Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Mar 1;97(3):516-525. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.11.007. Epub 2016 Nov 24.
Patients' perspectives on their treatment experiences have not been compared between modern radiation modalities for localized prostate cancer. We evaluated treatment regret and patients' perceptions of their treatment experiences to better inform our understanding of a treatment's value.
Patients with localized prostate cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), or high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy between 2008 and 2014 with at least 1 year of follow-up were surveyed. The questionnaire explored the decision-making experience, expectations of toxicities versus the reality, and treatment regret by means of a validated tool.
Three hundred twenty-nine consecutive patients were surveyed, with an 86% response rate (IMRT, n=74; SBRT, n=108; HDR, n=94). The median patient age and posttreatment follow-up time were 68 years and 47 months, respectively. Eighty-two percent of patients had T1c disease with either Gleason 6 (42%) or Gleason 7 (58%) pathologic features and a median initial prostate-specific antigen of 5.8 ng/mL. Thirteen percent expressed regret with their treatment. Among patients with regret, 71% now wish they had elected for active surveillance. The incidence of regret was significantly different between treatment modalities: 5% of patients treated with SBRT expressed regret versus 18% with HDR and 19% with IMRT (P<.01). On multivariable logistic regression, patients treated with HDR versus SBRT were 7.42 times more likely to have regret, and patients treated with IMRT versus SBRT were 11.11 times more likely to have regret (P<.01 and P<.01, respectively). Significantly more patients treated with SBRT selected that their actual long-term toxicities were significantly less than originally expected, compared with IMRT and HDR patients (SBRT 43% vs IMRT 20% vs HDR 10%, P<.01).
We found significant differences in patients' experiences between SBRT, IMRT, and HDR, with significantly less treatment regret and less toxicity than expected among SBRT patients. The majority of patients with regret would now opt for active surveillance; therefore, pretreatment counseling is essential.
对于局限性前列腺癌的现代放射治疗方式,患者对其治疗体验的看法尚未进行比较。我们评估了治疗后悔和患者对治疗体验的看法,以便更好地了解治疗的价值。
对 2008 年至 2014 年间接受立体定向体部放射治疗(SBRT)、调强放射治疗(IMRT)或高剂量率(HDR)近距离放射治疗的局限性前列腺癌患者进行了调查,这些患者至少随访了 1 年。问卷调查通过一种经过验证的工具,探讨了决策体验、对毒性的预期与现实的差异以及治疗后悔。
共调查了 329 例连续患者,应答率为 86%(IMRT,n=74;SBRT,n=108;HDR,n=94)。患者中位年龄和治疗后随访时间分别为 68 岁和 47 个月。82%的患者患有 T1c 疾病,前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)中位值为 5.8ng/ml,病理特征为 Gleason 6(42%)或 Gleason 7(58%)。13%的患者对治疗表示后悔。在有后悔的患者中,71%的人现在希望选择主动监测。治疗方式之间的后悔发生率存在显著差异:SBRT 治疗的患者中有 5%表示后悔,HDR 治疗的患者中有 18%表示后悔,IMRT 治疗的患者中有 19%表示后悔(P<.01)。多变量逻辑回归显示,与 SBRT 相比,HDR 治疗的患者更有可能后悔,与 SBRT 相比,IMRT 治疗的患者更有可能后悔(P<.01 和 P<.01)。与 IMRT 和 HDR 患者相比,接受 SBRT 治疗的患者中,有更多患者选择其实际长期毒性明显低于最初预期(SBRT 43% vs. IMRT 20% vs. HDR 10%,P<.01)。
我们发现 SBRT、IMRT 和 HDR 之间患者体验存在显著差异,SBRT 治疗的患者治疗后悔和毒性低于预期。大多数有后悔的患者现在会选择主动监测,因此,术前咨询是必要的。