4.7 Article

ACUTE AND LATE TOXICITY IN A RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF CONVENTIONAL VERSUS HYPOFRACTIONATED THREE-DIMENSIONAL CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.12.045

关键词

Prostate tumors; Acute toxicity; Late toxicity; High-risk disease; Hypofractionated schedule; Conventional fractionation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To compare the toxicity between hypofractionation vs. conventional fractionation schedules in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: Between January 2003 and December 2007, 168 patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (62 Gy in 20 fractions within 5 weeks, 4 fractions/wk) or conventionally fractionated (80 Gy in 40 fractions within 8 weeks) three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to the prostate and seminal vesicles. All patients had undergone a 9-month course of total androgen deprivation, with radiotherapy starting 2 months after initiation of the total androgen deprivation. Results: The median follow-up was 32 and 35 months in the hypofractionation and conventional fractionation arms, respectively. For the patients developing acute toxicity, no difference between the two fractionation groups was found in either severity or duration of gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity. Also, no difference was found in the incidence and severity of late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity between the two treatment schedules, with a 3-year rate of Grade 2 or greater toxicity of 17% and 16% for the hypofractionation arm and 14% and 11% for the conventional fractionation arm, respectively. A statistically significant correlation between acute and late gastrointestinal toxicity was found only in the conventional fractionation group. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the hypofractionation regimen used in our study is safe, with only a slight, nonsignificant increase in tolerable and temporary acute toxicity compared with the conventional fractionation schedule. The severity and frequency of late complications was equivalent between the two treatment groups. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据