Suppr超能文献

质子和光子辐射治疗前列腺癌的比较毒性更新分析。

Updated Analysis of Comparative Toxicity of Proton and Photon Radiation for Prostate Cancer.

机构信息

Smilow Cancer Center at St Francis Hospital, Hartford, CT.

Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research (COPPER) Center at Yale, New Haven, CT.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 2024 Jun 1;42(16):1943-1952. doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.01604. Epub 2024 Mar 20.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Previous comparative effectiveness studies have not demonstrated a benefit of proton beam therapy (PBT) compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer. An updated comparison of GI and genitourinary (GU) toxicity is needed.

METHODS

We investigated the SEER-Medicare linked database, identifying patients with localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 2010 to 2017. Procedure and diagnosis codes indicative of treatment-related toxicity were identified. As a sensitivity analysis, we also identified toxicity based only on procedure codes. Patients who underwent IMRT and PBT were matched 2:1 on the basis of clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. We then compared GI and GU toxicity at 6, 12, and 24 months after treatment.

RESULTS

The final sample included 772 PBT patients matched to 1,544 IMRT patients. The frequency of GI toxicity for IMRT versus PBT was 3.5% versus 2.5% at 6 months ( = .18), 9.5% versus 10.2% at 12 months ( = .18), and 20.5% versus 23.4% at 24 months ( = .11). The frequency of only procedure codes indicative of GI toxicity for IMRT versus PBT was too low to be reported and not significantly different. The frequency of GU toxicity for IMRT versus PBT was 6.8% versus 5.7% ( = .30), 14.3% versus 12.2% ( = .13), and 28.2% versus 25.8% ( = .21) at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. When looking only at procedure codes, the frequency of GU toxicity for IMRT was 1.0% at 6 months, whereas it was too infrequent to report for PBT ( = .64). GU toxicity for IMRT versus PBT was 3.3% versus 2.1% ( = .10), and 8.7% versus 6.7% ( = .10) at 12 and 24 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, there were no statistically significant differences between PBT and IMRT in terms of GI or GU toxicity.

摘要

目的

先前的比较有效性研究并未显示质子束治疗(PBT)与前列腺癌调强放疗(IMRT)相比具有优势。因此,有必要对胃肠道(GI)和泌尿生殖系统(GU)毒性进行更新的比较。

方法

我们调查了 SEER-Medicare 关联数据库,确定了 2010 年至 2017 年间诊断为局限性前列腺癌的患者。确定了与治疗相关毒性的程序和诊断代码。作为敏感性分析,我们还仅根据程序代码确定了毒性。根据临床和社会人口统计学特征,对接受 IMRT 和 PBT 的患者进行了 2:1 的匹配。然后比较了治疗后 6、12 和 24 个月的 GI 和 GU 毒性。

结果

最终样本包括 772 名 PBT 患者和 1544 名 IMRT 患者。IMRT 与 PBT 的 GI 毒性频率分别为治疗后 6 个月时 3.5%与 2.5%(=0.18)、12 个月时 9.5%与 10.2%(=0.18)以及 24 个月时 20.5%与 23.4%(=0.11)。仅报告 IMRT 与 PBT 的程序代码指示的 GI 毒性频率过低,无法进行报告,且无显著差异。IMRT 与 PBT 的 GU 毒性频率分别为 6 个月时 6.8%与 5.7%(=0.30)、12 个月时 14.3%与 12.2%(=0.13)以及 24 个月时 28.2%与 25.8%(=0.21)。仅查看程序代码时,IMRT 的 GU 毒性频率为 6 个月时 1.0%,而 PBT 的 GU 毒性频率过低,无法进行报告(=0.64)。IMRT 与 PBT 的 GU 毒性频率分别为 12 个月时 3.3%与 2.1%(=0.10)以及 24 个月时 8.7%与 6.7%(=0.10)。

结论

在这项观察性研究中,PBT 与 IMRT 在 GI 或 GU 毒性方面没有统计学上的显著差异。

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