Cargando…

Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques

PURPOSE: To report our institutional quality of life (QOL) data for low-dose-rate (LDR) monotherapy (LDR mono), high-dose-rate (HDR) monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The charts of 165 patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the pro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morgan, Tiffany M., Press, Robert H., Cutrell, Patrick K., Zhang, Chao, Chen, Zhengja, Rahnema, Sara, Sanda, Martin, Pattaras, John, Patel, Pretesh R., Jani, Ashesh B., Rossi, Peter J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6335553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30662471
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2018.81024
_version_ 1783387907417964544
author Morgan, Tiffany M.
Press, Robert H.
Cutrell, Patrick K.
Zhang, Chao
Chen, Zhengja
Rahnema, Sara
Sanda, Martin
Pattaras, John
Patel, Pretesh R.
Jani, Ashesh B.
Rossi, Peter J.
author_facet Morgan, Tiffany M.
Press, Robert H.
Cutrell, Patrick K.
Zhang, Chao
Chen, Zhengja
Rahnema, Sara
Sanda, Martin
Pattaras, John
Patel, Pretesh R.
Jani, Ashesh B.
Rossi, Peter J.
author_sort Morgan, Tiffany M.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To report our institutional quality of life (QOL) data for low-dose-rate (LDR) monotherapy (LDR mono), high-dose-rate (HDR) monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The charts of 165 patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated with LDR monotherapy (LDR mono), HDR monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost) at a single institution between 2012 and 2015 were reviewed. All patients completed the American Urological Association symptom score (AUASS) and Expanded Prostate Index for Prostate Cancer – Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) quality of life assessments prior to treatment and at least one follow-up survey. Time points included baseline, ≤ 2 months, 2-≤ 6 months, 6-≤ 12 months, 12-≤ 18 months, 18-≤ 24 months, 24-≤ 30 months, and > 30 months. Linear mixed models were performed to test for significant changes and differences in each outcome over time. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 19.5 months. All major functional QOL domains were affected after treatment with brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. All domains improved over time, with the exception of sexual function scores for all groups and urinary incontinence scores for the HDR mono group. Patients treated with LDR did have higher AUA, irritability/obstructive symptoms, incontinence, bowel, and QOL scores acutely compared to the HDR and HDR + boost groups. Vitality scores were significantly worse in the HDR boost group both acutely and at the > 30-month time point. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving HDR brachytherapy had lower acute urinary and rectal toxicity compared to the patients receiving LDR, even when combined with EBRT. However, long-term toxicity was similar.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6335553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Termedia Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63355532019-01-18 Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques Morgan, Tiffany M. Press, Robert H. Cutrell, Patrick K. Zhang, Chao Chen, Zhengja Rahnema, Sara Sanda, Martin Pattaras, John Patel, Pretesh R. Jani, Ashesh B. Rossi, Peter J. J Contemp Brachytherapy Original Paper PURPOSE: To report our institutional quality of life (QOL) data for low-dose-rate (LDR) monotherapy (LDR mono), high-dose-rate (HDR) monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The charts of 165 patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated with LDR monotherapy (LDR mono), HDR monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost) at a single institution between 2012 and 2015 were reviewed. All patients completed the American Urological Association symptom score (AUASS) and Expanded Prostate Index for Prostate Cancer – Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) quality of life assessments prior to treatment and at least one follow-up survey. Time points included baseline, ≤ 2 months, 2-≤ 6 months, 6-≤ 12 months, 12-≤ 18 months, 18-≤ 24 months, 24-≤ 30 months, and > 30 months. Linear mixed models were performed to test for significant changes and differences in each outcome over time. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 19.5 months. All major functional QOL domains were affected after treatment with brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. All domains improved over time, with the exception of sexual function scores for all groups and urinary incontinence scores for the HDR mono group. Patients treated with LDR did have higher AUA, irritability/obstructive symptoms, incontinence, bowel, and QOL scores acutely compared to the HDR and HDR + boost groups. Vitality scores were significantly worse in the HDR boost group both acutely and at the > 30-month time point. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving HDR brachytherapy had lower acute urinary and rectal toxicity compared to the patients receiving LDR, even when combined with EBRT. However, long-term toxicity was similar. Termedia Publishing House 2018-12-28 2018-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6335553/ /pubmed/30662471 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2018.81024 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Termedia Sp. z o. o. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Morgan, Tiffany M.
Press, Robert H.
Cutrell, Patrick K.
Zhang, Chao
Chen, Zhengja
Rahnema, Sara
Sanda, Martin
Pattaras, John
Patel, Pretesh R.
Jani, Ashesh B.
Rossi, Peter J.
Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
title Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
title_full Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
title_fullStr Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
title_full_unstemmed Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
title_short Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
title_sort brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6335553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30662471
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2018.81024
work_keys_str_mv AT morgantiffanym brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT pressroberth brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT cutrellpatrickk brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT zhangchao brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT chenzhengja brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT rahnemasara brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT sandamartin brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT pattarasjohn brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT patelpreteshr brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT janiasheshb brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques
AT rossipeterj brachytherapyforlocalizedprostatecancerinthemoderneraacomparisonofpatientreportedqualityoflifeoutcomesamongdifferenttechniques