS of the WPRT group was significantly higher compared to the PBRT group (63.1 vs. 43.4%, p = 0.034). Subgroup analysis showed that the bRFS of patients who had two or more risk factors (seminal vesicle invasion, Roach score for lymph node invasion ≥ 45%, and number of harvested lymph nodes ≤ 5) and were treated with WPRT was significantly improved compared to those who received PBRT (hazard ratio, HR 0.33; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.13-0.83; p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Elective WPRT for SRT may improve bRFS in patients with unfavorable risk factors. These results need to be confirmed by a prospective randomized trial.
PURPOSE: To compare the impact of elective whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) versus prostate bed-only radiotherapy (PBRT) on biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) in prostate cancerpatients treated with salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In our database, 163 lymph node-negative prostate cancerpatients who had undergone salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for biochemical relapse after RP between September 2004 and April 2012 were identified. PBRT was administered to 134 patients (the PBRT group), while the remaining 29 patients (the WPRT group) received WPRT. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 57 months (range 18-122 months). In the propensity score-matched cohort, the 4-year bRFS of the WPRT group was significantly higher compared to the PBRT group (63.1 vs. 43.4%, p = 0.034). Subgroup analysis showed that the bRFS of patients who had two or more risk factors (seminal vesicle invasion, Roach score for lymph node invasion ≥ 45%, and number of harvested lymph nodes ≤ 5) and were treated with WPRT was significantly improved compared to those who received PBRT (hazard ratio, HR 0.33; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.13-0.83; p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Elective WPRT for SRT may improve bRFS in patients with unfavorable risk factors. These results need to be confirmed by a prospective randomized trial.
Authors: Francesco Paparo; Arnoldo Piccardo; Lorenzo Bacigalupo; Andrea Romagnoli; Riccardo Piccazzo; Michela Monticone; Luca Cevasco; Fabio Campodonico; Giuseppe Maria Conzi; Giorgio Carmignani; Gian Andrea Rollandi Journal: Abdom Imaging Date: 2015-08
Authors: Drew Moghanaki; Bridget F Koontz; Jeremy D Karlin; Wen Wan; Nitai Mukhopadhay; Michael P Hagan; Mitchell S Anscher Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Shane E Cotter; Ming Hui Chen; Judd W Moul; W Robert Lee; Bridget F Koontz; Mitchell S Anscher; Cary N Robertson; Philip J Walther; Thomas J Polascik; Anthony V D'Amico Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-03-22 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Bruce J Trock; Misop Han; Stephen J Freedland; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Theodore L DeWeese; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gunnar Lohm; Jörg Lütcke; Basil Jamil; Stefan Höcht; Konrad Neumann; Wolfgang Hinkelbein; Thomas Wiegel; Dirk Bottke Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: J F Langenhuijsen; R Donker; G M McColl; L A L M Kiemeney; J A Witjes; E N J T van Lin Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-04-21 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Alan Dal Pra; Cedric Panje; Thomas Zilli; Winfried Arnold; Kathrin Brouwer; Helena Garcia; Markus Glatzer; Silvia Gomez; Fernanda Herrera; Khanfir Kaouthar; Alexandros Papachristofilou; Gianfranco Pesce; Christiane Reuter; Hansjörg Vees; Daniel Rudolf Zwahlen; Daniel Engeler; Paul Martin Putora Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Carola Link; Patrick Honeck; Akiko Makabe; Frank Anton Giordano; Christian Bolenz; Joerg Schaefer; Markus Bohrer; Frank Lohr; Frederik Wenz; Daniel Buergy Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Changhoon Song; Sang Jun Byun; Young Seok Kim; Hanjong Ahn; Seok-Soo Byun; Choung-Soo Kim; Sang Eun Lee; Jae-Sung Kim Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 3.240