add state sales tax. The GST tax of 7% must be added to all orders shipped to Canada (Wolters Kluwer Health Inc.'s GST Identification #895524239, Publications Mail Agreement #1119672). Subscription prices outside the United States must be prepaid. Prices subject to change without notice. Visit us online at www.lww.com. Individual and in-training subscription rates include print and access to the online version. Institutional rates are for print only; online subscriptions are available via Ovid. Institutions can choose to purchase a print and online subscription together for a discounted rate. Institutions that wish to purchase a print subscription, please contact
Purpose: To compare the treatment outcomes of a cohort of prostate cancer patients treated with conventional schedule using IMRT or 3DRT technique. Materials and Methods: Between 2010-2017, 485 men with localized prostate cancer were treated with conventional radiotherapy schedule with a total dose ≥74Gy using IMRT (231) or 3DCRT (254). Late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity were retrospectively evaluated according to modifi ed RTOG criteria. The biochemical control was defi ned by the Phoenix criteria (nadir + 2ng/mL). The comparison between the groups included biochemical recurrence free survival (bRFS), overall survival (OS) and late toxicity. Results: With a median follow-up of 51 months (IMRT=49 and 3DRT=51 months), the maximal late GU for >=grade-2 during the entire period of follow-up was 13.1% in the IMRT and 15.4% in the 3DRT (p=0.85). The maximal late GI ≥ grade-2 in the IMRT was 10% and in the 3DRT 24% (p=0.0001). The 5-year bRFS for all risk groups with IMRT and 3D-CRT was 87.5% vs. 87.2% (p=0.415). Considering the risk-groups no signifi cant difference for low-, intermediate-and high-risk groups between IMRT (low-95.3%, intermediate-86.2% and high-73%) and 3D-CRT (low-96.4%, intermediate-88.2% and high-76.6%, p=0.448) was observed. No signifi cant differences for OS and DMFS were observed comparing treatment groups. Conclusion: IMRT reduces signifi cantly the risk of late GI severe complication compared with 3D-CRT using conventional fractionation with a total dose ≥74Gy without any differences for bRFS and OS.
The aim of this study was to evaluate whether there is a relationship between bleeding response and radiotherapy dose to palliate patients with local recurrence or progression of gastric cancer (GC). To this end, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies that evaluated the bleeding response in patients with GC with local recurrence or progression. A meta-regression analysis between biological effective dose (BED) and bleeding response was performed, as was subgroup analysis to evaluate the outcome by BED level and radiotherapy (RT) technique. A p-value o0.05 was considered significant. Ten non-comparative retrospective studies and one prospective study were included. In general, RT was effective at controlling tumor bleeding, and the bleeding response rate was 0.77 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.73-0.81). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated a linear correlation between BED Gy 10 and bleeding response (p=0o0001). Studies using conformational RT had a significant bleeding response rate compared to those using 2D (0.79; 95%CI, 0.74-0.84 vs 0.65; 95%CI, 0.56-0.75; p=0.021). In terms of the BED level, a significant difference in BR was identified on comparing BED Gy10 X40 (0.79; 95%CI, 0.7-0.8), BED Gy10 30-39 (0.79, 95%CI, 0.71-0.86), and BED Gy10 o30 (0.64; 95%CI, 0.5-0.7; p=0.0001). The mean survival time was 3.31 months (95%CI, 2.73-3.9) months, and the responders had a significantly longer survival (longer by 2.5 months) compared to the non-responders (95%CI, 1.7-3.3; po0.0001). Palliative RT is effective at controlling bleeding due to local recurrence/progression from GC. Our findings reveal a relationship between BR and BED. BED o30 Gy 10 should not be recommended, and 3DRT should be indicated instead in order to improve the result.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.