We evaluated the acute and late toxicity after high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with fiducial marker-based position verification for prostate cancer. Between 2001 and 2004, 331 patients with prostate cancer received 76 Gy in 35 fractions using IMRT combined with fiducial marker-based position verification. The symptoms before treatment (pre-treatment) and weekly during treatment (acute toxicity) were scored using the Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC). The goal was to score late toxicity according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (RTOG/EORTC) scale with a follow-up time of at least three years. Twenty-two percent of the patients experienced pre-treatment grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) complaints and 2% experienced grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) complaints. Acute grade 2 GU and GI toxicity occurred in 47% and 30%, respectively. Only 3% of the patients developed acute grade 3 GU and no grade ≥ 3 GI toxicity occurred. After a mean follow-up time of 47 months with a minimum of 31 months for all patients, the incidence of late grade 2 GU and GI toxicity was 21% and 9%, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 GU and GI toxicity rates were 4% and 1%, respectively, including one patient with a rectal fistula and one patient with a severe hemorrhagic cystitis (both grade 4). In conclusion, high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy with fiducial marker-based position verification is well tolerated. The low grade ≥ 3 toxicity allows further dose escalation if the same dose constraints for the organs at risk will be used.
Comparison of the characteristics of prostate cancer detected through screening of the general population with those in a population based cohort of men in which there was no organized screening revealed stage reduction, primarily with regard to number of metastatic cases. Whether this stage reduction will lead to a decrease in disease specific mortality remains unknown until the study is completed and the end point of prostate cancer specific mortality is evaluated.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the change in quality of life (QoL) 3 years after high‐dose intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using gold fiducial marker‐based position verification in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Between October 2003 and November 2004, 95 patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were treated with 76 Gy IMRT with gold‐fiducial marker‐based position verification. Before treatment (baseline) and 1, 6 and 36 months after RT the QoL was measured using the RAND‐36, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire (QLQ‐C30(+3)) and the prostate tumour‐specific module (EORTC QLQ‐PR25). Changes in QoL with time of ≥10 points were considered clinically relevant.
RESULTS
After 3 years there was a statistically significant improvement in QoL for emotional role restriction and functioning, change in health, mental health and insomnia, compared with baseline. Emotional role restriction increased by >10 points and was therefore clinically relevant, while all other differences were of <10 points. There was a statistically significant deterioration of QoL after 3 years in physical and cognitive functioning, bowel symptoms/function and sexual activity. Only the sexual activity QoL score changed by 12 points and was therefore the only meaningful deterioration in QoL at 3 years after treatment.
CONCLUSION
IMRT and accurate position verification provide the possibility to deliver a high irradiation dose to the prostate without clinically relevant deterioration in long‐term QoL, except for a persistent decrease in sexual activity score.
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.