Dataset Information

Comparison of two treatment approaches for prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with 125I seed-implant brachytherapy or 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of the present study was to assess the results of two different treatment approaches for clinically localized prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) followed by 125I seed-implant brachytherapy and 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone. We studied our 30 most recent consecutive patients. The sample population consisted of 15 cases treated with IMRT (50.4 Gy) followed by 125I seed-implant boost (95 Gy), and 15 cases treated with 125I seed implant only (144 Gy). We analyzed established dosimetric indices and various clinical parameters. In addition, we also evaluated and compared the acute urinary morbidities of the two treatment approaches, as assessed by the international prostate symptom score (IPSS). In our series, acute urinary morbidity was slightly increased with IMRT followed by 125I seed-implant brachytherapy as compared with 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone. In addition, we observed no statistically significant correlation between the IPSS and the maximum or mean urethral dose. The combination of IMRT and seed-implant brachytherapy presents an alternative opportunity to treat clinically localized prostate cancer. The full potential of the procedure needs to be further investigated.

SUBMITTER: Song Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5721712 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of two treatment approaches for prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with 125I seed-implant brachytherapy or 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone.

Song Yulin Y Chan Maria F MF Burman Chandra C Cann Donald D

Journal of applied clinical medical physics 20080318 2

The purpose of the present study was to assess the results of two different treatment approaches for clinically localized prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) followed by 125I seed-implant brachytherapy and 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone. We studied our 30 most recent consecutive patients. The sample population consisted of 15 cases treated with IMRT (50.4 Gy) followed by 125I seed-implant boost (95 Gy), and 15 cases treated with 125I seed implant only (144 Gy). W ...[more]

PMID: 18714275

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:This study reported long-term outcomes of patients with cervical cancer who were treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy and 3-dimensional (3D) image-guided adapted brachytherapy (IMRT/3D-IGABT) compared with those treated with 2-dimensional (2D) external irradiation and 2D brachytherapy (2D EBRT/BT). METHODS AND MATERIALS:This study included patients with newly diagnosed cervical cancer and pretreatment fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scans who were treated with curative-intent irradiation from 1997 to 2013. The treatment policy changed from using 2D EBRT/BT to IMRT/3D-IGABT in 2005. Patterns of recurrence, cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were scored with National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS:The median follow-up for patients alive at the time of last follow-up in the 2D EBRT/BT group (n = 300) was 15.3 years (range, 10.8-20.5 years). In the IMRT/3D-IGABT group (n = 300), it was 7 years (range, 5-12.4 years). According to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 33% of tumors were stage IB1 to IB2, 41% were stage IIA to IIB, and 26% were stage IIIA to IVA. The results after 5 years for patients treated with 2D EBRT/BT showed that freedom from relapse (FFR) was 57%, CSS was 62%, and OS was 57%. For the IMRT/3D-IGABT group, the 5-year results showed that FFR was 65% (P = .04), CSS was 69% (P = .01), and OS was 61% (P = .04). When stratified by lymph node status according to positron emission tomography scan results, disease control was most improved with IMRT/3D-IGABT versus 2D EBRT/BT in patients with positive pelvic lymph nodes only (P = .02). Cumulatively, 88 of 600 patients (15%) had grade ?3 late bowel/bladder toxicity. The 2D EBRT/BT group had 55 patients (18%), and the IMRT/3D-IGABT group had 33 patients (11%; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS:IMRT/3D-IGABT was associated with improved survival and decreased gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity in patients with cervical cancer compared with those who received 2D EBRT/BT.

Project description:BackgroundRadiation therapy is the method of choice for subjects with inoperable salivary gland malignancies. I-125 brachytherapy, delivering a high radiation dose to a tumor but sparing surrounding normal tissues, is supposed to be ideal modality for the treatment of salivary gland malignancies. We designed a randomised controlled clinical trial to compare the efficacy of I-125 permanent brachytherapy (PBT) versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for inoperable salivary gland malignancies.Methods/designIn this study, inclusion criteria are subjects with inoperable salivary gland malignancies, aged 18-80 years, have provided informed consent, with at least one measurable tumor focus, be able to survive ≥3 months, Karnofsky performance status ≥60, have adequate hematopoietic function of bone marrow, have normal liver and kidney function, and are willing to prevent pregnancy. Exclusion criteria include a history of radiation or chemotherapy, a history of other malignant tumors in the past 5 years, receiving other effective treatments, participating in other clinical trials, with circulatory metastasis, cognitive impairment, severe cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, acute infection, uncontrolled systemic disease, history of interstitial lungdisease, and being pregnant or breast feeding. The study will be conducted as a clinical, prospective, randomised controlled trial with balanced randomisation (1:1). The planned sample size is 90 subjects. Subjects with inoperable salivary gland malignancies are randomised to receive either I-125 PBT or IMRT, with stratification by tumor size and neck lymph node metastasis. Participants in both groups will be followed up at 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24 months after randomization. The primary outcome is local control rate of the primary site (based on imaging findings and clinical examination, RECIST criteria) in 1 year. Secondary outcomes are progression-free survival, overall survival, quality of life (QOL) measured with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35) of Chinese version, and safety of treatment. Chi-squared test is used to compare the local control rates in both groups. The survival curves are estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and log-rank test is used to test the significant difference.DiscussionOnly few observational studies have investigated the effect of I-125 PBT on inoperable salivary gland malignancies. To our knowledge, this is the first randomised controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of I-125 PBT for subjects with inoperable salivary gland malignancies, and will add to the knowledge base for the treatment of these subjects.Trial registrationThe study is registered to Clinical Trials.gov ( NCT02048254 ) on Jan 29, 2014.

Project description:Purpose:To evaluate 2 published normal tissue complication probability models for radiation-induced hypothyroidism (RHT) on a large cohort of oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) patients who were treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Methods and Materials:OPC patients treated with retrievable IMRT Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOMs) data and available baseline and follow-up thyroid function tests were included. Mean dose (Dmean) to the thyroid gland (TG) and its volume were calculated. The study outcome was clinical HT at least 6 months after radiation therapy, which was defined as grade ?2 HT per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grading system (symptomatic hypothyroidism that required thyroid replacement therapy). Regression analyses and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used. Receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve for the fitted model were calculated. Results:In the study, 360 OPC patients were included. The median age was 58 years. Most tumors (51%) originated from the base of tongue. IMRT-split field was used in 95%, and median radiation therapy dose was 69.96 Gy. In the study, 233 patients (65%) developed clinical RHT that required thyroid replacement therapy. On multivariate analysis higher Dmean and smaller TG volume maintained the statistically significant association with the risk of clinical RHT (P < .0001). Dmean was significantly higher in patients with clinical RHT versus those without (50 vs 42 Gy, P < .0001). Patients with RHT had smaller TG volume compared with those without (11.8 compared with 12.8 mL, P < .0001). AUC of 0.72 and 0.66 were identified for fitted model versus for the applied Boomsma et al and Cella et al models, respectively. Conclusions:Volume and Dmean of the TG are important predictors of clinical RHT and shall be integrated into normal tissue complication probability models for RHT. Dmean and thyroid volume should be considered during the IMRT plan optimization in OPC patients.

Project description:Purpose:Intensity modulated proton beam radiation therapy (IMPT) has a clinically significant dosimetric advantage over intensity modulated photon radiation therapy (IMRT) for the treatment of patients with esophageal cancer, particularly for sparing the heart and lungs. We compared acute radiation therapy-related toxicities and short-term clinical outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer who received treatment with IMPT or IMRT. Methods and Materials:We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of consecutive adult patients with esophageal cancer who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT in the definitive or neoadjuvant setting from January 1, 2014, through June 30, 2018, with additional follow-up data collected through January 31, 2019. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4. Survival outcomes were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Results:A total of 64 patients (32 per group) were included (median follow-up time: 10 months for IMPT patients vs 14 months for IMRT patients). The most common radiation therapy regimen was 45 Gy in 25 fractions, and 80% of patients received a simultaneous integrated boost to a median cumulative dose of 50 Gy. Similar numbers of IMPT patients (n = 15; 47%) and IMRT patients (n = 18; 56%) underwent surgery (P = .07), with no difference in pathologic complete response rates (IMPT: n = 5; 33% vs IMRT: n = 7; 39%; P = .14). At 1 year, the clinical outcomes also were similar for IMPT and IMRT patients, respectively. Local control was 92% versus 84% (P = .87), locoregional control 92% versus 80% (P = .76), distant metastasis-free survival 87% versus 65% (P = .08), progression-free survival 71% versus 45% (P = .15), and overall survival 74% versus 71% (P = .62). The rate of acute treatment-related grade 3 toxicity was similar between the groups (P = .71). Conclusions:In our early experience, IMPT is a safe and effective treatment when administered as part of definitive or trimodality therapy. Longer follow-up is required to evaluate the effectiveness of IMPT.

Dataset Information

Comparison of two treatment approaches for prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with 125I seed-implant brachytherapy or 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone.

Publications

Comparison of two treatment approaches for prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with 125I seed-implant brachytherapy or 125I seed-implant brachytherapy alone.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets