BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper was to report definitive outcome of prostate cancer patients treated with dose escalation during a period of 12.5 years. METHODS: From October 1999 to March 2012 we treated 1080 patients affected by prostate cancer, using External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT). The mean age was 69.2 years. Most of the patients (69%) were staged as cT2, Gleason Score (GS)<7; the mean iPSA 18 ng/mL; the rate of clinical positive nodes was 1%. Our intention to treat was the following: for low risk patients 72 Gy; for intermediate risk patients 75.6 Gy and for high-very high risk patients 79.2 Gy in 1.8 Gy/day fractions. From 2008 we changed the fractionation scheme and the doses were the following: for low risk patients 74 Gy and for intermediate and high-very high risk patients 78 Gy in 2.0 Gy/day fractions. Whole pelvis irradiation was performed in high-very high risk patients with 43.2-50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy per day. The mean follow-up was 81 months. RESULTS: For the whole population at 5 and 10 years, the prostate cancer specific overall survival (CSOS) was 96.7% and 92.2% respectively; the clinical disease free survival (CDFS) 88% and 77%; the biochemical disease free survival (BDFS) 75% and 58.5%. The 5 and 10 years CSOS was 98% and 96% respectively for low risk, 96% and 92% for intermediate risk and 89% and 82% for high-very high risk patients. In intermediate and high-very high risk groups at 5 and 10 years the CSOS was 95.2% and 89.2% respectively, the CDFS 84.5% and 70% and the BDFS 70% and 51% respectively. In high-very high risk patients at 5 and 10 years the CSOS were respectively 89% and 82% the CDFS was 78% and 61% and BDFS was 61% and 34%. In whole patient population the BDFS was related with the dose level (P=0.006) as well as the CDFS (P=0.003) with a cut off of 75.6 Gy. In the subgroup of intermediate plus high-very high risk patients the BDFS and the CDFS were dose-related with a cut off of 75.6 Gy (P=0.007 and P=0.0018 respectively). Finally, in the subgroup of high-very high risk patients we found that the CSOS, the BDFS and the CDFS were related to the dose level with a cut-off of 77.7 Gy (P=0.017; P=0.006 and P=0.038, respectively). Overall gastrointestinal (GI) acute and late G2 toxicities were respectively 5 % and 3.8%; GI acute and late >G3 toxicities were respectively 0.5% and 0.9%; acute and late >G2 genitourinary (GU) toxicities were respectively 10.5% and 2.6%; finally GU acute and late >G3 toxicities were respectively 0.6% and 0.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The dose escalation is not relevant for the outcome in low risk patients that can benefit from relatively moderate doses (72-74 Gy). For intermediate and high-very high risk patients the dose becomes significant to levels above 75.6 Gy; particularly in high-very high risk doses >77.7 Gy correlate with an improved outcome. Patients receiving dose >77.7 Gy presented a higher rate of overall GI and GU toxicity, but the number of grade >2 remains low. Our results, consolidated by a long follow-up, corroborate the literature data, confirming that 3D-CRT can allow a safe dose escalation without significantly increasing the severe toxicity.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper was to report definitive outcome of prostate cancerpatients treated with dose escalation during a period of 12.5 years. METHODS: From October 1999 to March 2012 we treated 1080 patients affected by prostate cancer, using External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT). The mean age was 69.2 years. Most of the patients (69%) were staged as cT2, Gleason Score (GS)<7; the mean iPSA 18 ng/mL; the rate of clinical positive nodes was 1%. Our intention to treat was the following: for low risk patients 72 Gy; for intermediate risk patients 75.6 Gy and for high-very high risk patients 79.2 Gy in 1.8 Gy/day fractions. From 2008 we changed the fractionation scheme and the doses were the following: for low risk patients 74 Gy and for intermediate and high-very high risk patients 78 Gy in 2.0 Gy/day fractions. Whole pelvis irradiation was performed in high-very high risk patients with 43.2-50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy per day. The mean follow-up was 81 months. RESULTS: For the whole population at 5 and 10 years, the prostate cancer specific overall survival (CSOS) was 96.7% and 92.2% respectively; the clinical disease free survival (CDFS) 88% and 77%; the biochemical disease free survival (BDFS) 75% and 58.5%. The 5 and 10 years CSOS was 98% and 96% respectively for low risk, 96% and 92% for intermediate risk and 89% and 82% for high-very high risk patients. In intermediate and high-very high risk groups at 5 and 10 years the CSOS was 95.2% and 89.2% respectively, the CDFS 84.5% and 70% and the BDFS 70% and 51% respectively. In high-very high risk patients at 5 and 10 years the CSOS were respectively 89% and 82% the CDFS was 78% and 61% and BDFS was 61% and 34%. In whole patient population the BDFS was related with the dose level (P=0.006) as well as the CDFS (P=0.003) with a cut off of 75.6 Gy. In the subgroup of intermediate plus high-very high risk patients the BDFS and the CDFS were dose-related with a cut off of 75.6 Gy (P=0.007 and P=0.0018 respectively). Finally, in the subgroup of high-very high risk patients we found that the CSOS, the BDFS and the CDFS were related to the dose level with a cut-off of 77.7 Gy (P=0.017; P=0.006 and P=0.038, respectively). Overall gastrointestinal (GI) acute and late G2 toxicities were respectively 5 % and 3.8%; GI acute and late >G3 toxicities were respectively 0.5% and 0.9%; acute and late >G2 genitourinary (GU) toxicities were respectively 10.5% and 2.6%; finally GU acute and late >G3 toxicities were respectively 0.6% and 0.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The dose escalation is not relevant for the outcome in low risk patients that can benefit from relatively moderate doses (72-74 Gy). For intermediate and high-very high risk patients the dose becomes significant to levels above 75.6 Gy; particularly in high-very high risk doses >77.7 Gy correlate with an improved outcome. Patients receiving dose >77.7 Gy presented a higher rate of overall GI and GU toxicity, but the number of grade >2 remains low. Our results, consolidated by a long follow-up, corroborate the literature data, confirming that 3D-CRT can allow a safe dose escalation without significantly increasing the severe toxicity.