PURPOSE: 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT) has been shown to decrease acute morbidity in the treatment of prostate cancer. Therapeutic outcome and late morbidity data have been accumulating. To evaluate the results of 3D CRT for the treatment of prostate cancer, we analyzed the outcome of a large series of patients treated with conformal techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From January 1987 through June 1994, 707 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with 3D CRT. Patients with pathologically-confirmed pelvic lymph node metastasis, treated with pre-irradiation (preRT) androgen ablation, or treated post-prostatectomy were excluded. All had CT obtained specifically for treatment planning, multiple structures contoured on the axial images, and beam's-eye view conformal beams edited to provide 3D dose coverage. Median follow-up is 36 mos; 70 patients have been followed longer than 5.5 years. Six hundred three had T1-T2 tumors. PreRT prostate specific antigen (PSA) was available for 649 patients: median preRT PSA was 12.9 ng/ml, 209 patients had preRT PSA > 20 ng/ml. The median dose of radiation was 69 Gy; 102 patients received > or = 69 Gy. Biochemical failure was defined as: 1) two consecutive PSA rises over 2.0 ng/ml if nadir PSA < or = 2.0 ng/ml, 2) two consecutive PSA rises over nadir if nadir PSA > 2.0 ng/ml, or 3) initiation of hormonal therapy after RT. Complications were graded using the RTOG system. RESULTS: PreRT PSA and Gleason score emerged as independent indicators of biochemical control (bNED). Patients with preRT PSA > 10 had a significantly worse bNED at 5 years than patients with preRT PSA < or = 10. Five-year bNED was determined according to preRT PSA: PSA < or = 4, 88%; PSA > 4 < or = 10, 72%; PSA > 10 < or = 20, 43%; and PSA > 20, 30%. Patients with Gleason score > or = 7 also had a significantly worse bNED than patients with Gleason score < 7. Patients were divided into two prognostic groups: a favorable group with PSA < or = 10, Gleason score < 7, and T1-T2 tumors, and an unfavorable group with PSA > 10, Gleason score > or = 7 or T3-T4 tumors and studied for the effect of dose on bNED status. The bNED at 5 years was 75% for the favorable group and 37% for the unfavorable group. In addition, a group that might be considered a surgical subset was reviewed: patients with PSA < or = 10, Gleason score < or = 7, and T1-T2 tumors who were < 70 years old. This subset had an 84% 5-year bNED rate and 98% 5-year overall survival. Complications with the techniques used here are very low: 3% risk at 7 years of Grade 3-4 complications and 1% risk at 7 years of Grade 3 bladder complications (no Grade 4). CONCLUSION: 3D CRT allows for treatment of prostate cancers with a very low risk of complications. Patients with relatively early disease as defined by preRT PSA, Gleason score < 7, and T1-2 tumors and patients who are candidates for radical prostatectomy have excellent 5-year bNED rates. Patients with adverse prognostic factors have a high risk of biochemical recurrence and are candidates for innovative therapy.
PURPOSE: 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT) has been shown to decrease acute morbidity in the treatment of prostate cancer. Therapeutic outcome and late morbidity data have been accumulating. To evaluate the results of 3D CRT for the treatment of prostate cancer, we analyzed the outcome of a large series of patients treated with conformal techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From January 1987 through June 1994, 707 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with 3D CRT. Patients with pathologically-confirmed pelvic lymph node metastasis, treated with pre-irradiation (preRT) androgen ablation, or treated post-prostatectomy were excluded. All had CT obtained specifically for treatment planning, multiple structures contoured on the axial images, and beam's-eye view conformal beams edited to provide 3D dose coverage. Median follow-up is 36 mos; 70 patients have been followed longer than 5.5 years. Six hundred three had T1-T2 tumors. PreRT prostate specific antigen (PSA) was available for 649 patients: median preRT PSA was 12.9 ng/ml, 209 patients had preRT PSA > 20 ng/ml. The median dose of radiation was 69 Gy; 102 patients received > or = 69 Gy. Biochemical failure was defined as: 1) two consecutive PSA rises over 2.0 ng/ml if nadir PSA < or = 2.0 ng/ml, 2) two consecutive PSA rises over nadir if nadir PSA > 2.0 ng/ml, or 3) initiation of hormonal therapy after RT. Complications were graded using the RTOG system. RESULTS: PreRT PSA and Gleason score emerged as independent indicators of biochemical control (bNED). Patients with preRT PSA > 10 had a significantly worse bNED at 5 years than patients with preRT PSA < or = 10. Five-year bNED was determined according to preRT PSA: PSA < or = 4, 88%; PSA > 4 < or = 10, 72%; PSA > 10 < or = 20, 43%; and PSA > 20, 30%. Patients with Gleason score > or = 7 also had a significantly worse bNED than patients with Gleason score < 7. Patients were divided into two prognostic groups: a favorable group with PSA < or = 10, Gleason score < 7, and T1-T2 tumors, and an unfavorable group with PSA > 10, Gleason score > or = 7 or T3-T4 tumors and studied for the effect of dose on bNED status. The bNED at 5 years was 75% for the favorable group and 37% for the unfavorable group. In addition, a group that might be considered a surgical subset was reviewed: patients with PSA < or = 10, Gleason score < or = 7, and T1-T2 tumors who were < 70 years old. This subset had an 84% 5-year bNED rate and 98% 5-year overall survival. Complications with the techniques used here are very low: 3% risk at 7 years of Grade 3-4 complications and 1% risk at 7 years of Grade 3 bladder complications (no Grade 4). CONCLUSION: 3D CRT allows for treatment of prostate cancers with a very low risk of complications. Patients with relatively early disease as defined by preRT PSA, Gleason score < 7, and T1-2 tumors and patients who are candidates for radical prostatectomy have excellent 5-year bNED rates. Patients with adverse prognostic factors have a high risk of biochemical recurrence and are candidates for innovative therapy.