Suppr超能文献

低剂量率近距离放疗与冷冻疗法治疗低危和中危前列腺癌的比较。

Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Versus Cryotherapy in Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Baylor Scott and White Memorial Hospital, Texas A&M University School of Medicine, Temple, Texas.

Department of Biostatistics, Baylor Scott and White Health, Temple, Texas.

出版信息

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 May 1;98(1):101-107. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.01.030. Epub 2017 Jan 16.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Cryotherapy and brachytherapy are definitive local treatment options for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer. There are both prospective and retrospective data for brachytherapy, but the use of cryotherapy has been limited primarily to single-institution retrospective studies. Currently, no published evidence has compared low-dose-rate brachytherapy versus cryotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Institutional review board approval was obtained to conduct a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients treated at our institution from 1990 to 2012. For inclusion, patients must have received a prostate cancer diagnosis and have been considered to have low- to intermediate-risk disease according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. All patients received brachytherapy or cryotherapy treatment. Disease specifics and failure details were collected for all patients. Failure was defined as prostate-specific antigen nadir +2 ng/mL.

RESULTS

A total of 359 patients were analyzed. The groups comprised 50 low-risk cryotherapy (LRC), 92 intermediate-risk cryotherapy (IRC), 133 low-risk brachytherapy (LRB), and 84 intermediate-risk brachytherapy (IRB) patients. The median prostate-specific antigen follow-up periods were 85.6 months (LRC), 59.2 months (IRC), 74.9 months (LRB), and 59.8 months (IRB). The 5-year biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) rate was 57.9% in the cryotherapy group versus 89.6% in the brachytherapy group (P<.0001). The 5-year bPFS rate was 70.0% (LRC), 51.4% (IRC), 89.4% (LRB), and 89.7% (IRB). The bPFS rate was significantly different between brachytherapy and cryotherapy for low- and intermediate-risk groups (P<.05). The mean nadir temperature reached for cryotherapy patients was -35°C (range, -96°C to -6°C). Cryotherapy used a median of 2 freeze-thaw cycles (range, 2-4 freeze-thaw cycles).

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study suggest that cryotherapy is inferior to brachytherapy for patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Patient selection criteria for consideration of cryotherapy and brachytherapy are similar in terms of anesthesia candidacy. Therefore, cryotherapy would not be recommended as a first-line local therapy for this particular patient subset.

摘要

目的

冷冻疗法和近距离放射疗法是低危到中危前列腺癌的明确局部治疗选择。有前瞻性和回顾性数据可用于近距离放射疗法,但冷冻疗法的应用主要限于单一机构的回顾性研究。目前,尚无已发表的证据比较低剂量率近距离放射疗法与冷冻疗法。

方法和材料

获得机构审查委员会的批准,对我院 1990 年至 2012 年连续收治的患者进行回顾性图表审查。纳入标准为患者必须被诊断为前列腺癌,且根据国家综合癌症网络标准被认为患有低危到中危疾病。所有患者均接受近距离放射疗法或冷冻疗法治疗。为所有患者收集疾病特异性和失败详细信息。失败定义为前列腺特异性抗原最低点+2ng/mL。

结果

共分析了 359 例患者。这些患者组包括 50 例低危冷冻治疗(LRC)患者、92 例中危冷冻治疗(IRC)患者、133 例低危近距离放射治疗(LRB)患者和 84 例中危近距离放射治疗(IRB)患者。中位前列腺特异性抗原随访期分别为 LRC 组 85.6 个月、IRC 组 59.2 个月、LRB 组 74.9 个月和 IRB 组 59.8 个月。冷冻治疗组的 5 年生化无进展生存率(bPFS)为 57.9%,近距离放射治疗组为 89.6%(P<.0001)。5 年 bPFS 率分别为 70.0%(LRC)、51.4%(IRC)、89.4%(LRB)和 89.7%(IRB)。低危和中危组中,近距离放射治疗和冷冻治疗之间的 bPFS 率有显著差异(P<.05)。冷冻治疗患者的平均最低温度达到-35°C(范围为-96°C 至-6°C)。冷冻治疗使用中位数为 2 次冻融循环(范围为 2-4 次冻融循环)。

结论

这项研究的结果表明,冷冻疗法对低危到中危前列腺癌患者不如近距离放射疗法。冷冻疗法和近距离放射疗法的患者选择标准在麻醉候选方面相似。因此,不建议将冷冻疗法作为该特定患者亚组的一线局部治疗方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验