The getug 70 GY vs. 80 GY randomized trial for localized prostate cancer:: Feasibility and acute toxicity

被引:86
作者
Beckendorf, V [1 ]
Guérif, S
Le Prisé, E
Cosset, JM
Lefloch, O
Chauvet, B
Salem, N
Chapet, O
Bourdin, S
Bachaud, JM
Maingon, P
Lagrange, JL
Malissard, L
Simon, JM
Pommier, P
Hay, MH
Dubray, B
Luporsi, E
Bey, P
机构
[1] Ctr Alexis Vautrin, Dept Radiotherapy, F-54511 Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France
[2] CHU Jean Bernard, Poitiers, France
[3] Ctr Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France
[4] Inst Curie, Paris, France
[5] CHU Bretonneau, F-37044 Tours, France
[6] Inst St Catherine, Avignon, France
[7] Inst Paoli Calmette, Marseille, France
[8] Hop Lyon Sud, Lyon, France
[9] Ctr Rene Gauducheau, St Herblain, France
[10] Ctr Claudius Regaud, Toulouse, France
[11] Ctr George Francois Leclerc, Dijon, France
[12] Ctr Antoine Lacassagne, F-06054 Nice, France
[13] La Chaussee St Victor, Paris, France
[14] Hop La Pitie Salpetriere, Paris, France
[15] Ctr Leon Berard, F-69373 Lyon, France
[16] Ctr Val Aurelle, Montpellier, France
[17] Ctr Henri Becquerel, F-76038 Rouen, France
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2004年 / 60卷 / 04期
关键词
conformal therapy; prostate cancer; dose escalation; dose-volume histograms; acute toxicity;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.05.033
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To describe treatments and acute tolerance in a randomized trial comparing 70 Gy and 80 Gy to the prostate in patients with localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: Between September 1999 and February 2002, 306 patients were randomized to receive 70 Gy (153 patients) or 80 Gy (153 patients) in 17 institutions. Patients exhibited intermediate-prognosis tumors. If the risk of node involvement was greater than 10%, surgical staging was required. Previous prostatectomy was excluded, and androgen deprivation was not admitted. The treatment was delivered in two steps. PTV1-including seminal vesicles, prostate, and a 1-0.5-cm margin-received 46 Gy given with a 4-field conformal technique. PTV2, reduced to prostate with the same margins, irradiated with at least 5 fields. Dose was prescribed according to ICRU recommendations in the 70 Gy group, but adapted at the 80 Gy level. Results: All patients but one in the 80 Gy arm completed the treatment. In the 70 Gy arm, the mean dose to the PTV2 was 69.5 Gy. In the 80 Gy arm, the mean dose in the PTV2 was 78.5 Gy. Acute toxicity according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale during treatment was reported in 306 patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the two arms: 12% had no toxicity, 80% complained of bladder toxicity, and 70% complained of rectal symptoms. Two months after the end of treatment, 43% of the 70 Gy level and 48% of the 80 Gy level complained of side effects, including 24% and 20% of sexual disorders. There was 6% and 2% of Grade 3 urinary and rectal toxicity. Five patients required a 10-29-day suspension of the treatment. Acute Grade 2 and 3 side effects were related to PTV and CTV1 size, which was the only independent predictive factor in multivariate analysis. Toxicity was not related to the center, age, arm of treatment, or selected data from dose-volume histogram of organ at risk. Conclusion: Treatments were completed in respect to constraints. Acute toxicity was acceptable. Intensity of toxicity depended on target volumes. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1056 / 1065
页数:10
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] The impact of co-morbidity on life expectancy among men with localized prostate cancer
    Albertsen, PC
    Fryback, DG
    Storer, BE
    Kolon, TF
    Fine, J
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1996, 156 (01) : 127 - 132
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1993, 50 ICRU
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1999, 62 ICRU
  • [4] Beckendorf V, 2002, Cancer Radiother, V6 Suppl 1, p78s
  • [5] Dose escalation with 3D-CRT in prostate cancer: French study of dose escalation with conformal 3D radiotherapy in prostate cancer - Preliminary results
    Bey, P
    Carrie, C
    Beckendorf, V
    Ginestet, C
    Aletti, P
    Madelis, G
    Luporsi, E
    Pommier, P
    Cowen, D
    Gonzague-Casabianca, L
    Simonian-Sauve, M
    Maingon, P
    Naudy, S
    Lagrange, JL
    Marcie, S
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2000, 48 (02): : 513 - 517
  • [6] Acute toxicity of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer patients eligible for implant monotherapy
    Chou, RH
    Wilder, RB
    Ji, M
    Ryu, JK
    Leigh, BR
    Earle, JD
    Doggett, RLS
    Kubo, HD
    Roach, M
    White, RWD
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2000, 47 (01): : 115 - 119
  • [7] TOXICITY CRITERIA OF THE RADIATION-THERAPY ONCOLOGY GROUP (RTOG) AND THE EUROPEAN-ORGANIZATION-FOR-RESEARCH-AND-TREATMENT-OF-CANCER (EORTC)
    COX, JD
    STETZ, J
    PAJAK, TF
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1995, 31 (05): : 1341 - 1346
  • [8] Equivalent 5-year bNED in select prostate cancer patients managed with surgery or radiation therapy despite exclusion of the seminal vesicles from the CTV
    DAmico, AV
    Whittington, R
    Kaplan, I
    Beard, C
    Schultz, D
    Malkowicz, SB
    Tomaszewski, JE
    Wein, A
    Coleman, CN
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1997, 39 (02): : 335 - 340
  • [9] THE EFFECT OF DOSE ON LOCAL-CONTROL OF PROSTATE-CANCER
    HANKS, GE
    MARTZ, KL
    DIAMOND, JJ
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1988, 15 (06): : 1299 - 1305
  • [10] Dose escalation with 3D conformal treatment: Five year outcomes, treatment optimization, and future directions
    Hanks, GE
    Hanlon, AL
    Schultheiss, TE
    Pinover, WH
    Movsas, B
    Epstein, BE
    Hunt, MA
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1998, 41 (03): : 501 - 510