Comparing morbidity and cancer control after 3D-conformal (70/74 Gy) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (78/82 Gy) for prostate cancer

Abstract

Dose escalation with IMRT was associated with improved cancer control in intermediate- and high-risk patients in comparison with 3D-CRT, without compromising toxicity.

Radical Prostatectomy versus External Beam Radiotherapy for cT1-4N0M0 Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Patient Outcomes Including Mortality

“…Thirdly, our EBRT cohort included a small proportion of 3D-CRT cases. As new technologies such as IMRT, VMAT, and image-guided radiotherapy have improved EBRT outcomes [ 22 ], evaluations of EBRT against RP should be updated often. In fact, we have obtained a promising VMAT outcome.…”

Erectile function following brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, or radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer patients

“…The IIEF-5 score was graded as very severe (1-4), severe (5-7), moderate (8)(9)(10)(11), mild to moderate (12)(13)(14)(15)(16), mild (17)(18)(19)(20)(21), and no ED (22)(23)(24)(25) based on the published classification [14]. In addition, a cut-off score of 17 was used to differentiate no-to-mild ED and worse ED.…”

“…Functional and oncological outcomes should be considered in the evaluation of treatment success [3,7]. Despite improvements in radiotherapy and prostatectomy, erectile dysfunction (ED) among other adverse effects, is still common [8][9][10][11]. Although local treatments focus on cure, there is a need to include ED and possible recovery of potency in their assessment [7,12], especially since patients' decisions are driven by many factors other than cancer cure [13].…”

Long-Term Clinical Results of IGRT in Prostate Cancer Treatment

“…Eskalace dávky s sebou mimo lepší výsledky bohužel přináší i vyšší morbiditu, zejména pozdní gastrointestinální postradiační toxicitu. Použití radioterapie s modulovanou intenzitou (intensity modulated radiation therapy -IMRT) je jednou z možností, jak nežádoucí účinky redukovat [9][10][11][12][13][14]. IMRT umožňuje lepší rozložení dávky v prostoru s minimalizováním ozářeného objemu okolních zdravých tkání díky lepšímu tvarování svazku záření, významnějšímu poklesu dávky na okrajích cílového objemu a modulaci průtoku záření napříč svazkem.…”