• search hit 6 of 19
Back to Result List

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

Please always quote using this URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-325055
  • 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 33Purpose 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.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author: Jörg TamihardjaORCiD, Ingulf Lawrenz, Paul Lutyj, Stefan Weick, Matthias Guckenberger, Bülent Polat, Michael Flentje
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-325055
Document Type:Journal article
Faculties:Medizinische Fakultät / Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie
Language:English
Parent Title (English):Strahlentherapie und Onkologie
Year of Completion:2022
Volume:198
Issue:8
Pagenumber:735-743
Source:Strahlentherapie und Onkologie (2022) 198:8, 735-743 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01953-y
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-022-01953-y
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Tag:dose escalation; high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost; long-term outcome; propensity score matching; toxicity
Release Date:2024/03/04
Licence (German):License LogoCC BY: Creative-Commons-Lizenz: Namensnennung 4.0 International