Advertisement

Carbon Ion Radiotherapy in Advanced Hypofractionated Regimens for Prostate Cancer: From 20 to 16 Fractions

      Purpose

      To assess the effects of differences in dose fractionation on late radiation toxicity and biochemical control in patients with prostate cancer treated with carbon ion radiotherapy (C-ion RT).

      Methods and Materials

      A total of 740 prostate cancer patients who received C-ion RT between April 2000 and February 2009 were analyzed. Of those, 664 patients followed for at least 1 year were analyzed with regard to late radiation toxicity. Biochemical relapse-free (BRF) and overall survival (OS) rates in patient subgroups with each dose-fractionation were analyzed.

      Results

      Only 1 case of grade 3 genitourinary (GU) morbidity was observed in 20 fractions, and none of the patients developed higher grade morbidities. The incidence of late GU toxicity in patients treated with 16 fractions was lower than that of patients treated with 20 fractions. The OS rate and BRF rate of the entire group at 5 years were 95.2% and 89.7%, respectively. The 5-year BRF rate of the patients treated with 16 fractions of C-ion RT (88.5%) was comparable to that of the patients treated with 20 fractions (90.2%).

      Conclusion

      C-ion RT of 57.6 GyE (the physical C-ion dose [Gy] × RBE) in 16 fractions could offer an even lower incidence of genitourinary toxicity and comparable BRF rate than that in 20 fractions. Advancement in hypofractionation could be safely achieved with C-ion RT for prostate cancer.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      ASTRO Member Login
      ASTRO Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Use your society credentials to access all journal content and features.
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Nikoghosyan A.
        • Schulz-Ertner D.
        • Didinger B.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of therapeutic potential of heavy ion therapy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 58: 89-97
        • Suzuki M.
        • Kase Y.
        • Yamaguchi H.
        • et al.
        Relative biological effectiveness for cell-killing effect on various human cell lines irradiated with heavy-ion medical accelerator in Chiba (HIMAC) carbon-ion beams.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000; 48: 241-250
        • Denekamp J.
        • Waites T.
        • Fowler J.F.
        • et al.
        Predicting realistic RBE values for clinically relevant radiotherapy schedules.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997; 71: 681-694
        • Koike S.
        • Ando K.
        • Uzawa A.
        • et al.
        Significance of fractionated irradiation for the biological therapeutic gain of carbon ions.
        Radiat Prot Dos. 2002; 99: 405-408
        • Ando K.
        • Koike S.
        • Uzawa A.
        • et al.
        Biological gain of carbon-ion radiotherapy for the early response of tumor growth delay and against early response of skin reaction in mice.
        J Radiat Res. 2005; 46: 51-57
        • Tsujii H.
        • Morita S.
        • Miyamoto T.
        • et al.
        Preliminary results of phase I/II carbon-ion therapy at the National Institute of Radiological Sciences.
        J Brachyther Int. 1997; 13: 1-8
        • Akakura K.
        • Tsujii H.
        • Morita S.
        • et al.
        Phase I/II clinical trials of carbon ion therapy for prostate cancer.
        Prostate. 2004; 58: 252-258
        • Tsuji H.
        • Yanagi T.
        • Ishikawa H.
        • et al.
        Hypofractionated radiotherapy with carbon ion beams prostate cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005; 63: 1153-1160
        • Ishikawa H.
        • Tsuji H.
        • Kamada T.
        • et al.
        Carbon ion radiation therapy for prostate cancer: Results of a prospective phase II study.
        Radiother Oncol. 2006; 81: 57-64
        • International Union Against Cancer (UICC)
        TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours.
        5th ed. Wiley-Liss, Inc, New York1997 (170–173)
        • Kanai T.
        • Endo M.
        • Minohara S.
        • et al.
        Biophysical characteristics of HIMAC clinical irradiation system for heavy-ion radiation therapy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999; 44: 201-210
        • Cox J.D.
        • Stetz B.S.
        • Pajak T.F.
        Toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC).
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995; 31: 1341-1346
        • Roach III, M.
        • Hanks G.
        • Thames Jr., H.
        • et al.
        Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix consensus conference.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65: 965-974
        • Kaplan E.
        • Meier P.
        Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations.
        J Am Stat Assoc. 1958; 53: 457-481
        • Douglas B.G.
        • Fowler J.F.
        The effect of multiple small doses of X rays on skin reactions in the mouse and a basic interpretation.
        Radiat Res. 1976; 66: 401-426

      Comments

      Commenting Guidelines

      To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:

      • We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
      • This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
      • We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
      • Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
      • Comments are not peer-reviewed.