Pepin Abigail, Aghdam Nima, Shah Sarthak, Kataria Shaan, Tsou Harry, Datta Subhradeep, Danner Malika, Ayoob Marilyn, Yung Thomas, Lei Siyuan, Gurka Marie, Collins Brian T, Krishnan Pranay, Suy Simeng, Hankins Ryan, Lynch John H, Collins Sean P
School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States.
Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States.
Front Oncol. 2020 May 5;10:555. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00555. eCollection 2020.
Clinical data suggest that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) provides similar clinical outcomes as other radiation modalities for prostate cancer. However, data reporting on the safety of SBRT after TURP is limited. Herein, we report our experience using SBRT to deliver hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with a history of TURP including physician-reported toxicities and patient-reported quality of life. Forty-seven patients treated with SBRT from 2007 to 2016 at Georgetown University Hospital for localized prostate carcinoma with a history of prior TURP were included in this retrospective analysis. Treatment was delivered using the CyberKnife® (Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA) with doses of 35 Gy or 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions without prostatic urethral sparing. Toxicities were recorded and scored using the CTCAE v.4. Cystoscopy findings were retrospectively reviewed. Urinary quality of life data was assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Scoring (IPSS) and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26 (EPIC-26). A Wilcoxon signed-rank sum test was used to determine if there was a statistically significant increase or decrease in IPSS or EPIC scores between timepoints. Minimally important differences were calculated by obtaining half the standard deviation at time of start of treatment. Forty-seven patients at a median age of 72 years (range 63-84) received SBRT. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years (range 2-10 years). Late Grade 2 and grade 3 urinary toxicity occurred in 23 (48.9%) and 3 (6.4%) men, respectively. There were no Grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Approximately 51% of patients experienced hematuria following treatment. Mean time to hematuria was 10.5 months. Twenty-five cystoscopies were performed during follow-up and the most common finding was hyperemia, varices of the bladder neck/TURP defect, and/or necrotic tissue in the TURP defect. Baseline urinary QOL composite scores were low, but they did not clinically significantly decline in the first 2 years following treatment. In patients with prior TURP, prostate SBRT was well-tolerated. GU toxicity rates were comparable to similar patients treated with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy. Urinary quality of life was poor at baseline, but did not worsen clinically over time. Stricter dosimetric criteria could potentially improve the rate of high-grade late toxicity, but may increase the risk of peri-urethral recurrence.
临床数据表明,立体定向体部放射治疗(SBRT)与其他前列腺癌放射治疗方式的临床疗效相似。然而,关于经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)后SBRT安全性的报道数据有限。在此,我们报告我们使用SBRT对有TURP病史的患者进行大分割放疗的经验,包括医生报告的毒性反应和患者报告的生活质量。2007年至2016年在乔治敦大学医院接受SBRT治疗的47例有既往TURP病史的局限性前列腺癌患者纳入了这项回顾性分析。采用射波刀®(Accuray Incorporated,加利福尼亚州森尼韦尔市)进行治疗,给予35 Gy或36.25 Gy分5次照射,未保留前列腺尿道。使用美国国立癌症研究所不良事件通用术语标准第4版(CTCAE v.4)记录毒性反应并进行评分。对膀胱镜检查结果进行回顾性分析。使用国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)和扩展前列腺癌指数综合评分26项(EPIC - 26)评估泌尿生活质量数据。采用Wilcoxon符号秩和检验来确定不同时间点IPSS或EPIC评分是否有统计学上的显著升高或降低。通过获取治疗开始时标准差的一半来计算最小重要差异。47例患者接受了SBRT,中位年龄为72岁(范围63 - 84岁)。平均随访时间为4.7年(范围2 - 10年)。分别有23例(48.9%)和3例(6.4%)男性发生2级和3级晚期泌尿毒性反应。无4级或5级毒性反应。约51%的患者治疗后出现血尿。血尿的平均发生时间为10.5个月。随访期间进行了25次膀胱镜检查,最常见的发现是膀胱颈部/经尿道前列腺电切术缺损处充血、静脉曲张和/或经尿道前列腺电切术缺损处坏死组织。基线泌尿生活质量综合评分较低,但在治疗后的前2年临床上无显著下降。在有既往经尿道前列腺电切术病史的患者中,前列腺SBRT耐受性良好。泌尿生殖系统毒性发生率与接受常规分割放疗的类似患者相当。基线时泌尿生活质量较差,但随着时间推移临床上并未恶化。更严格的剂量学标准可能会提高高级别晚期毒性反应的发生率,但可能会增加尿道周围复发的风险。