Toxicity after three-dimensional radiotherapy for prostate cancer on RTOG 9406 dose level V

被引:109
作者
Michalski, JM
Winter, K
Purdy, JA
Parliament, M
Wong, H
Perez, CA
Roach, M
Bosch, W
Cox, JD
机构
[1] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[2] Image Guided Therapy Ctr, St Louis, MO USA
[3] Radiat Therapy Oncol Grp, Philadelphia, PA USA
[4] Univ Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[5] St Joseph Med Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Stockton, CA USA
[6] Univ Calif San Francisco, Sch Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[7] Univ Texas, MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2005年 / 62卷 / 03期
关键词
prostate cancer; RTOG; 3D-CRT; toxicity;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.11.028
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 [肿瘤学];
摘要
Purpose: This is the first report of toxicity outcomes at dose Level V (78 Gy) on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9406 for Stages T1-T2 adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Methods and Materials: A total of 225 patients were entered in this cooperative group, Phase I-II dose-escalation trial of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for localized carcinoma of the prostate treated to a dose of 78 Gy (Level V). Of these patients, 219 were analyzed for acute and 218 for late toxicity. A minimum of 2 Gy/fraction was prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV). Patients were stratified according to the risk of seminal vesicle invasion as determined by Gleason score and presenting prostate-specific antigen level. Group I patients had clinical Stages T1-T2 tumors with a seminal vesicle invasion risk of < 15 %. Group 2 patients had clinical Stages T1-T2 tumors with a seminal vesicle invasion risk of 15 %. Patients in Group 1 were prescribed 78 Gy to a prostate PTV. Patients in Group 2 were prescribed 54 Gy to the prostate and seminal vesicles (PTV1) followed by a boost to the prostate only (PTV2) to 78 Gy. PTV margins of between 5 and 10 mm were required. The average time at risk for late Grade 3+ toxicity after therapy completion was 23.2 and 23.1 months for Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The frequency of Grade 3 or worse late effects was compared with a similar group of patients treated in Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) studies 7506 and 7706, with length of follow-up adjustments made for the interval from therapy completion. A second comparison was made with 170 patients treated to dose Level III (79.2 Gy in 1.8 Gy/fraction) to see whether the fraction size affected toxicity. Unlike other dose levels, patients treated at dose Level III had treatment prescribed as a minimum to the gross tumor volume. This effectively lowered the volume of the rectum treated to the study dose. Results: Acute toxicity at dose Level V (78 Gy) was remarkably low, with Grade 3 acute effects reported in only 4% of Group 1 and 2% of Group 2 patients. No Grade 4 or 5 acute toxicity was reported. There was no statistically significant difference in rates of acute toxicities in patients who were treated to 79.2 Gy at 1.8 Gy/fraction or 78 Gy at 2.0 Gy/fraction. Late toxicity continues to be low compared with RTOG historical controls. The observed rate of Grade 3 or worse late effects for Group 1 (6 cases) was significantly lower (p = 0.0042) than the 18.2 cases that would have been expected from the historical control. The observed rate for Group 2 (8 cases) was lower than the 15.5 cases expected, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.06). A trend was noted that Group 2 patients treated on dose Level V had more late Grade 3 or worse toxicity than patients treated to a similar dose on Level III (7% vs. 1%, p = 0.06). A significantly (p < 0.0001) greater incidence of late Grade 2 or greater toxicity occurred in patients treated at dose Level V (30% and 33% for Groups 1 and 2, respectively) than at dose Level HI (13% and 9% for Groups 1 and 2, respectively). The longer follow-up at dose Level M suggests these differences may increase with additional follow-up. Conclusion: Tolerance to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy with 78 Gy in 2-Gy fractions remains better than expected compared with historical controls. The magnitude of any effect from fraction size and treatment volume requires additional follow-up. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:706 / 713
页数:8
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]
*AM JOINT COMM CAN, 1992, AJCC CANC STAG MAN
[2]
Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma [J].
Brenner, DJ ;
Hall, EJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1999, 43 (05) :1095-1101
[3]
COX DR, 1972, J R STAT SOC B, V34, P187
[4]
Is the α/β ratio for prostate cancer low? [J].
D'Souza, WD ;
Thames, HD .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 51 (01) :1-3
[5]
INDICATIONS FOR AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SEMINAL-VESICLE IRRADIATION DURING 3D CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY FOR LOCALIZED PROSTATE-CANCER [J].
DIAZ, A ;
ROACH, M ;
MARQUEZ, C ;
COLEMAN, L ;
PICKETT, B ;
WOLFE, JS ;
CARROLL, P ;
NARAYAN, P .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1994, 30 (02) :323-329
[6]
Duchesne GM, 1999, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V44, P747
[7]
A CLASS OF K-SAMPLE TESTS FOR COMPARING THE CUMULATIVE INCIDENCE OF A COMPETING RISK [J].
GRAY, RJ .
ANNALS OF STATISTICS, 1988, 16 (03) :1141-1154
[8]
International comission on radiation units and measurements, 1993, 50 ICRU
[9]
Kalbfleisch JD., 2011, STAT ANAL FAILURE TI
[10]
A simple analytic derivation suggests that prostate cancer α/β ratio is low [J].
King, CR ;
Fowler, JF .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 51 (01) :213-214