Literature DB >> 7790250

Incidence of and factors related to late complications in conformal and conventional radiation treatment of cancer of the prostate.

T E Schultheiss1, G E Hanks, M A Hunt, W R Lee.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The fundament hypothesis of conformal radiation therapy is that tumor control can be increased by using conformal treatment techniques that allow a higher tumor dose while maintaining an acceptable level of complications. To test this hypothesis, it is necessary first to estimate the incidence of morbidity for both standard and conformal fields. In this study, we examine factors that influence the incidence of late Grade 3 and 4 morbidity in patients treated with conformal and standard radiation treatment for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Six hundred sixteen consecutive patients treated with conformal or standard techniques between 1986 and 1994 to doses greater than 65 Gy and with more than 3 months follow-up were analyzed. No patients treated with prostatectomies were included in the analysis. The conformal technique includes special immobilization by a cast, careful identification of the target volume in three dimensions, localization of the inferior border of the prostate using a retrograde urethrogram, and individually shaped portals that conform to the Planning Target Volume (PTV). Multivariate analysis using a proportional hazards model compares differences in the incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Center Treatment (RTOG/EORTC) Grade 3 and 4 late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) morbidity by technique, T-stage, grade, age, hormonal treatment, irradiated volume, dose, and comorbid conditions. Grade 3 rectal bleeding was defined as requiring three or more cautery procedures.
RESULTS: The overall actuarial incidence of genitourinary (GU) toxicities at 5 years was 3.4%, with the crude incidence being six cases in 616 patients satisfying the selection criteria; for gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities, the overall actuarial incidence was 2.7%, with the crude incidence being 13 cases out of 616 patients. The average time to complication for our patients was 12.8 months for GI toxicity and 32.9 months for GU toxicity (p < 0.001). No factors were found that were predictive for GU morbidity. The only factors significantly related to incidence of late GI morbidity on multivariate analysis of our data were dose and age. The central axis dose was a more significant variable than the dose prescribed to the Treated Volume. Age was negatively correlated with late GI morbidity, with older patients having a reduced incidence of toxicity. The median tolerance dose for GI complications was estimated to be 92.8 Gy, and the dose for 10% incidence was estimated to be 80.2 Gy. Treating the pelvis to 45 Gy did not increase the incidence of late morbidity. Late GI and GU toxicities were not correlated.
CONCLUSION: The conformal technique has been associated with fewer acute Grade 2 toxicities (6). The use of conformal fields did not decrease the incidence of late GI morbidity; however, patients with this technique invariably had higher doses. Because of the dose response for this complication and the correlation between the dose and the use of conformal fields, one would not expect to demonstrate an advantage to conformal fields in this data set. On the other hand, no dose effect was observed for late GU morbidity. In this case, there appears to be an advantage for conformal treatment that has not reached statistical significance because the follow-up time is shorter than for the patients treated with conventional fields and the latency for GU morbidity is long.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7790250     DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(95)00149-s

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  15 in total

1.  Late rectal toxicity on RTOG 94-06: analysis using a mixture Lyman model.

Authors:  Susan L Tucker; Lei Dong; Walter R Bosch; Jeff Michalski; Kathryn Winter; Radhe Mohan; James A Purdy; Deborah Kuban; Andrew K Lee; M Rex Cheung; Howard D Thames; James D Cox
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-07-02       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Investigation of bladder dose and volume factors influencing late urinary toxicity after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Rex Cheung; Susan L Tucker; Lei Dong; Renaud de Crevoisier; Andrew K Lee; Steven Frank; Rajat J Kudchadker; Howard Thames; Radhe Mohan; Deborah Kuban
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-01-22       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Selecting treatment for high-risk, localized prostate cancer: the case for radiation therapy.

Authors:  Robert Meier; Michael K Brawer
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2002

4.  Therapeutic Strategies for Localized Prostate Cancer II: Perineal Prostatectomy, X-Rays, Protons, Neutrons, and Combination Brachytherapy.

Authors:  M D Weil; A T Porter; D C Beyer; P S Albert; D Chinn; M J Harris
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2000

5.  Management of post-radiation therapy complications among prostate cancer patients: A case series.

Authors:  Ryan Kendrick Flannigan; Richard John Baverstock
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 6.  Hypofractionated radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer. Review of clinical trials.

Authors:  Víctor Macías; Albert Biete
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 7.  [Locally advanced prostate carcinoma (T2b-T4 N0) without and with clinical evidence of local progression (Tx N+) with lymphatic metastasis. Is radiotherapy for pelvic lymphatic metastasis indicated or not?].

Authors:  T Wiegel; W Hinkelbein
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.621

8.  Approaches to the prevention and management of radiation colitis.

Authors:  Mohammed A Qadeer; John J Vargo
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2008-10

9.  [Comparison of different 3-dimensional irradiation techniques in local radiotherapy of prostatic carcinoma].

Authors:  S Koswig; S Dinges; A Buchali; D Böhmer; J Salk; P Rosenthal; C Harder; L Schlenger; V Budach
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 10.  Challenges of managing elderly men with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Gautam G Jha; Vidhu Anand; Ayman Soubra; Badrinath R Konety
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 66.675

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.