Impact of the Target Volume (Prostate Alone vs. Prostate with Seminal Vesicles) and Fraction Dose (1.8 Gy vs. 2.0 Gy) on Quality of Life Changes After External-Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Pinkawa, Michael; Piroth, Marc D.; Fischedick, Karin; Holý, Richard; Klotz, Jens; Nussen, Sandra; Krenkel, Barbara; Eble, Michael J.

doi:10.1007/s00066-009-2008-6

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(53 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seminal vesicles were excluded after reaching a dose of 66.0 or 66.6 Gy. Patients after treatment of the prostate without seminal vesicles (15) were excluded from this evaluation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Life After Whole Pelvic Versus Prostate-Only External Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Matched-Pair Comparison

Pinkawa

Piroth

Holý

et al. 2011

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Seminal vesicles were excluded after reaching a dose of 66.0 or 66.6 Gy. Patients after treatment of the prostate without seminal vesicles (15) were excluded from this evaluation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Life After Whole Pelvic Versus Prostate-Only External Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Matched-Pair Comparison

Pinkawa

Piroth

Holý

et al. 2011

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Only patients with questionnaire results from both time A and time D were included in the analysis, resulting in an initial group of 362 patients after 3DCRT (whole pelvic treatment in 61 cases) [20,21] and 78 patients after IMRT (whole pelvic treatment with IMRT as a boost in 16 cases, IMRT as a boost following 3DCRT up to a dose of 60 Gy in 44 cases, IMRT for the complete treatment in 18 cases). For each patient in the IMRT subgroup, a 3DCRT patient was matched according to the following criteria: age ± 5 years, use of antiandrogens, treatment volume (± whole pelvis), prognostic risk group, and urinary/bowel/sexual QoL (function score preferably ± 10 points) before treatment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combination of Dose Escalation with Technological Advances (Intensity-Modulated and Image-Guided Radiotherapy) Is Not Associated with Increased Morbidity for Patients with Prostate Cancer

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The aim was to evaluate treatment-related morbidity after intensity-modulated (IMRT) and image-guided (IGRT) radiotherapy with a total dose of 76 Gy in comparison to conventional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) up to 70.2-72 Gy for patients with prostate cancer. Patients and Methods: All patients were prospectively surveyed prior to, on the last day, as well as after a median time of 2 and 16 months after RT using a validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite). Criteria for the 78 matched pairs after IMRT vs. 3DCRT were patient age, use of antiandrogens, treatment volume (± whole pelvis), prognostic risk group, and urinary/bowel/sexual quality of life (QoL) before treatment. Results: QoL changes after dose-escalated IMRT were found to be similar to QoL changes after 3DCRT in all domains. Only sexual function scores more than 1 year after RT decreased slightly more after 3DCRT in comparison to IMRT (mean 9 vs. 6 points; p = 0.04), with erections firm enough for intercourse in 14% vs. 30% (p = 0.03). Painful bowel movements were reported more frequently after 3DCRT vs. IMRT 2 months after treatment (≥ once a day in 10% vs. 1%; p = 0.03), but a tendency for higher rectal bleeding rates was found after IMRT vs. 3DCRT more than 1 year after RT (≥ rarely in 20% vs. 9%; p = 0.06). Conclusion: Combination of dose escalation with technological advances (IMRT and IGRT) is not associated with increased morbidity for patients with prostate cancer. Verknüpfung einer Dosiseskalation mit technologischen Fortschritten (intensitätsmodulierte und bildgeführte Radiotherapie) ist bei Patienten mit Prostatakarzinom nicht mit erhöhter Morbidität assoziiertZiel: Ziel war die Analyse therapiebedingter Morbidität nach intensitätsmodulierter (IMRT) und bildgeführter (IGRT) Radiotherapie mit einer Gesamtdosis von 76 Gy im Vergleich zur konventionellen konformalen Radiotherapie (3DCRT) bis 70,2-72 Gy bei Patienten mit einem Prostatakarzinom. Patienten und Methoden: Alle Patienten wurden prospektiv vor Beginn, am letzten Tag, median 2 Monate und 16 Monate nach RT mittels eines validierten Fragebogens befragt (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite). Kriterien für 78 gematchte Paare nach IMRT vs. 3DCRT waren das Patientenalter, der Einsatz eines Antiandrogens, Zielvolumen (± Becken), prognostische Risikogruppe und Lebensqualität (LQ) beim Wasserlassen/Stuhlgang/Sexualität vor der Behandlung. Ergebnisse: LQ-Veränderungen nach dosiseskalierter IMRT waren den LQ-Veränderungen nach 3DCRT in allen Domänen sehr ähnlich. Nur der Punktwert für die sexuelle Funktion fiel über ein Jahr nach der Behandlung nach 3DCRT etwas mehr als nach IMRT (durchschnittlich 9 vs. 6 Punkte; p = 0,04), mit ausreichender Erektion für Geschlechtsverkehr in 14% vs. 30% (p = 0,03). Schmerzhafter Stuhlgang wurde zwei Monate nach Therapie häufiger nach 3DCRT als nach IMRT berichtet (≥1-mal täglich in 10% vs. 1%; p = 0,03); jedoch fand sich über ein Jahr nach RT die Tendenz zu einer häufigeren Rate rektaler Blutungen nach IMRT als nach 3DCRT (≥ s...

show abstract

“…A dose escalation of > 79 Gy is not recommended in clinical routine practice [38]. Dose escalation in general requires modern radiation oncology concepts to minimize side effects, e.g., immobilization, preparation of bowel and bladder, thin-slice imaging, inverse treatment planning, image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; e.g., [1,3,17,21,25,37]). In spite of the availability of several randomized trials the question of radiation of the pelvic lymph nodes is not definitely answered yet.…”

Section: Technical Performance Of External-beam Radiotherapymentioning

confidence: 99%

The German S3 Guideline Prostate Cancer

Wenz

Martin²,

Böhmer

et al. 2010

Strahlenther Onkol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Impact of the Target Volume (Prostate Alone vs. Prostate with Seminal Vesicles) and Fraction Dose (1.8 Gy vs. 2.0 Gy) on Quality of Life Changes After External-Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Cited by 7 publications

References 36 publications

Quality of Life After Whole Pelvic Versus Prostate-Only External Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Matched-Pair Comparison

Quality of Life After Whole Pelvic Versus Prostate-Only External Beam Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Matched-Pair Comparison

Combination of Dose Escalation with Technological Advances (Intensity-Modulated and Image-Guided Radiotherapy) Is Not Associated with Increased Morbidity for Patients with Prostate Cancer

The German S3 Guideline Prostate Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About