1
|
Corrao G, Marvaso G, Mastroleo F, Biffi A, Pellegrini G, Minari S, Vincini MG, Zaffaroni M, Zerini D, Volpe S, Gaito S, Mazzola GC, Bergamaschi L, Cattani F, Petralia G, Musi G, Ceci F, De Cobelli O, Orecchia R, Alterio D, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol 2024; 195:110264. [PMID: 38561122 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2023] [Revised: 03/21/2024] [Accepted: 03/24/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa. METHODS PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies). RESULTS A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes. CONCLUSION The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Corrao
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Federico Mastroleo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Annalisa Biffi
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Pellegrini
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Samuele Minari
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Giulia Vincini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Mattia Zaffaroni
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Dario Zerini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester, UK; Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Luca Bergamaschi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Cattani
- Unit of Medical Physics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Petralia
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gennaro Musi
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Ceci
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Nuclear Medicine and Theranostics, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Ottavio De Cobelli
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
D'Agostino GR, Badalamenti M, Stefanini S, Baldaccini D, Franzese C, Faro LL, Di Cristina L, Vernier V, Reggiori G, Scorsetti M. Long term update on toxicity and survival of a phase II trial of linac-based stereotactic body radiation therapy for low-intermediate risk prostate cancer. Prostate 2024; 84:368-375. [PMID: 38112222 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24657] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2023] [Revised: 11/25/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2016 we published a phase II study exploring safety and efficacy of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) delivered with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Flattening Filter Free (FFF) beams techniques in prostate cancer (PC) patients. We present herein the updated results on late toxicity and long-term survival. METHODS Patients enrolled in the study had a biopsy-confirmed localized PC and the features of a low- or intermediate-risk disease (National Comprehensive Network Criteria). The radiotherapy (RT) schedule consisted of 35 Gy delivered in five fractions every other day. Toxicities were registered according to the common toxicity adverse events v4.0. Biochemical recurrence was defined as an increase of prostate specific antigen after nadir, confirmed at least once. Local recurrence (LR) and distant metastases were detected either with Choline- or PSMA-PET/CT scans. Kaplan-Meier curves for Biochemical Recurrence-Free Survival (BFS), Local Control (LC), Distant Metastasis Free Survival (DMFS) and Cancer Specific Survival, were calculated by using MedCalc. RESULTS Ninety patients were submitted to SBRT between February 2012 and March 2015. Fifty-eight patients (64.5%) had a Gleason Score of 6, while 32 (35.5%) had a Gleason Score of 7. A late grade 1 Genito-Urinary toxicity was observed in 54.5% of patients while a grade 2 in 3.3%. A late Gastro-intestinal grade 1 toxicity was reported in 18.9% of patients, while a grade 2 in 2.2%. Erectile dysfunction was reported by 13% of patients No heavier toxicities were observed. At a median follow-up of 102 months, 5- and 8-year BFS were 93.0% and 84.4% respectively, 5- and 8-year LC were 95.2% and 87.0% respectively, 5- and 8-year DMFS were 95.3% and 88.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This long-term update confirms that SBRT is a valid therapeutic strategy for low-intermediate risk PC. RT with VMAT and FFF warrants optimal results in terms of toxicity and disease control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe R D'Agostino
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Badalamenti
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Sara Stefanini
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Davide Baldaccini
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Lo Faro
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Luciana Di Cristina
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Veronica Vernier
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Reggiori
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mechanisms, mitigation, and management of urinary toxicity from prostate radiotherapy. Lancet Oncol 2022; 23:e534-e543. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(22)00544-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2022] [Revised: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
4
|
Leeman JE, Cagney DN, Mak RH, Huynh MA, Tanguturi SK, Singer L, Catalano P, Martin NE, D'Amico AV, Mouw KW, Nguyen PL, King MT, Han Z, Williams C, Huynh E. Magnetic Resonance-Guided Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With Daily Online Plan Adaptation: Results of a Prospective Phase 1 Trial and Supplemental Cohort. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100934. [PMID: 35847547 PMCID: PMC9280019 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.100934] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2021] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Stereotactic magnetic resonance (MR)-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) for prostate cancer allows for MR-based contouring, real-time MR motion management, and daily plan adaptation. The clinical and dosimetric benefits associated with prostate SMART remain largely unknown. Methods and Materials A phase 1 trial of prostate SMART was conducted with primary endpoints of safety and feasibility. An additional cohort of patients similarly treated with prostate SMART were included in the analysis. SMART was delivered to 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions to the prostate ± seminal vesicles using the MRIdian linear accelerator system (ViewRay, Inc). Rates of urinary and gastrointestinal toxic effects and patient-reported outcome measures were assessed. Dosimetric analyses were conducted to evaluate the specific benefits of daily plan adaptation. Results The cohort included 22 patients (n = 10 phase 1, n = 12 supplemental) treated in 110 fractions. Median follow-up was 7.9 months. Acute grade 2 urinary and gastrointestinal toxic effects were observed in 22.7% and 4.5%, respectively, and 4.5% and 0%, respectively, at last follow-up. No grade 3+ events were observed. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index-26 urinary obstructive scores decreased during SMART (mean, 9.3 points; P = .03) and returned to baseline by 3 months. No other significant changes in patient-reported outcome measures were observed. One-hundred percent of fractions required plan adaptation owing to exceeding organ-at-risk metrics (68%) or suboptimal target coverage (33%) resulting from anatomic changes. Minimum acceptable planning target volume, rectal, bladder, and urethra/bladder neck metrics were violated in 24%, 20%, 24%, and 33% of predicted plans, respectively; 0% of reoptimized plans violated metrics. Underlying causes for deficient dosimetry before reoptimization included changes in bladder filling, seminal vesicle position, prostate volume (median 4.7% increase by fraction 3; range, 0%-56%), and hotspots shifting into urethra/bladder neck. Conclusions Prostate SMART results in low risk of acute toxic effects with improvements in target and organ-at-risk dosimetry. The clinical benefits resulting from daily plan adaptation, including urethra/bladder neck protection, warrant further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan E. Leeman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Daniel N. Cagney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Raymond H. Mak
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Mai Anh Huynh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Shyam K. Tanguturi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Lisa Singer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Paul Catalano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Neil E. Martin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Anthony V. D'Amico
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kent W. Mouw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Paul L. Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Martin T. King
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Zhaohui Han
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Christopher Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Elizabeth Huynh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cellini F, Tagliaferri L, Frascino V, Alitto AR, Fionda B, Boldrini L, Romano A, Casà C, Catucci F, Mattiucci GC, Valentini V. Radiation therapy for prostate cancer: What's the best in 2021. Urologia 2022; 89:5-15. [PMID: 34496707 DOI: 10.1177/03915603211042335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Radiotherapy is highly involved in the management of prostate cancer. Its features and potential applications experienced a radical evolution over last decades, as they are associated to the continuous evolution of available technology and current oncological innovations. Some application of radiotherapy like brachytherapy have been recently enriched by innovative features and multidisciplinary dedications. In this report we aim to put some questions regarding the following issues regarding multiple aspects of modern application of radiation oncology: the current application of radiation oncology; the modern role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for both the management of primary lesions and for lymph-nodal recurrence; the management of the oligometastatic presentations; the role of brachytherapy; the aid played by the application of the organ at risk spacer (spacer OAR), fiducial markers, electromagnetic tracking systems and on-line Magnetic Resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT), and the role of the new opportunity represented by radiomic analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Cellini
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia
| | - Luca Tagliaferri
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Frascino
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Anna Rita Alitto
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Bruno Fionda
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Luca Boldrini
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Angela Romano
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Calogero Casà
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Gian Carlo Mattiucci
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia
- Radiation Oncology, Mater Olbia Hospital, Olbia, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy
- Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Leeman JE, Chen YH, Catalano P, Bredfeldt J, King M, Mouw KW, D'Amico AV, Orio P, Nguyen PL, Martin N. Radiation Dose to the Intraprostatic Urethra Correlates Strongly With Urinary Toxicity After Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: A Combined Analysis of 23 Prospective Clinical Trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 112:75-82. [PMID: 34711459 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.06.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2021] [Revised: 06/13/2021] [Accepted: 06/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Clinical trials assessing evaluation prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) have used a wide range of allowed doses to the intraprostatic urethra, but the relationship between urethral dose and urinary toxicity has not been thoroughly evaluated. The goal of this study was to characterize urinary toxicity outcomes according to urethral dose administered during prostate SBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS The MEDLINE (PubMed) database was searched for published prospective studies of prostate SBRT through August 2020 that documented a maximum urethral dose metric (MUDM). Reported acute and late urinary toxicity rates were collected. Logistic regression and weighted Pearson correlation models were used to assess associations between urinary toxicity rates and MUDM. RESULTS Twenty-three unique studies (n = 2232 patients) met the inclusion criteria and included a wide range of MUDMs (equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions [EQD2]: 69-141.75 Gy; α/β = 3 Gy). The median follow-up ranged from 3 to 67 months (median, 32 months). On logistic regression analysis, the MUDM EQD2 was significantly associated with multiple urinary toxicity endpoints, including acute grade (G) 2+ (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; P < .001), late G2+ (OR, 1.03; P < .0001), and late G3+ (OR, 1.04; P = .003) urinary toxicity. On weighted Pearson correlation analysis, the MUDM was more closely associated with all evaluated urinary toxicity endpoints than prescription dose, including acute G2+ (r = 0.51; P = .02), late G2+ (r = 0.9; P < .0001), and late G3+ toxicity (r = 0.7; P = .003). Multivariate analysis accounting for age, prostate size, bladder dosimetry, and baseline urinary function confirmed associations between urinary outcomes and MUDM. Within the studied dose range, each increase of 1 Gy to the MUDM corresponded to a 0.8% and 1.0% increase in acute G2+ and late G2+ toxicity, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Radiation dose to the urethra correlates closely with urinary toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with SBRT. Attention should be paid to the urethral dose when delivering prostate SBRT to high doses, and approaches for urethral dose reduction warrant further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan E Leeman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Yu-Hui Chen
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Paul Catalano
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jeremy Bredfeldt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Martin King
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kent W Mouw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Anthony V D'Amico
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Peter Orio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Neil Martin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ferini G, Pergolizzi S. A Ten-year-long Update on Radiation Proctitis Among Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Curative External Beam Radiotherapy. In Vivo 2021; 35:1379-1391. [PMID: 33910815 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2021] [Revised: 02/07/2021] [Accepted: 02/12/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
This comprehensive synopsis summarizes the most relevant information obtained from a systematic analysis of studies of the last decade on radiation proctitis, one of the most feared radioinduced side effects among prostate cancer patients treated with curative external beam radiotherapy. The present review provides a useful support to radiation oncologists for limiting the onset or improving the treatment of radiation proctitis. This work shows that the past decade was a harbinger of significant new evidence in technological advances and technical tricks to avoid radiation proctitis, in addition to dosimetric perspectives and goals, understanding of pathogenesis, diagnostic work-up and treatment. We believe that a well-rounded knowledge of such an issue is fundamental for its appropriate management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Stefano Pergolizzi
- Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences, Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| |
Collapse
|