No abstract

No abstract

After a median follow-up period of 10.8 years, a boost dose of 16 Gy led to improved local control in all age groups, but no difference in survival.

No abstract

The 15-year outcomes of PORTEC-1 confirm the relevance of HIR criteria for treatment selection, and a trend for long-term risk of second cancers. EBRT should be avoided in patients with low- and intermediate-risk EC.

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.-Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research -You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain -You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. A B S T R A C T PurposeTo determine the long-term outcome and health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients with endometrial carcinoma (EC) treated with or without pelvic radiotherapy in the Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma 1 (PORTEC-1) trial. Patients and MethodsBetween 1990 and 1997, 714 patients with stage IC grade 1 to 2 or IB grade 2 to 3 EC were randomly allocated to pelvic external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or no additional treatment (NAT). HRQL was evaluated with the Short Form 36-Item (SF-36) questionnaire; subscales from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PR25 module for bowel and bladder symptoms and the OV28 and CX24 modules for sexual symptoms; and demographic questions. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. ResultsMedian follow-up was 13.3 years. The 15-year actuarial locoregional recurrence rates were 5.8% for EBRT versus 15.5% for NAT (P Ͻ .001), and 15-year overall survival was 52% versus 60% (P ϭ .14). Of the 351 patients confirmed to be alive with correct address, 246 (70%) returned the questionnaire. Patients treated with EBRT reported significant (P Ͻ .01) and clinically relevant higher rates of urinary incontinence, diarrhea, and fecal leakage leading to more limitations in daily activities. Increased symptoms were reflected by the frequent use of incontinence materials after EBRT (day and night use, 42.9% v 15.2% for NAT; P Ͻ .001). Patients treated with EBRT reported lower scores on the SF-36 scales "physical functioning" (P ϭ .004) and "role-physical" (P ϭ .003). ConclusionEBRT for endometrial cancer is associated with long-term urinary and bowel symptoms and lower physical and role-physical functioning, even 15 years after treatment. Despite its efficacy in reducing locoregional recurrence, EBRT should be avoided in patients with low-and intermediate-risk EC.J Clin Oncol 29.

No abstract

No abstract