@article{TamihardjaLawrenzLutyjetal.2022,
  author    = {Tamihardja, J{\"o}rg and Lawrenz, Ingulf and Lutyj, Paul and Weick, Stefan and Guckenberger, Matthias and Polat, B{\"u}lent and Flentje, Michael},
  title     = {Propensity score-matched analysis comparing dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiation therapy versus external beam radiation therapy plus high-dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer},
  series = {Strahlentherapie und Onkologie},
  volume    = {198},
  journal   = {Strahlentherapie und Onkologie},
  number    = {8},
  doi       = {10.1007/s00066-022-01953-y},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-325055},
  pages     = {735-743},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Purpose Dose-escalated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and EBRT + high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost are guideline-recommended treatment options for localized prostate cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare long-term outcome and toxicity of dose-escalated EBRT versus EBRT + HDR-BT boost. Methods From 2002 to 2019, 744 consecutive patients received either EBRT or EBRT + HDR-BT boost, of whom 516 patients were propensity score matched. Median follow-up was 95.3 months. Cone beam CT image-guided EBRT consisted of 33 fractions of intensity-modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost up to 76.23 Gy (D\(_{Mean}\)). Combined treatment was delivered as 46 Gy (D\(_{Mean}\)) EBRT, followed by two fractions HDR-BT boost with 9 Gy (D\(_{90\\%}\)). Propensity score matching was applied before analysis of the primary endpoint, estimated 10-year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS), and the secondary endpoints metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS). Prognostic parameters were analyzed by Cox proportional hazard modelling. Genitourinary (GU)/gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity evaluation used the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (v5.0). Results The estimated 10-year bRFS was 82.0\% vs. 76.4\% (p = 0.075) for EBRT alone versus combined treatment, respectively. The estimated 10-year MFS was 82.9\% vs. 87.0\% (p = 0.195) and the 10-year OS was 65.7\% vs. 68.9\% (p = 0.303), respectively. Cumulative 5‑year late GU ≥ grade 2 toxicities were seen in 23.6\% vs. 19.2\% (p = 0.086) and 5‑year late GI ≥ grade 2 toxicities in 11.1\% vs. 5.0\% of the patients (p = 0.002); cumulative 5‑year late grade 3 GU toxicity occurred in 4.2\% vs. 3.6\% (p = 0.401) and GI toxicity in 1.0\% vs. 0.3\% (p = 0.249), respectively. Conclusion Both treatment groups showed excellent long-term outcomes with low rates of severe toxicity.},
  language  = {en}
}