前列腺癌调强适形放疗38例疗效分析

目的:分析前列腺癌调强适形放疗临床疗效及毒副反应。方法:回顾性分析了38例经调强适形放射治疗(inten-sive modulated radiotherapy,IMRT)的前列腺癌,37例放疗前行双侧睾丸切除术,35例同时服用内分泌药物。放疗前前列腺特异性抗原(prostate specific antigen,PSA)23.5～159.0ng/mL,中位值36.0ng/mL。36例完成全程调强适形放疗,总剂量60～72Gy/38～50d(2.0～3.0Gy/次,4～5次/周),中位剂量68.6Gy。结果:38例调强适形放疗的前列腺癌患者3年总生存率87.6%,5年总生存率75.2%;急性直肠毒性反应Ⅰ级30.6%、Ⅱ级8.33%,急性膀胱毒性反应Ⅰ级38.9%、Ⅱ级5.56%,未见直肠和膀胱Ⅲ级、Ⅳ级反应。结论:前殂腺癌调强适形放疗可提高前列腺局部剂量,相邻组织器官的毒性反应发生率低。有较高的生存率和良好的耐受性。联合激素治疗没有增加直肠和膀胱的毒性反应。     

前列腺癌三维适形和调强放疗的初步结果

目的 分析三维适形放疗（3DCRT）和调强放疗（IMRT）前列腺癌的初步疗效和早晚期副反应.方法 36例无远处转移的前列腺癌接受了3DCRT和IMRT,其中35例同时接受内分泌治疗.23例临床靶区包括前列腺或前列腺加精囊,13例先接受盆腔照射然后包括前列腺和精囊.临床靶区的中位剂量为76.0 Gy（52.5～83.0Gy）,盆腔预防性照射中位剂量为45.0Gy（40～50Gy）.结果 3、5年总生存率分别为91%、84%.3、5年癌症相关生存率均为91%.全组早期胃肠道反应≤2级35例,3级1例,无4级反应;早期泌尿系统副反应≤2级34例,3级2例,无4级反应.全组分别有4例1级和3例2级晚期胃肠道反应,无≥3级晚期胃肠道反应;晚期泌尿系统反应发生率低,6例1级,2级1例,3级1例.结论 应用三维适形放疗和调强放疗技术治疗前列腺癌,高剂量放疗是安全的,早期和晚期副反应可接受,未发现严重晚期副反应.     

局限期前列腺癌大分割调强放疗临床Ⅱ期研究

目的 观察前列腺癌2.7 Gy 25次大分割调强适形放疗的疗效和不良反应。     

调强适形放疗在前列腺癌治疗中的临床初探

目的：初步探讨调强适形放射治疗在前列腺癌治疗中的临床应用价值。方法：14例前列腺癌患者，其中12例在调强适形放射治疗前接受双侧睾丸去势术。采用美国VARIAN的6MV－X线直线加速器，NOMOS的PEACOCK调强适形放射治疗计划系统。剂量－时间－分割:2.5-3.0Gy/次，5次／周，25－30次，总剂量72－77Gy，5－6周完成。结果：调强适形放疗后3个月时PR10例（71.4%)、NC4例；6个月时CR6例、PR8例，总有效率（CR PR)为100％。无Ⅲ、Ⅳ级消化、泌尿系统放射反应发生。结论：调强适形放射治疗可以治疗前列腺癌，照射剂量72－77Gy为安全剂量。     

98例老年前列腺癌根治术后调强技术放疗结果分析

目的 回顾分析老年前列腺癌患者根治术后接受调强技术放疗疗效和不良反应。 方法 2007-2017年收治 98例接受术后放疗的前列腺癌患者,中位年龄 68岁。全组患者中低危 10例、中危 21例、高危 67例。2例患者存在寡转移(均为骨盆骨转移),64例患者联合了内分泌治疗。全组患者中 43例接受辅助放疗,55例接受挽救放疗。放疗均采用了调强技术(55例调强放疗、43例容积调强弧形治疗),前列腺瘤床中位剂量72 Gy。共 29例接受了盆腔淋巴结区域照射,中位放疗剂量50 Gy。 结果 中位随访40个月,全组 5年总生存率、无生化复发生存率、局部控制率分别为90%、76%、100%。辅助放疗和挽救放疗的总生存率、无生化复发生存率、局部控制率均相近[89%和91%(P=0.94)、76%和71%(P=0.79)、100%和100%(P=0.32)]。不良反应方面 1-2级晚期直肠反应发生率为24.1%,1-2级晚期膀胱反应发生率为29.9%,3级为3.4%。 结论 前列腺癌根治术后采用调强技术放疗可以获得很好的疗效,晚期不良反应轻微。     

巨块型宫颈癌肿瘤中心前程同步加量调强放疗止血效果的观察

目的 探讨肿瘤中心前程同步加量调强放疗治疗巨块型宫颈癌大出血的有效性和安全性。方法 21例伴有阴道大出血的巨块型宫颈癌患者,前程(前3次)给予肿瘤中心(宫颈大肿块边界内收2 cm的范围)同步加量放疗15 Gy分3次后给予常规分割剂量(2 Gy/次),肿瘤周边和盆腔全程采用常规分割照射剂量46 Gy分23次。同步化疗采用顺铂25 mg/m²每周方案。外照射结束后给予腔内放疗20 Gy/4次。结果 首程大剂量放疗后24 h内阴道出血量较前减少50%,1周内阴道出血渐止,止血率100%。结论 采用肿瘤中心同步加量调强放疗是巨块型宫颈癌阴道大出血的有效治疗措施。     

前列腺癌局部调强放疗是否同步盆腔照射不良反应比较

目的 分析前列腺癌调强放疗中盆腔照射与否的肠道和泌尿道急慢性不良反应差别。
方法 2009-2012年局限于盆腔接受根治性调强放疗的前列腺癌83例,其中38例中低危患者前列腺±精囊腺放疗67.5 Gy,45例高危或盆腔淋巴结转移风险预测>15%者前列腺和精囊腺放疗67.5 Gy同步盆腔照射50 Gy。急性不良反应依据不良反应常见术语标准3.0版进行评价,慢性不良反应依据美国肿瘤放疗协会标准评测。
结果 盆腔放疗与无放疗的肠道2、3级急性不良反应分别为27%、0%与5%、3%(P=0.025),晚期不良反应分别为11%、9%与29%、3%(P=0.170);泌尿道2、3级急性不良反应分别为13%、0%与16%、3%(P=0.368),慢性不良反应分别为9%、2%与24%、3%(P=0.066)。
结论 前列腺癌放疗中盆腔放疗增加了肠道急性不良反应,但未增加肠道和泌尿道晚期损伤。     

鼻咽癌螺旋断层放疗与常规加速器调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 通过比较鼻咽癌螺旋断层放疗与常规直线加速器静态调强治疗计划,研究其剂量学特性.方法 选10例鼻咽癌患者的CT图像,统一勾画靶区及正常器官后,分别传输至螺旋断层放疗、常规调强放疗逆向调强计划系统.统一给予肿瘤靶区(pGTV、PTVnd)处方剂量70 Gy分33次,亚临床病灶区(PTV1)60 Gy分33次,预防照射区(PTV2)54 Gy分33次.正常器官限制体积与剂量为腮腺V35＜50%,脑干＜54 Gy,脊髓＜45 Gy,晶体＜9 Gy等.对两组数据进行配对t检验.结果 两组计划均有较好靶区处方剂量分布,但螺旋断层放疗组的均匀性好于常规调强放疗组;PTV1平均剂量(63.84 Gy)也显著低于常规调强放疗组(70.30 Gy);腮腺平均剂量较常规常规调强放疗组低5.3Gy,V30及V35显著低于常规调强放疗组;喉-气管-食管的最大剂量也较常规调强放疗组明显降低.结论 在鼻咽癌调强放疗中,螺旋断层放疗较常规直线加速器静态调强放疗有更好的剂量均匀性及更陡峭的剂量梯度,并可更好地保护正常器官.     

不同照射方式下非常规分割方案的生物效应对鼻咽癌疗效的影响

[目的]探讨不同照射方式（调强和普放）中采用非标准分割方案的疗程总剂量及分次剂量、总时间及分次数对鼻咽癌疗效的影响。[方法]回顾性分析2004年1～12月经病理确认并进行放射治疗且随访到2009年12月的资料完整的Ⅱ～Ⅳ期鼻咽癌病例162例,调强组57例,普放组105例;调强组和普放组给予肿瘤的总平均物理剂量分别为72Gy和76Gy,所对应的生物等效剂量（EQD2T）分别是75.5Gy和70Gy。调强组采用鼻咽加上下颈淋巴引流区同期加速推量动态调强放疗技术,普放组采用面颈联合野加颈部切线野常规放疗技术。[结果]调强组和普放组5年生存率分别为71.9%和70.5%,5年局控率分别为84.2%和78.1%,5年无瘤生存率分别为73.7%和71.4%,均无显著性差异。5年并发症发生率调强组低于普放组（65.9%vs85.1%,P=0.016）。[结论]调强和普放照射方式中采用72～76Gy物理剂量所反映的生物效应对鼻咽癌疗效影响不明显,两组的生存率和局控率接近。调强技术降低放疗损伤与晚反应组织生物剂量无关,但和物理优化技术有关。     

鼻咽癌调强放疗受照剂量分布特性研究

目的研究鼻咽癌调强放疗(IMRT)受照剂量分布特性。方法用拓能公司WiMRT放疗计划系统分别进行鼻咽癌常规放疗和调强放疗计划设计,对比分析不同放疗方式下正常组织受照剂量-体积直方图和所需照射的总跳数。结果调强放疗射野内正常组织受照剂量低于28Gy的体积是常规放疗的1.43~1.81倍,而高于35Gy时,受照体积仅为常规放疗的0.73~0.30倍。结论鼻咽癌调强放疗时靶区受照剂量高、正照组织受照剂量低,但正常组织受照体积大。鼻咽癌调强放疗剂量分布明显优于常规放疗。     

Hypofractionated accelerated radiotherapy using concomitant intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost technique for localized high-risk prostate cancer: acute toxicity results

PURPOSE: To evaluate the acute toxicities of hypofractionated accelerated radiotherapy (RT) using a concomitant intensity-modulated RT boost in conjunction with elective pelvic nodal irradiation for high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This report focused on 66 patients entered into this prospective Phase I study. The eligible patients had clinically localized prostate cancer with at least one of the following high-risk features (Stage T3, Gleason score >/=8, or prostate-specific antigen level >20 ng/mL). Patients were treated with 45 Gy in 25 fractions to the pelvic lymph nodes using a conventional four-field technique. A concomitant intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost of 22.5 Gy in 25 fractions was delivered to the prostate. Thus, the prostate received 67.5 Gy in 25 fractions within 5 weeks. Next, the patients underwent 3 years of adjuvant androgen ablative therapy. Acute toxicities were assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0, weekly during treatment and at 3 months after RT. RESULTS: The median patient age was 71 years. The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level and Gleason score was 18.7 ng/L and 8, respectively. Grade 1-2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were common during RT but most had settled at 3 months after treatment. Only 5 patients had acute Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity, in the form of urinary incontinence (n = 1), urinary frequency/urgency (n = 3), and urinary retention (n = 1). None of the patients developed Grade 3 or greater gastrointestinal or Grade 4 or greater genitourinary toxicity. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study have indicated that hypofractionated accelerated RT with a concomitant intensity-modulated RT boost and pelvic nodal irradiation is feasible with acceptable acute toxicity.     

Long-term use of combined radiation therapy and hormonal therapy in the management of stage D1 prostate cancer

PURPOSE: To determine tumor response, patterns of relapse, and prognostic indicators in patients followed long-term after combined hormonal radiation therapy of adenocarcinoma of the prostate in men with tumor metastatic to pelvic lymph nodes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventy-nine patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate with pathologically confirmed pelvic lymph node metastases were treated with combined radiation therapy and hormonal therapy. Of these, 55 patients (70%) had T3 disease, with the remainder having earlier-stage disease; 45 (57%) patients had N2 disease (Whitmore-Jewett staging). No distant metastases were detected at initial staging, and no patient had radiographic or pathologic involvement of the para-aortic nodes. Pelvic lymph nodes were irradiated to a dose 45-54 Gy, and the prostate was irradiated to a dose 65-71.8 Gy. Hormonal therapy began up to 2 months before radiation and continued indefinitely. Patients were allowed to select their hormonal therapy and could choose diethylstilbestrol (DES) (2 patients), orchiectomy (21 patients), luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (12 patients), or combined androgen blockade (44 patients). Prognostic factors examined included microscopic vs. measurable lymph node involvement, one-sided vs. two-sided disease, T stage, pretreatment PSA, method of androgen blockade, and Gleason score. Log-rank analysis was used to determine statistical significance with respect to overall survival, disease-free survival, clinical freedom from progression, and biochemical freedom from progression; Cox multivariate analysis was employed to determine potential confounders. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.7 years. There were 25 recurrences among the 79 patients, including 7 biochemical recurrences without clinical evidence of disease, three local recurrences in the prostate, and distant metastases in 14 patients; 2 patients were deceased, with cause of death listed as prostate cancer, though the location of recurrence was unknown. Patients with biochemical failure before 5 years were more likely to fail distantly, 16% vs. 4% (p < 0.001). Overall actuarial survival at 5, 8, and 12 years was 86%, 72%, and 53%, respectively, whereas actuarial disease-free survival was 90%, 87%, and 81%. Ten patients died of intercurrent disease; these included 4 patients who died of a separate (nonpelvic) malignancy of nonadenocarcinomatous histology with no elevation in PSA. When the potential prognostic variables were examined, a trend toward increased biochemical recurrence in patients with Gleason score >or=8 was observed; this became statistically significant when the 4 patients with known residual lymph node disease after biopsy were excluded (p < 0.03). Gleason score remained the only significant indicator on multivariate analysis. A single long-term toxic event, recto-ureteral fistula, was observed. CONCLUSION: Combined hormonal and radiation therapy continues to represent an effective treatment option for patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate with metastasis confined to pelvic lymph nodes. All patient groups seem to have a better disease-free survival than that reported previously in single-modality hormone or radiation treatment series. There is a suggestion that patients with lower Gleason score have a lower risk for recurrence. Combined modality therapy may also extend disease-free survival and allow patients to maintain independent function.     

Moderately Hypofractionated Radiotherapy and Androgen Deprivation Therapy for High-risk Localised Prostate Cancer: Predictors of Long-term Biochemical Control and Toxicity

AimsThere is a paucity of long-term data on outcomes of high-risk prostatic adenocarcinoma after moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy with elective nodal treatment and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We report long-term control and toxicity outcomes and analyse the predictors of failure and toxicity.Materials and methodsThe records of 120 consecutive high-risk prostate cancer patients treated in a single institution between February 2012 and December 2016 were retrospectively analysed. A moderately hypofractionted radiotherapy (HypoRT) regimen of 60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks with simultaneous elective pelvic irradiation to 44 Gy in 20 fractions with intensity-modulated radiotherapy was used, together with long-term ADT with either orchiectomy or medical castration for a total duration of 2–3 years. We analysed biochemical control, metastasis-free survival and late toxicities and their predictive factors using survival analysis.ResultsPatients had locally advanced cancers (cT3 77.5%, median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen 30 ng/ml, Gleason score 8–10 in 45.8%). The median follow-up time was 70 months. The 3- and 5-year probability of freedom from biochemical progression was 93% and 80%, respectively. The 5-year probability of freedom from local relapse/intra-pelvic nodal relapse/distant metastases as the site of first failure was 96%/97%/86%, respectively. Gleason score 8–10 and medical ADT for 2–3 years (as opposed to orchidectomy) were independent risk factors for distant metastases. A total of 18 grade 2 and above late gastrointestinal toxicity events and a total of 23 grade 2 and above late genitourinary toxicity events were documented. Patients who underwent a transurethral resection of prostate prior to radiotherapy had worse urological toxicity.ConclusionsHypoRT with elective nodal treatment results in excellent pelvic control. Distant metastases are the primary mode of failure. Risk of metastases is associated with Gleason score and the duration of ADT. Late urinary toxicities are more common in those with prior transurethral resection of prostate.     

Phase I/II trial evaluating combined radiotherapy and in situ gene therapy with or without hormonal therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer--a preliminary report

PURPOSE: To report the preliminary results of a Phase I/II study combining radiotherapy and in situ gene therapy (adenovirus/herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene/valacyclovir) with or without hormonal therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Arm A: low-risk patients (T1-T2a, Gleason score <7, pretreatment PSA <10) were treated with combined radio-gene therapy. A mean dose of 76 Gy was delivered to the prostate with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Arm B: high-risk patients (T2b-T3, Gleason score >or=7, pretreatment PSA >or=10) were treated with combined radio-gene therapy and hormonal therapy. Hormonal therapy was comprised of a 4-month leuprolide injection and 2-week use of flutamide. Arm C: Stage D1 (positive pelvic lymph node) patients received the same regimen as Arm B, with the additional 45 Gy to the pelvic lymphatics. Treatment-related toxicity was assessed using Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program common toxicity score and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) toxicity score. RESULTS: Thirty patients (13 in Arm A, 14 in Arm B, and 3 in Arm C) completed the trial. Median follow-up was 5.5 months. Eleven patients (37%) developed flu-like symptoms (Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program Grade 1) of fatigue and chills/rigors after gene therapy injection but recovered within 24 h. Four patients (13%) and 2 patients (7%) developed Grade 1 and 2 fever, respectively. There was no patient with weight loss. One patient in Arm B developed Grade 3 elevation in liver enzyme, whereas 11 and 2 patients developed Grade 1 and 2 abnormal liver function tests. There was no Grade 2 or above hematologic toxicity. Three patients had transient rise in creatinine. There was no RTOG Grade 3 or above lower gastrointestinal toxicity. Toxicity levels were as follows: 4 patients (13%), Grade 2; 6 patients (20%), Grade 1; and 20 patients (67%), no toxicity. There was 1 patient with RTOG Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity, 12 patients (40%) with Grade 2, 8 patients (27%) with Grade 1, and 9 patients (30%) with no toxicity. No patient dropped out from the trial or had to withhold treatment because of severe toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first trial of its kind in the field of prostate cancer that aims to expand the therapeutic index of radiotherapy by combining in situ gene therapy. Initial experience has demonstrated the safety of this approach. There is no added toxicity to each therapy used alone. Long-term follow-up and larger cohort studies are warranted to evaluate long-term toxicity and efficacy.     

66例局限期中危前列腺癌IMRT疗效分析

目的 分析局限期中危前列腺癌IMRT疗效和不良反应,分析PSA变化水平和意义。方法 回顾分析2007—2018年间经本院IMRT局限期中危前列腺癌66例资料。60例放疗前接受内分泌治疗,6例照射野包括盆腔淋巴引流区,47例采用IGRT技术。前列腺精囊腺中位剂量78 Gy,盆腔淋巴引流区中位剂量48 Gy。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率。结果 中位年龄77岁,中位随访时间71.3个月。5年样本量47例。3、5年OS率分别为98%、90%,CSS率分别为100%、93%,BRFS率分别为97%、86%。PSA降至最低点的平均时间为5.83个月。IMRT后PSA最低点中位数为0.06 ng/ml。1、2级早期泌尿系统不良反应发生率分别为38%、6%,1、2级早期直肠不良反应发生率分别为21%、3%,1、2级晚期泌尿系统不良反应发生率分别为9%、2%,1级晚期直肠不良反应发生率为5%。结论 局限期中危前列腺癌IMRT疗效好,早期、晚期不良反应小,IMRT后PSA监测利于判断肿瘤预后。     

The protective effect of recombinant human keratinocyte growth factor on radiation-induced pulmonary toxicity in rats

PURPOSE: There is an evolving role for combining radiotherapy (RT) with gene therapy in the management of prostate cancer. However, the clinical results of this combined approach are much needed. The preliminary results addressing the safety of this Phase I-II study combining RT and gene therapy (adenovirus/herpes simplex virus-thymidine kinase gene/valacyclovir with or without hormonal therapy) in the treatment of prostate cancer have been previously reported. We now report the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and biopsy data. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This trial was composed of three separate arms. Arm A consisted of low-risk patients (Stage T1-T2a, Gleason score <7, pretreatment PSA <10 ng/mL) treated with combined RT-gene therapy. A mean dose of 76 Gy was delivered to the prostate with intensity-modulated RT. They also received adenovirus/herpes simplex virus-thymidine kinase/valacyclovir gene therapy. Arm B consisted of high-risk patients (Stage T2b-T3, Gleason score >6, pretreatment PSA level >10 ng/mL) treated with combined RT-gene therapy and hormonal therapy (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist [30-mg Lupron, 4-month depot] and an antiandrogen [flutamide, 250 mg t.i.d. for 14 days]). Arm C consisted of patients with Stage D1 (positive pelvic lymph nodes) who received the same regimen as Arm B with the addition of 45 Gy to the pelvic lymphatics. PSA determination and biopsy were performed before, during, and after treatment. The American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology consensus definition (three consecutive rises in PSA level) was used to denote PSA failure. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (29 in Arm A, 26 in Arm B, and 4 in Arm C) completed the trial. The median age was 68 years (range, 39-85 years). The median follow-up for the entire group was 13.5 months (range, 1.4-27.8 months). Only Arm A patients were observed to have an increase in PSA on Day 14. The PSA then declined appropriately. All patients in Arm A (median follow-up, 13.4 months) and Arm B (median follow-up, 13.9 months) had biochemical control at last follow-up. Three patients in Arm C (with pretreatment PSA of 335, 19.6, and 2.5 ng/mL and a combined Gleason score of 8, 9, and 9 involving all biopsy cores) had biochemical failure at 3, 3, and 7.7 months. Two patients had distant failure in bone and 1 patient in the para-aortic lymph nodes outside the RT portal. Six to twelve prostate biopsies performed in these 3 patients revealed no evidence of residual carcinoma. In Arm A, biopsy showed no evidence of carcinoma in 66.7% (18 of 27), 92.3% (24 of 26), 91.7% (11 of 12), 100% (8 of 8), and 100% (6 of 6) at 6 weeks, 4 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months after treatment, respectively. In Arm B, no evidence of carcinoma on biopsy was noted in 96% (24 of 25), 90.5% (19 of 21), 100% (14 of 14), 100% (7 of 7), and 100% (2 of 2), respectively, in the same interval after treatment. CONCLUSION: This is the first reported trial of its kind in the field of prostate cancer that aims to expand the therapeutic index of RT by combining it with in situ gene therapy. The initial transient PSA rise in the Arm A patients may have been a result of local immunologic response or inflammation elicited by in situ gene therapy. Additional investigation to elucidate the mechanisms is needed. Hormonal therapy may have obliterated this rise in Arm B and C patients. The biopsy data were encouraging and appeared to show no evidence of malignancy earlier than historical data. Combined RT, short-course hormonal therapy, and in situ therapy appeared to provide good locoregional control but inadequate systemic control in patients with positive pelvic lymph nodes. Longer term use of hormonal therapy in addition to gene therapy and RT has been adopted for this group of patients to maximize both locoregional and systemic control.     

The evolving role of pelvic radiation therapy

Whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) is controversial in the management of prostate cancer. The estimation of the risk of pelvic lymph node involvement in prostate cancer patients will identify those who will potentially benefit from WPRT. Nomograms and equations based on pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score, and/or clinical stage allow clinicians to quickly estimate nodal risk. Most of the studies analyzing WPRT, including a randomized trial from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), were conducted in the pre-PSA era and did not necessarily include patients at high risk for nodal involvement. The addition of hormonal therapy to WPRT has been shown in 4 major prospective randomized trials to improve survival for some subsets of patients. The preliminary results of RTOG 94-13 show the superiority of WPRT over prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in high-risk prostate cancer patients receiving hormonal therapy. For most other solid tumors, the regional lymph nodes are routinely treated by some modality, so it is not surprising that WPRT might benefit a subset of high-risk patients.