Suppr超能文献

与低分割外照射放疗相比,低剂量率近距离放射治疗对中度风险前列腺癌的长期肿瘤学结局。

Long-term oncologic outcomes of low dose-rate brachytherapy compared to hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy for intermediate -risk prostate cancer.

作者信息

Sanmamed Noelia, Joseph Lisa, Crook Juanita, Craig Tim, Warde Padraig, Tomasso Anne Di, Chung Peter, Berlin Alejandro, Bayley Andrew, Saibishkumar Elantholi P, Glicksman Rachel, Raman Srinivas, Catton Charles, Helou Joelle

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Investigation institute, Clinico San Carlos Hospital, Madrid, Spain.

Department of Clinical Oncology, St James University Hospital, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

Brachytherapy. 2023 Mar-Apr;22(2):188-194. doi: 10.1016/j.brachy.2022.09.159. Epub 2022 Dec 20.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of intermediate risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with low dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) or moderate hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy (HF-EBRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients diagnosed with IR PCa and treated with LDR-BT or HF-EBRT between January 2005 and December 2013 were included. Brachytherapy treatment involved a transperineal implant of iodine-125 to a dose of 145 Gy to the PTV, while HF-EBRT was delivered using intensity modulated radiotherapy with 60 Gy in 20 fractions. The Phoenix ''nadir +2'' threshold was used to define biochemical relapse (BR). The cumulative incidence function (CIF) of BR and metastases was reported for each group and compared using the Gray's test to account for the competing risk of death. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer specific survival (PCSS). Univariate (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) analysis of the CIF of BR and metastases were performed. A 2-tailed p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Overall, 122 and 124 patients were treated with LDR-BT and HF-EBRT respectively. Median follow-up was 95 months [interquartile range (IQR): 79-118] in the LDR-BT group and 96 months (IQR: 63-123) in the HF-EBRT group. BR was observed in 5 patients treated with LDR-BT and 34 treated with HF-EBRT. At 60 and 90 months, the CIF of BR was 0.9% and 3.5% in the LDR-BT group vs. 16.6% and 23.7% in the HF-EBRT (p < 0.001). The CIF of metastases at 90 and 108 months, was 0% and 1.6% vs. 3.4% and 9.1% in the LDR-BT and HF-EBRT groups (p = 0.003), respectively. At the last follow-up, 3 patients treated with HF-EBRT died from their cancer [PCSS of 97.5% at 8 years and none died in the LDR-BT group (p = 0.09). On UVA and MVA risk group and treatment modality were independently associated with CIF of BR. On UVA HF-EBRT and ISUP grade group 3 were associated with metastases.

CONCLUSION

LDR-BT was associated with higher biochemical and metastases control in our cohort when compared to moderately HF-EBRT. In the absence of a randomized trial, LDR-BT when feasible should be offered to patients with a life expectancy of >8 years.

摘要

目的

比较接受低剂量率近距离放射治疗(LDR-BT)或中度分割外照射放疗(HF-EBRT)的中危(IR)前列腺癌(PCa)患者的长期肿瘤学结局。

方法和材料

纳入2005年1月至2013年12月期间诊断为IR PCa并接受LDR-BT或HF-EBRT治疗的患者。近距离放射治疗采用经会阴植入碘-125,靶区处方剂量为145 Gy,而HF-EBRT采用调强放疗,20次分割给予60 Gy。采用Phoenix“最低点+2”阈值定义生化复发(BR)。报告每组BR和转移的累积发病率函数(CIF),并使用Gray检验进行比较,以考虑死亡的竞争风险。采用Kaplan-Meier(KM)方法估计总生存期(OS)和前列腺癌特异性生存期(PCSS)。对BR和转移的CIF进行单因素(UVA)和多因素(MVA)分析。双侧p值≤0.05被认为具有统计学意义。

结果

总体上,分别有122例和124例患者接受了LDR-BT和HF-EBRT治疗。LDR-BT组的中位随访时间为95个月[四分位间距(IQR):79 - 118],HF-EBRT组为96个月(IQR:63 - 123)。接受LDR-BT治疗的患者中有5例出现BR,接受HF-EBRT治疗的有34例。在60个月和90个月时,LDR-BT组BR的CIF分别为0.9%和3.5%,而HF-EBRT组为16.6%和23.7%(p < 0.001)。在90个月和108个月时,LDR-BT组和HF-EBRT组转移的CIF分别为0%和1.6%以及3.4%和9.1%(p = 0.003)。在最后一次随访时,3例接受HF-EBRT治疗的患者死于癌症[8年时PCSS为97.5%,LDR-BT组无死亡病例(p = 0.09)。在UVA和MVA中,风险组和治疗方式与BR的CIF独立相关。在UVA中,HF-EBRT和ISUP 3级组与转移相关。

结论

与中度HF-EBRT相比,LDR-BT在我们的队列中与更高的生化控制和转移控制相关。在缺乏随机试验的情况下,对于预期寿命>8年的患者,若可行应提供LDR-BT治疗。

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