Proctitis after external-beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer classified by Vienna Rectoscopy Score and correlated with EORTC/RTOG score for late rectal toxicity: Results of a prospective multicenter study of 166 patients

2007 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregor Goldner ◽  
Birgit Tomicek ◽  
Gerd Becker ◽  
Hans Geinitz ◽  
Stefan Wachter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Multicenter Study ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Rectal Toxicity ◽  
Prospective Multicenter Study ◽  
Late Rectal Toxicity

Rectal toxicity results for patients treated with HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy versus dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5-5
Author(s):  
Jacob Samuel Parzen ◽  
Hong Ye ◽  
Gary S. Gustafson ◽  
Alvaro Martinez ◽  
Evelyn Sebastian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Rectal Bleeding ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
High Dose Rate ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Dose ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Hdr Brachytherapy ◽  
Rectal Toxicity ◽  
Rectal Pain

5 Background: We present a large retrospective analysis comparing rectal toxicity following high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy as monotherapy relative to dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for patients with localized prostate cancer. Methods: 2683 patients treated with HDR or EBRT between 1994 and 2017 were included. 545 (20.3%) received HDR and 2138 (79.7%) EBRT. HDR fractionation was 38 Gy/4 fractions (n=321), 24 Gy/2 (n=96), or 27 Gy/2 (n=128). EBRT patients received a median dose of 75.6 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions [range 70.2-82.8 Gy], using either 3D conformal or intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). All EBRT patients underwent 3D image guidance via an off-line adaptive process. Treatment was directed to prostate only (n=780) or prostate and seminal vesicles (n=1351). No nodal therapy was given. Target volume for HDR patients included the prostate with no expansion. Acute and chronic gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was defined as occurring ≤ 6 and > 6 months, respectively, after radiotherapy and was graded per CTCAE version 3.0. Toxicity variables were analyzed with χ2 test. Results: Median follow-up was 7.5 years (7.4 years for EBRT and 7.9 years for HDR). 69.1% of EBRT patients received IMRT with the remainder treated using 3D conformal technique. Compared to EBRT, HDR was associated with decreased rates of acute grade ≥ 2 diarrhea (0.7% vs. 4.5%, p < 0.001), rectal pain/tenesmus (0.6% vs. 7.9%, p < 0.001), and rectal bleeding (0% vs. 1.6%, p=0.001). Rates of chronic grade ≥ 2 rectal bleeding (1.3% vs. 8.7%, p < 0.001) and radiation proctitis (0.9% vs. 3.3%, p=0.001) favored HDR over EBRT. Rates of any chronic rectal toxicity grade ≥ 2 were 2.4% vs. 10.5% (p < 0.001) for HDR vs. EBRT, respectively. For the 1478 EBRT patients treated with IMRT, acute and chronic rates of any grade ≥ 2GI toxicity were 4.2% and 5.6%, respectively, compared to 1.5% (p=0.002) and 2.4% (p=0.002), respectively, for HDR patients. Conclusions: In appropriately selected patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing definitive radiation therapy, HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy is an effective strategy for reducing acute and chronic rectal toxicity.

LOW-DOSE-RATE OR HIGH-DOSE-RATE BRACHYTHERAPY IN COMBINATION WITH EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY FOR INTERMEDIATE AND HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-83
Author(s):  
Vladimir Solodkiy ◽  
Andrey Pavlov ◽  
Aleksey Tsybulskiy ◽  
Anton Ivashin
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Dose Rate ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
High Dose ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Low Dose Rate ◽  
Risk Of Progression

Introduction. One of the main problems of modem on-courology is treatment for prostate cancer of intermediate and high risk of progression. Modern radiotherapy in this category of patients has an advantage over surgical methods of treatment. One way to improve the effectiveness of radiotherapy is to escalate the dose in the prostate gland. For this purpose a combination of brachytherapy and remote radiotherapy is used. This combination allows increasing the dose of radiation, thereby providing better local control, reducing complications from neighboring organs. Purpose of the study. To conduct a comparative analysis of efficacy and safety of radical treatment of patients with prostate cancer at medium and high risk of progression using a combination of high and low dose rate brachytherapy with external beam radiotherapy. Materials and methods. 107 patients with prostate cancer of the group of medium and high risk of progression combined treatment (brachytherapy with external beam radiotherapy) was conducted. 53 patients underwent combined treatment (HDR-brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy). 54 patients underwent combined treatment (LDR-brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy). The observation period was 5 years. Conclusion. In a comparative analysis in groups of combined radiotherapy with the use of high-dose and low-dose-rate brachytherapy, the same effectiveness of immediate and long-term results of treatment was demonstrated. A significant reduction in early and late toxic reactions in patients with high-power brachytherapy has been demonstrated.

scholarly journals Addition of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy or Brachytherapy Boost to External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (26) ◽  
pp. 3024-3031 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. Jackson ◽  
Holly E. Hartman ◽  
Robert T. Dess ◽  
Sam R. Birer ◽  
Payal D. Soni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost ◽  
Meta Analyses

PURPOSE In men with localized prostate cancer, the addition of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or a brachytherapy boost (BT) to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have been shown to improve various oncologic end points. Practice patterns indicate that those who receive BT are significantly less likely to receive ADT, and thus we sought to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the predicted outcomes of a randomized trial of EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review identified published randomized trials comparing EBRT with or without ADT, or EBRT (with or without ADT) with or without BT, that reported on overall survival (OS). Standard fixed-effects meta-analyses were performed for each comparison, and a meta-regression was conducted to adjust for use and duration of ADT. Network meta-analyses were performed to compare EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. Bayesian analyses were also performed, and a rank was assigned to each treatment after Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses to create a surface under the cumulative ranking curve. RESULTS Six trials compared EBRT with or without ADT (n = 4,663), and 3 compared EBRT with or without BT (n = 718). The addition of ADT to EBRT improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.81]), whereas the addition of BT did not significantly improve OS (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.36]). In a network meta-analysis, EBRT plus ADT had improved OS compared with EBRT plus BT (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.89]). Bayesian modeling demonstrated an 88% probability that EBRT plus ADT resulted in superior OS compared with EBRT plus BT. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that current practice patterns of omitting ADT with EBRT plus BT may result in inferior OS compared with EBRT plus ADT in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. ADT for these men should remain a critical component of treatment regardless of radiotherapy delivery method until randomized evidence demonstrates otherwise.

Is external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer a risk factor for bladder or rectal cancer?

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. e975
Author(s):  
M. Mekayten ◽  
M. Duvdevani ◽  
V. Yutkin ◽  
D. Pode ◽  
G. Hidas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
External Beam
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document