4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Ultra-high dose (86.4 Gy) IMRT for localized prostate cancer: Toxicity and biochemical outcomes

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.10.004

Keywords

prostate cancer; toxicity; outcomes; IMRT; dose escalation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To report toxicity and preliminary biochemical outcomes with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to a dose of 86.4 Gy for localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: Between August 1997 and March 2004,478 patients were treated with 86.4 Gy using a 5- to 7-field IMRT technique. To adhere to normal tissue constraints, the mean D95 and V100 for the planning target volume were 83 Gy and 87%, respectively. Toxicity data were scored according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 3.0. Freedom from biochemical relapse was calculated. The median follow-up was 53 months. Results: Thirty-seven patients (8%) experienced acute Grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. There was no acute Grade 3 or 4 GI toxicity. One hundred and five patients (22%) experienced acute Grade 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity and three patients (0.6%) had Grade 3 GU toxicity. There was no acute Grade 4 GU toxicity. Sixteen patients (3 %) developed late Grade 2 GI toxicity and two patients (<1 %) developed late Grade 3 GI toxicity. Sixty patients (13%) had late Grade 2 GU toxicity and 12 (<3%) experienced late Grade 3 GU toxicity. The 5-year actuarial PSA relapse-free survival according to the nadir plus 2 ng/mL definition was 98%, 85% and 70% for the low, intermediate, and high risk NCCN prognostic groups. Conclusion: This report represents the largest data set of patients treated to ultra-high radiation dose levels of 86.4 Gy using IMRT for localized prostate cancer. Our findings indicate that this treatment is well tolerated and the early excellent biochemical control rates are encouraging. (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available