PURPOSE: To determine the impact of whole pelvic irradiation on the risk of PSA failure in prostate cancer patients, at high predicted risk for lymph node involvement, receiving definitive radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Between October 1987 and December 1995, 506 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with definitive radiotherapy at UCSF and affiliated institutions. Treatment consisted of 4-field whole pelvic irradiation followed by a prostate-only boost, or prostate-only treatment (median follow-up was 35 months and 30 months, respectively). PSA failure was defined as: 1. a PSA value > or = 1 ng/ml; or 2. a PSA value that rose > or = 0.5 ng/ml in < or = 1 year posttreatment on two consecutive measurements, with the first rise defined as the time of failure. The calculated risk of lymph node positivity (%rLN+) was defined as 2/3(iPSA) + 10(GS-6), and high risk was defined as %rLN+ > or = 15%. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 201 high-risk patients were identified. High-risk patients who received whole pelvic irradiation had significantly improved freedom from PSA failure compared to those who received prostate-only treatment (median PFS = 34.3 months vs. 21.0 months; p = 0.0001). Potential confounding variables, including initial PSA, Gleason score, T stage, radiation dose, year of treatment, use of three-dimensional (3D) conformal techniques, and use of hormone therapy, did not account for the observed difference in time to PSA failure. Multivariate analysis revealed type of radiation treatment to be the most significant independent predictor of outcome. CONCLUSION:Whole pelvic radiotherapy significantly improves the PSA failure-free survival in patients with a high calculated risk of lymph node positivity.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To determine the impact of whole pelvic irradiation on the risk of PSA failure in prostate cancerpatients, at high predicted risk for lymph node involvement, receiving definitive radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between October 1987 and December 1995, 506 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with definitive radiotherapy at UCSF and affiliated institutions. Treatment consisted of 4-field whole pelvic irradiation followed by a prostate-only boost, or prostate-only treatment (median follow-up was 35 months and 30 months, respectively). PSA failure was defined as: 1. a PSA value > or = 1 ng/ml; or 2. a PSA value that rose > or = 0.5 ng/ml in < or = 1 year posttreatment on two consecutive measurements, with the first rise defined as the time of failure. The calculated risk of lymph node positivity (%rLN+) was defined as 2/3(iPSA) + 10(GS-6), and high risk was defined as %rLN+ > or = 15%. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 201 high-risk patients were identified. High-risk patients who received whole pelvic irradiation had significantly improved freedom from PSA failure compared to those who received prostate-only treatment (median PFS = 34.3 months vs. 21.0 months; p = 0.0001). Potential confounding variables, including initial PSA, Gleason score, T stage, radiation dose, year of treatment, use of three-dimensional (3D) conformal techniques, and use of hormone therapy, did not account for the observed difference in time to PSA failure. Multivariate analysis revealed type of radiation treatment to be the most significant independent predictor of outcome. CONCLUSION: Whole pelvic radiotherapy significantly improves the PSA failure-free survival in patients with a high calculated risk of lymph node positivity.
Authors: Hanneke J M Meijer; Oscar A Debats; Emile N J Th van Lin; Marco van Vulpen; J Alfred Witjes; Wim J G Oyen; Jelle O Barentsz; Johannes H A M Kaanders Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Kiri A Sandler; Ryan R Cook; Jay P Ciezki; Ashley E Ross; Mark M Pomerantz; Paul L Nguyen; Talha Shaikh; Phuoc T Tran; Richard G Stock; Gregory S Merrick; David Jeffrey Demanes; Daniel E Spratt; Eyad I Abu-Isa; Trude B Wedde; Wolfgang Lilleby; Daniel J Krauss; Grace K Shaw; Ridwan Alam; Chandana A Reddy; Daniel Y Song; Eric A Klein; Andrew J Stephenson; Jeffrey J Tosoian; John V Hegde; Sun Mi Yoo; Ryan Fiano; Anthony V D'Amico; Nicholas G Nickols; William J Aronson; Ahmad Sadeghi; Stephen C Greco; Curtiland Deville; Todd McNutt; Theodore L DeWeese; Robert E Reiter; Jonathan W Said; Michael L Steinberg; Eric M Horwitz; Patrick A Kupelian; Christopher R King; Amar U Kishan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2019-04-13 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Berardino De Bari; Filippo Alongi; Pierfrancesco Franco; Patrizia Ciammella; Tarik Chekrine; Lorenzo Livi; Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa; Andrea Riccardo Filippi Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2013-05-27 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Colleen A F Lawton; Jeff Michalski; Issam El-Naqa; Deborah Kuban; W Robert Lee; Seth A Rosenthal; Anthony Zietman; Howard Sandler; William Shipley; Mark Ritter; Richard Valicenti; Charles Catton; Mack Roach; Thomas M Pisansky; Michael Seider Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-10-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Daniela A Ferraro; Urs J Muehlematter; Helena I Garcia Schüler; Niels J Rupp; Martin Huellner; Michael Messerli; Jan Hendrik Rüschoff; Edwin E G W Ter Voert; Thomas Hermanns; Irene A Burger Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-09-14 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Ute Ganswindt; Frank Paulsen; Stefan Corvin; Kai Eichhorn; Stefan Glocker; Ilse Hundt; Mattias Birkner; Markus Alber; Aristotelis Anastasiadis; Arnulf Stenzl; Roland Bares; Wilfried Budach; Michael Bamberg; Claus Belka Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2005-07-28 Impact factor: 4.430