Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Radiation technique and outcomes following moderately hypofractionated treatment of low risk prostate cancer: a secondary analysis of RTOG 0415.
Carpenter, David J; Salama, Joseph K; Lee, W Robert; Boyer, Matthew J.
Afiliación
  • Carpenter DJ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
  • Salama JK; Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
  • Lee WR; Radiation Oncology Clinical Service, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, NC, USA.
  • Boyer MJ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis ; 27(1): 95-102, 2024 Mar.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36849728
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

While moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) for prostate cancer (PC) is commonly delivered by intensity modulated radiation therapy, IMRT has not been prospectively compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in this context. We conducted a secondary analysis of the phase III RTOG 0415 trial comparing survival and toxicity outcomes for low-risk PC following MHRT with IMRT versus 3D-CRT.

METHODS:

RTOG 0415 was a phase III, non-inferiority trial randomizing low-risk PC patients to either MHRT or conventionally fractionated radiation with stratification by RT technique. A secondary analysis for differences in overall survival (OS), biochemical recurrence free survival (BRFS), or toxicity by EPIC scores and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) was performed.

RESULTS:

1079 patients received the allocated intervention with a median follow up of 5.8 years. 79.1% of patients were treated with IMRT and radiation technique was balanced between arms. Across all patients, RT technique was not associated with significant differences in BRFS, OS, or rates of acute and late toxicities. For patients completing MHRT, there was a difference in the late GU toxicity distribution between 3D-CRT and IMRT but no difference in late grade 2 or greater GU or GI toxicity. Stratifying patients by RT technique and fractionation, no significant differences were observed in the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in EPIC urinary and bowel scores following RT.

CONCLUSIONS:

RT technique did not impact clinical outcomes following MHRT for low-risk PC. Despite different late GU toxicity distributions in patients treated with MHRT by IMRT or 3D-CRT, there was no difference in late Grade 2 or greater GU or GI toxicity or patient reported toxicity. Increases in late GU and GI toxicity following MHRT compared to CFRT, as demonstrated in the initial publication of RTOG 0415, do not appear related to a 3D-CRT treatment technique.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Radioterapia Conformacional / Radioterapia de Intensidad Modulada Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Asunto de la revista: ENDOCRINOLOGIA / NEOPLASIAS / UROLOGIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Radioterapia Conformacional / Radioterapia de Intensidad Modulada Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Asunto de la revista: ENDOCRINOLOGIA / NEOPLASIAS / UROLOGIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos
...