Martina Becker-Schiebe1, Ali Abaci2, Tahera Ahmad2, Wolfgang Hoffmann2. 1. Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, Klinikum Braunschweig, Hannover Medical School, Braunschweig, Germany; Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 2. Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, Klinikum Braunschweig, Hannover Medical School, Braunschweig, Germany.
Abstract
AIM: To determine the influence of IGRT in terms of toxicities compared to non-IGRT patients undergoing definitive RT. BACKGROUND: Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) enables immediate correction of target movement by online imaging. For prostate cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT), a geographical miss of the prostate may result in increased dose-volume effects in the rectum and bladder. METHODS: A total of 198 prostate cancer patients treated between 2003 and 2013 were recruited randomly for this evaluation. The rates of genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity for 96 non-IGRT patients (total dose: 72/73.8 Gy) were compared to those for 102 IGRT patients (total dose: 77.4 Gy) according to the Common Toxicity Criteria Version 3.0 (CTCAEv3.0). Follow-up information included treatment-related symptoms and PSA relapse. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 55.4 months, a statistically significant difference was noted for acute GI toxicities ≥1 in favour of IGRT. Significantly more patients treated by IGRT were free of acute GI symptoms (43% vs. 19%, p = 0.0012). In the non-IGRT group, more patients experienced acute GU side effects (89% vs. 80%, p = 0.07). Late toxicity scores were comparable for both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the data, we demonstrated that despite dose escalation, IGRT enabled us to reduce the GI side effects of radiation. IGRT can therefore be considered to be the standard of care for dose-escalated RT of localized prostate cancer.
AIM: To determine the influence of IGRT in terms of toxicities compared to non-IGRT patients undergoing definitive RT. BACKGROUND: Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) enables immediate correction of target movement by online imaging. For prostate cancerpatients undergoing radiation therapy (RT), a geographical miss of the prostate may result in increased dose-volume effects in the rectum and bladder. METHODS: A total of 198 prostate cancerpatients treated between 2003 and 2013 were recruited randomly for this evaluation. The rates of genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity for 96 non-IGRT patients (total dose: 72/73.8 Gy) were compared to those for 102 IGRT patients (total dose: 77.4 Gy) according to the Common Toxicity Criteria Version 3.0 (CTCAEv3.0). Follow-up information included treatment-related symptoms and PSA relapse. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 55.4 months, a statistically significant difference was noted for acute GI toxicities ≥1 in favour of IGRT. Significantly more patients treated by IGRT were free of acute GI symptoms (43% vs. 19%, p = 0.0012). In the non-IGRT group, more patients experienced acute GU side effects (89% vs. 80%, p = 0.07). Late toxicity scores were comparable for both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the data, we demonstrated that despite dose escalation, IGRT enabled us to reduce the GI side effects of radiation. IGRT can therefore be considered to be the standard of care for dose-escalated RT of localized prostate cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acute toxicity; Image guidance; Late toxicity; Prostate cancer; Radiotherapy
Authors: Robert Jan Smeenk; Bin S Teh; E Brian Butler; Emile N J Th van Lin; Johannes H A M Kaanders Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2010-05-05 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Alan Pollack; Alexandra L Hanlon; Eric M Horwitz; Steven J Feigenberg; Andre A Konski; Benjamin Movsas; Richard E Greenberg; Robert G Uzzo; C-M Charlie Ma; Shawn W McNeeley; Mark K Buyyounouski; Robert A Price Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-10-19 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Nadeem Pervez; Cormac Small; Marc MacKenzie; Don Yee; Matthew Parliament; Sunita Ghosh; Alina Mihai; John Amanie; Albert Murtha; Colin Field; David Murray; Gino Fallone; Robert Pearcey Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Laura M Mullaney; Evelyn O'Shea; Mary T Dunne; Marie A Finn; Pierre G Thirion; Lesley Ann Cleary; Maeve McGarry; Louise O'Neill; John G Armstrong Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-01-08
Authors: J J van Tol-Geerdink; J W H Leer; I M van Oort; E J N T van Lin; P C Weijerman; H Vergunst; J A Witjes; P F M Stalmeier Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-04-23 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Theresa A Lawrie; John T Green; Mark Beresford; Linda Wedlake; Sorrel Burden; Susan E Davidson; Simon Lal; Caroline C Henson; H Jervoise N Andreyev Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-01-23