scholarly journals Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy is more effective and safe for localized prostate cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Oncotarget ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 2647-2658 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Cao ◽  
Yong-Jing Yang ◽  
Zhi-Wen Li ◽  
Hong-Fen Wu ◽  
Zhu-Chun Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy

scholarly journals Hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in patients with intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BMC Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Guo ◽  
Yun-Chuan Sun ◽  
Jian-Qiang Bi ◽  
Xin-Ying He ◽  
Li Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Cancer Specific Survival ◽  
Conventional Radiotherapy ◽  
Results Of Treatment

Abstract Background Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world. The results of treatment after hypofractionated radiotherapy only have been reported from several small randomized clinical trials. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes of hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer. Methods Relevant studies were identified through searching related databases till August 2018. Hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as pooled statistics for all analyses. Results The meta-analysis results showed that overall survival (HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.93–1.35, p = 0.219) and prostate cancer-specific survival (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.42–3.95, p = 0.661) were similar in two groups. The pooled data showed that biochemical failure was RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.76–1.07, p = 0.248. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events (grade ≥ 2) was higher in the hypofractionated radiotherapy (RR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.12–2.56, p = 0.012); conversely, for late grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal adverse events, a significant increase in the conventional radiotherapy was found (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.61–0.91, p = 0.003). Acute (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.89–1.15, p = 0.894) and late (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86–1.10, p = 0.692) genitourinary adverse events (grade ≥ 2) were similar for both treatment groups. Conclusion Results suggest that the efficacy and risk for adverse events are comparable for hypofractionated radiotherapy and conventional radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer.

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.

Body mass index and mortality in prostate cancer patients: a dose–response meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Zhong ◽  
X Yan ◽  
Y Wu ◽  
X Zhang ◽  
L Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Dose Response ◽  
Meta Analysis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document