Suppr超能文献

比较适形调强放疗、螺旋断层放疗和容积旋转调强放疗在局限性前列腺癌中的应用。

Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy with the 5-field technique, helical tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for localized prostate cancer.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan.

Department of Proton Therapy, Narita Memorial Proton Center, 78 Shirakawa-cho, Toyohashi, Aichi, 441-8021, Japan.

出版信息

J Radiat Res. 2022 Jul 19;63(4):666-674. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rrac027.

Abstract

The outcomes of three methods of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer were evaluated. Between 2010 and 2018, 308 D'Amico intermediate- or high-risk patients were treated with 2.2 Gy daily fractions to a total dose of 74.8 Gy in combination with hormonal therapy. Overall, 165 patients were treated with 5-field IMRT using a sliding window technique, 66 were then treated with helical tomotherapy and 77 were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The median age of patients was 71 years. The median follow-up period was 75 months. Five-year overall survival (OS) and biochemical or clinical failure-free survival (FFS) rates were 95.5 and 91.6% in the 5-field IMRT group, 95.1 and 90.3% in the tomotherapy group and 93.0 and 88.6% in the VMAT group, respectively, with no significant differences among the three groups. The 5-year cumulative incidence of late grade ≥2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 7.3 and 6.2%, respectively, for all patients. Late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicities were less frequent in patients undergoing VMAT (0%) than in patients undergoing 5-field IMRT (7.3%) and those undergoing tomotherapy (11%) (P = 0.025), and this finding appeared to be correlated with the better rectal DVH parameters in patients undergoing VMAT. Other toxicities did not differ significantly among the three groups, although bladder dose-volume parameters were slightly worse in the tomotherapy group than in the other groups. Despite differences in the IMRT delivery methods, X-ray energies and daily registration methods, all modalities may be used as IMRT for localized prostate cancer.

摘要

比较了三种调强放射治疗(IMRT)方法治疗局限性前列腺癌的结果。2010 年至 2018 年,对 308 例 D'Amico 中高危患者采用 2.2Gy 每日分割剂量,总剂量 74.8Gy 联合激素治疗。共有 165 例患者采用 5 野调强放射治疗,采用滑动窗口技术,66 例患者采用螺旋断层放疗,77 例患者采用容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)。患者的中位年龄为 71 岁。中位随访时间为 75 个月。5 年总生存率(OS)和生化或临床无失败生存率(FFS)在 5 野调强放射治疗组分别为 95.5%和 91.6%,在螺旋断层放疗组分别为 95.1%和 90.3%,在容积旋转调强放疗组分别为 93.0%和 88.6%,三组之间无显著差异。所有患者 5 年累积发生晚期≥2 级泌尿生殖和胃肠道毒性的发生率分别为 7.3%和 6.2%。VMAT 组(0%)晚期≥2 级胃肠道毒性的发生率明显低于 5 野调强放射治疗组(7.3%)和螺旋断层放疗组(11%)(P = 0.025),这一发现似乎与 VMAT 组患者直肠剂量体积直方图(DVH)参数较好有关。其他毒性在三组之间无显著差异,尽管螺旋断层放疗组的膀胱剂量体积参数略差。尽管调强放射治疗的方法、X 射线能量和每日登记方法不同,但所有方法都可以作为局限性前列腺癌的调强放射治疗。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/04fd/9303627/03a4c29c5fef/rrac027f1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验