Cargando…

Intensity modulated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: rigid compliance to dose-volume constraints as a warranty of acceptable toxicity?

BACKGROUND: To report the toxicity after intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for patients with localized prostate cancer, as a sole treatment or after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Between August 2001 and December 2003, 132 patients with prostate cancer were treated with IMRT and 125 were eval...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Michael J, Weltman, Eduardo, Hanriot, Rodrigo M, Luz, Fábio P, Cecílio, Paulo J, da Cruz, José C, Moreira, Frederico R, Santos, Adriana S, Martins, Lidiane C, Nadalin, Wladmir
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1781947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17224072
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-2-6
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To report the toxicity after intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for patients with localized prostate cancer, as a sole treatment or after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Between August 2001 and December 2003, 132 patients with prostate cancer were treated with IMRT and 125 were evaluable to acute and late toxicity analysis, after a minimum follow-up time of one year. Clinical and treatment data, including normal tissue dose-volume histogram (DVH) constraints, were reviewed. Gastro-intestinal (GI) and genito-urinary (GU) signs and symptoms were evaluated according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) toxicity scales. Median prescribed dose was 76 Gy. Median follow-up time was of 26.1 months. RESULTS: From the 125 patients, 73 (58.4%) presented acute Grade 1 or Grade 2 GI and 97 (77.2%) presented acute Grade 1 or Grade 2 GU toxicity. Grade 3 GI acute toxicity occurred in only 2 patients (1.6%) and Grade 3 GU acute toxicity in only 3 patients (2.4%). Regarding Grade 1 and 2 late toxicity, 26 patients (20.8%) and 21 patients (16.8%) presented GI and GU toxicity, respectively. Grade 2 GI late toxicity occurred in 6 patients (4.8%) and Grade 2 GU late toxicity in 4 patients (3.2%). None patient presented any Grade 3 or higher late toxicity. Non-conformity to DVH constraints occurred in only 11.2% of treatment plans. On univariate analysis, no significant risk factor was identified for Grade 2 GI late toxicity, but mean dose delivered to the PTV was associated to higher Grade 2 GU late toxicity (p = 0.042). CONCLUSION: IMRT is a well tolerable technique for routine treatment of localized prostate cancer, with short and medium-term acceptable toxicity profiles. According to the data presented here, rigid compliance to DHV constraints might prevent higher incidences of normal tissue complication.