Dataset Information

Proteomic serum profile of fatigued men receiving localized external beam radiation therapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT:Fatigue is the most distressing side effect of radiation therapy, and its progression etiology is unknown. OBJECTIVES:This study describes proteome changes from sera of fatigued men with non-metastatic prostate cancer receiving external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). METHODS:Fatigue scores, measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, and serum were collected from 12 subjects at baseline (before EBRT) and at midpoint (Day 21) of EBRT. Depleted sera from both time points were analyzed using two-dimensional difference gel electrophoresis, and up/down regulated proteins were identified using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Western blot analyses confirmed the protein changes observed. RESULTS:Results showed that apolipoprotein (Apo)A1, ApoE, and transthyretin (TTR) consistently changed from baseline (Day 0) to midpoint (Day 21). The mean ApoE level of subjects with high change in fatigue (HF: n = 9) increased significantly from baseline to midpoint and were higher than in subjects with no change in fatigue. The mean ApoA1 level was higher in HF subjects at baseline and at midpoint than in no fatigue subjects at both time points. The mean TTR level of no fatigue subjects was higher at baseline and midpoint than in HF subjects. CONCLUSION:These ApoE, ApoA1, and TTR results may assist in understanding pathways that can explain fatigue progression etiology in this clinical population.

SUBMITTER: Lukkahatai N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3743082 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Proteomic serum profile of fatigued men receiving localized external beam radiation therapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer.

Lukkahatai Nada N Patel Sajni S Gucek Marjan M Hsiao Chao-Pin CP Saligan Leorey N LN

Journal of pain and symptom management 20130731 4

<h4>Context</h4>Fatigue is the most distressing side effect of radiation therapy, and its progression etiology is unknown.<h4>Objectives</h4>This study describes proteome changes from sera of fatigued men with non-metastatic prostate cancer receiving external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).<h4>Methods</h4>Fatigue scores, measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, and serum were collected from 12 subjects at baseline (before EBRT) and at midpoint (Day 21) of EBRT. De ...[more]

PMID: 23916682

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo compare patient-reported disease-specific functional outcomes after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and EBRT combined with low-dose-rate brachytherapy prostate boost (EB-LDR) among men with localized prostate cancer.Methods and materialsThe prospective, population-based Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation study enrolled men with localized prostate cancer in 2011 to 2012. The 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite measured patient-reported disease-specific function at baseline and at 6, 12, and 36 months. Higher domain scores indicate better function. Minimal clinically important difference was defined as 6 for urinary incontinence, 5 for urinary irritative function, 4 for bowel function, 12 for sexual function, and 4 for hormonal function. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were fit to estimate the effect of treatment on patient-reported outcomes.ResultsFive-hundred seventy-eight men received EBRT and 109 received EB-LDR. Median patient age was 69 years, and 70% had intermediate- or high-risk disease. Men in the EB-LDR group were younger (P < .001) and less likely to receive androgen deprivation therapy (P < .001). Baseline urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal function was similar between treatment groups (P > .05). On multivariable analyses, men receiving EB-LDR reported worse urinary irritative function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference [AMD] -14.4, P < .001), 12 months (AMD -12.9, P < .001), and 36 months (AMD -4.7, P = .034) than men receiving EBRT. At 12 months, men receiving EB-LDR reported worse bowel function (AMD -5.8, P = .002), but these differences were not seen at 36 months. There were no significant differences in sexual or hormone function between treatment groups.ConclusionsMen treated with EB-LDR report worse bowel function at 1 year and worse urinary irritative function through 3 years compared with men treated with EBRT alone. These side effect profiles should be discussed with patients when considering EB-LDR versus EBRT treatment.

Project description:BackgroundExternal beam radiotherapy is the recommended but expensive treatment option for localized prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men worldwide. A cost-effectiveness study is needed given the excessive cost of radiotherapy treatment and the high prevalence of prostate cancer. The aim of this systematic review was to assess and identify studies that examined model based economic evaluation of external beam radiation therapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.MethodsA systematic review of the published literature was conducted through MEDLINE, NHS EED (NHS Economic Evaluation Database), and Cochrane databases with a specific search strategy. The literatures were searched according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. At first 1046 citations were identified. The extracted files were imported into the Rayyan systematic review site for inclusion or exclusion based on the defined criteria. Studies included in this review were articles published between 2003 and 2017, and that conducted full-economic evaluations of the modality of external beam radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.ResultsThere were 12 studies that satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Seven studies compared intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), two compared IMRT with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) another two-paper assessed IMRT with proton beam therapy (PBT). One paper compared the three external-beam radio therapy options of IMRT, SBRT and PBT. Most of the studies were originated from the US and analyzed the cost data from the payer's perspective. Most studies were supported that IMRT was cost effective when it compared with 3D-CRT. Compared with IMRT, SBRT was found to be cost-effective.ConclusionsThere are limited number of studies exist on the cost effectiveness of radiation therapy options for the treatment of localize prostate cancer across Europe. Most studies are originated from the US Medicare payer Perspective. Further research is need that investigate the cost effectiveness of these radiation therapy options from the societal perspective in Europe.

Dataset Information

Proteomic serum profile of fatigued men receiving localized external beam radiation therapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer.

Publications

Proteomic serum profile of fatigued men receiving localized external beam radiation therapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets