Advertisement

Long-term Survival and Toxicity in Patients Treated With High-Dose Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

      Purpose

      To report long-term survival and toxicity outcomes with the use of high-dose intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to 86.4 Gy for patients with localized prostate cancer.

      Methods and Materials

      Between August 1997 and December 2008, 1002 patients were treated to a dose of 86.4 Gy using a 5-7 field IMRT technique. Patients were stratified by prognostic risk group based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk classification criteria. A total of 587 patients (59%) were treated with neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy. The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 5.5 years (range, 1-14 years).

      Results

      For low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, 7-year biochemical relapse-free survival outcomes were 98.8%, 85.6%, and 67.9%, respectively (P<.001), and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 99.4%, 94.1%, and 82.0% (P<.001), respectively. On multivariate analysis, T stage (P<.001), Gleason score (P<.001), and >50% of initial biopsy positive core (P=.001) were predictive for distant mestastases. No prostate cancer-related deaths were observed in the low-risk group. The 7-year prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) rates, using competing risk analysis for intermediate- and high-risk groups, were 3.3% and 8.1%, respectively (P=.008). On multivariate analysis, Gleason score (P=.004), percentage of biopsy core positivity (P=.003), and T-stage (P=.033) were predictive for PCSM. Actuarial 7-year grade 2 or higher late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were 4.4% and 21.1%, respectively. Late grade 3 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity was experienced by 7 patients (0.7%) and 22 patients (2.2%), respectively. Of the 427 men with full potency at baseline, 317 men (74%) retained sexual function at time of last follow-up.

      Conclusions

      This study represents the largest cohort of patients treated with high-dose radiation to 86.4 Gy, using IMRT for localized prostate cancer, with the longest follow-up to date. Our findings indicate that this treatment results in excellent clinical outcomes with acceptable toxicity.
      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

        • Rhamy R.K.
        • Wilson S.K.
        • Caldwell W.L.
        Biopsy-proved tumor following definitive irradiation for resectable carcinoma of the prostate.
        J Urol. 1972; 107: 627-630
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • Reuter V.E.
        • Fuks Z.
        • et al.
        Influence of local tumor control on distant metastases and cancer related mortality after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer.
        J Urol. 2008; 179: 1368-1373
        • Dubray B.M.
        • Beckendorf V.
        • Guerif S.
        • et al.
        Does short-term androgen depletion add to high-dose radiotherapy (80 Gy) in localized intermediate-risk prostate cancer? Intermediate analysis of GETUG 14 randomized trial (EU20503/NCT00104741).
        J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 4521
        • Kuban D.A.
        • Tucker S.L.
        • Dong L.
        • et al.
        Long-term results of the M.D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; 70: 67-74
        • Peeters S.T.
        • Heemsbergen W.D.
        • Koper P.C.
        • et al.
        Dose-response in radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: results of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy.
        J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 1990-1996
        • Dearnaley D.P.
        • Sydes M.R.
        • Graham J.D.
        • et al.
        Escalated-dose versus standard-dose conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer: first results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial.
        Lancet Oncol. 2007; 8: 475-487
        • Zietman A.L.
        • Bae K.
        • Slater J.D.
        • et al.
        Randomized trial comparing conventional-dose with high-dose conformal radiation therapy in early-stage adenocarcinoma of the prostate: long-term results from Proton Radiation Oncology Group/American College of Radiology 95-09.
        J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 1106-1111
        • Beckendorf V.
        • Guerif S.
        • Le Prise E.
        • et al.
        The GETUG 70 Gy vs. 80 Gy randomized trial for localized prostate cancer: feasibility and acute toxicity.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 60: 1056-1065
        • Viani G.A.
        • Stefano E.J.
        • Afonso S.L.
        Higher-than-conventional radiation doses in localized prostate cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 74: 1405-1418
        • Hanks G.E.
        • Hanlon A.L.
        • Epstein B.
        • et al.
        Dose response in prostate cancer with 8-12 years'follow-up.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002; 54: 427-435
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • Fuks Z.
        • Hunt M.
        • et al.
        High-dose intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: early toxicity and biochemical outcome in 772 patients.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002; 53: 1111-1116
        • Cahlon O.
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • Shippy A.
        • et al.
        Ultra-high dose (86.4 Gy) IMRT for localized prostate cancer: toxicity and biochemical outcomes.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; 71: 330-337
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • Fuks Z.
        • Hunt M.
        • et al.
        High dose radiation delivered by intensity modulated conformal radiotherapy improves the outcome of localized prostate cancer.
        J Urol. 2001; 166: 876-881
        • Eade T.N.
        • Hanlon A.L.
        • Horwitz E.M.
        • et al.
        What dose of external-beam radiation is high enough for prostate cancer?.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 68: 682-689
        • Pahlajani N.
        • Ruth K.J.
        • Buyyounouski M.K.
        • et al.
        Radiotherapy doses of 80 Gy and higher are associated with lower mortality in men with Gleason score 8 to 10 prostate cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 82: 1949-1956
        • Levegrun S.
        • Jackson A.
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • et al.
        Risk group dependence of dose-response for biopsy outcome after three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer.
        Radiother Oncol. 2002; 63: 11-26
        • Stock R.G.
        • Stone N.N.
        • Tabert A.
        • et al.
        A dose-response study for I-125 prostate implants.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998; 41: 101-108
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • Fuks Z.
        • Happersett L.
        • et al.
        Clinical experience with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in prostate cancer.
        Radiother Oncol. 2000; 55: 241-249
        • Michalski J.M.
        • Bae K.
        • Roach M.
        • et al.
        Long-term toxicity following 3D conformal radiation therapy for prostate cancer from the RTOG 9406 phase I/II dose escalation study.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 76: 14-22
        • Zelefsky M.J.
        • Kollmeier M.
        • Cox B.
        • et al.
        Improved clinical outcomes with high-dose image guided radiotherapy compared with non-IGRT for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Feb 11; ([Epub ahead of print])

      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.