Radiotherapy and Prostate Cancer: Quo Vadis?

ContextRadiotherapy (RT) is one of the curative treatment options for clinically localised prostate cancer. Technical developments over recent years have yielded better conformation to the target volume, thus increasing the therapeutic ratio and decreasing side-effects.ObjectiveOur aim was to summarise current controversies in prostate cancer RT.Evidence acquisitionThis paper is based on a presentation given at the 7th Meeting of the European Association of Urology Section of Oncological Urology in Vienna, Austria. Data from reviews and original papers were compiled and interpreted.Evidence synthesisEvidence from randomised trials has indicated that total doses >72 Gy are significantly better in cases of biochemical disease-free survival. Image-guided radiotherapy resulted in reduced safety margins around the prostate target volume and decreased acute and late side-effects. To date, data from two randomised controlled trials have indicated comparable results between hypofractionation and normofractionation without an increase of side-effects. Until now, no prospective data have been published to support the hypothesis that proton therapy decreases late side-effects with comparable results to three-dimensional conformal intensity-modulated RT. Adjuvant RT for positive margins after radical prostatectomy (RP) has proved to be an advantage. Three phase 3 trials achieved a significant better biochemical nonevidence of disease of 20% for 5 yr. In one of these trials, survival also improved significantly with adjuvant radiation. However, salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is a possible option for a persisting or increasing prostate-specific antigen after RP. To date, there are no published randomised trials to compare adjuvant RT with SRT.ConclusionsDuring the few last years, there have been tremendous technological improvements with a focus on boosting the cure rate by increasing dose delivery while maintaining a similar or improved side-effect profile. Currently, efforts are also focused on shortening treatment times and improving efficacy through new technology.     

pT3R1-Prostatakarzinom

Approximately 50-60% of patients with tumor stage pT3R1 after radical prostatectomy (RP) who do not receive adjuvant therapy develop biochemical progression. At present it is unclear whether these patients should undergo immediate adjuvant irradiation or whether a wait and see approach should be adopted while monitoring PSA until the PSA level rises from zero and then initiate salvage radiotherapy (SRT).Three randomized trials showed that an absolute improvement of 20% in the 5-year biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED) could be achieved by administering adjuvant radiotherapy with 60 Gy in patients with tumor stage pT3R1, even with a PSA level around zero after RP. The rate of serious late effects is low. On the other hand, there are numerous, albeit retrospective studies, which provide evidence that SRT after an increase in PSA above zero is an effective treatment, but with higher total doses of 66-70 Gy and a higher rate of late effects. Prognostic factors such as the PSA level before radiotherapy is started, PSA doubling time, R1 resection, PSA velocity, and the Gleason score have a significant impact on both the return of the PSA level to zero and the bNED. Depending on the risk factor, between 20 and 70% of patients again achieve PSA levels around zero after SRT. Retrospective comparative studies suggest a benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy; prospective randomized trials do not exist.Adjuvant radiotherapy after RP in stage pT3R1 tumor and SRT in cases of PSA rising above zero or persistent PSA levels are valid options for the management of high-risk patients after RP. SRT requires higher total doses and thus carries a higher risk of late complications. A benefit has been demonstrated for bNED, but not for survival. The approach should be discussed with the individual patient.     

Adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: indications, results and side effects

BACKGROUND: Within 5 years following radical prostatectomy, between 15 and 60% of patients with pT3 prostate carcinomas show an increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level as a sign of local and/or systemic tumor progression. Apart from a large number of retrospective investigations, available results are present only from three randomized studies which have either been completely published or are only in abstract form. RESULTS: For pT3 prostate carcinomas the data from the three randomized studies agree, showing an around 20% reduced biochemical progression rate after 4-5 years. With these data the results of numerous retrospective studies have been confirmed. The majority of the authors use total doses of 60 Gy with single doses of 2 Gy. From one randomized study an increased local control rate is proposed as the basis for the extended freedom from biochemical progression. The rate of acute and late side effects after three-dimensional radiotherapy with 60 Gy is very small and the rate of severe side effects is below 2%. The data for pT2 prostate carcinomas with positive margins are worse. Here controversy exists, and further investigations are required. In principle, however, adjuvant radiotherapy seems reasonable also for pT2 carcinomas with positive margins (determined by bNED - no biochemical evidence of disease). CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with pT3 tumors and positive margins with and without detectable PSA levels is discussed. A survival advantage has not been demonstrated to date. For patients with positive margins in organ-limited prostate carcinomas (pT2 R1) randomized studies are recommended. It is unclear whether adjuvant radiotherapy is superior to radiotherapy for PSA levels increasing from the undetectable range after radical prostatectomy. To answer this question randomized studies are needed.     

Durable efficacy of early postoperative radiation therapy for high-risk pT3N0 prostate cancer: the importance of radiation dose

Objectives. To determine the durable efficacy of early postoperative radiation therapy (RT) in patients with pT3N0 prostate cancer who were at an increased risk of biochemical failure. We also evaluated the long-term benefit derived from using higher RT doses.Methods. Seventy-nine patients with pathologic Stage T3N0 prostate cancer and high-risk postoperative features underwent RT within 6 months after surgery. No patient received prior hormonal therapy. Fifty-nine patients had positive surgical margin, 29 had pathologic seminal vesicle invasion, and 27 had persistently elevated postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Freedom from biochemical relapse (bNED) was defined as an undetectable (less than 0.2 ng/mL) PSA level. Median follow-up time was 39 months, and the median radiation dose was 64.8 Gy. All patients were followed for at least 2 years to be considered biochemically controlled.Results. Patients receiving adjuvant RT for an undetectable pre-RT PSA level had a 3-year bNED rate of 90%, compared with 44% for those receiving salvage RT for a detectable level (P < 0.0001). In the group of adjuvant patients, RT doses more than 61.2 Gy resulted in a 3-year bNED rate of 90% compared with 64% for those receiving a lower dose (P = 0.015). The salvage patients irradiated with a dose of 64.8 Gy or greater had a 3-year bNED rate of 52% compared with 18% for those irradiated with lower doses (P = 0.048). Severe late RT-related complications were infrequent and did not correlate with dose.Conclusions. In patients with high-risk pT3N0 prostate cancer, an RT dose response may exist. Although some studies suggest limited durable efficacy for early postoperative RT, our data suggest that RT doses of 64.8 Gy or more appear superior to prevent future biochemical failures. A prospective randomized study evaluating a postoperative RT dose response is warranted.     

Vermeidung des Lokalrezidivs durch eine adjuvante Strahlentherapie nach radikaler Prostatektomie

Depending on the tumor stage, 15-60% of patients develop a rise in PSA from levels around zero following radical prostatectomy. It is unclear whether this involves a local, systemic, or a mixed form of local/systemic progression. In addition to a multitude of retrospective studies, the results of three randomized trials are available that have already been published in full or in abstract form.For pT3 prostate cancer with extraprostatic extension, data are available from three randomized trials that consistently evidence an absolute decrease in biochemical progression rate of 20% after 4-5 years. These findings confirm the results of numerous retrospective studies. The large majority of authors employ total radiation doses of 60 Gy with single doses of 2 Gy. One randomized trial has shown that an increased local control rate is the basis for prolonged biochemical progression-free survival. The rate of acute and late radiation sequelae after three-dimensionally planned prostatic fossa radiotherapy (RT) with 60 Gy is very low; the rate of more severe late sequelae is <2%. Data on the status of pT2 prostate cancer with positive surgical margins are worse. The current findings are controversial and require further investigations. Basically, however, adjuvant RT is also possible for pT2 cancers with positive surgical margins. The efficacy of adjuvant RT for patients with positive surgical margins of pT3 carcinomas, whether or not they achieve PSA levels around zero, has been substantiated. A prolongation of survival time has, however, not yet been established because the follow-up period is too short. Randomized trials are still needed for cases of organ-confined prostate cancer (pT2 R1). It is unclear whether adjuvant RT is superior to RT when PSA levels increase beyond zero after radical prostatectomy. Randomized trials addressing this issue are still lacking.     

Radiation therapy dose escalation for prostate cancer: a rationale for IMRT

The response of prostate cancer to radiation was well-documented in the pre-PSA era. Large palpable tumors resolved within months of treatment with relatively modest radiation doses of 64–70 Gy. The use of PSA-based failure as an endpoint, however, has made it clear that cure rates were much lower than appreciated. While doses in this range are still widely used today, data from retrospective, sequential prospective and now randomized studies indicate that for patients with intermediate-to-high risk disease, doses above 70 Gy are associated with a significant reduction in biochemical failure. The use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy to escalate radiation dose has resulted in modest increases in rectal and bladder toxicity. The application of intensity modulated radiotherapy methods allows for greater sparing of the surrounding normal tissues and, hence, the potential to further escalate dose. The results of dose escalation, the ability of IMRT to reduce rectal and bladder exposure to high radiation doses and the use of new imaging methods to more accurately target the prostate are described.     

Strahlentherapie beim Prostatakarzinom

Radiotherapy is a well-accepted treatment modality for patients with localised prostate cancer. Provided that radiotherapy is applied with a sufficient radiation dose, it is as effective as radical prostatectomy. Different radiation modalities are available (interstitial brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy or a combination of both). Various new developments will further increase the value of radiation-based approaches. In this regard, a wider use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) will result in higher treatment doses with even lower toxicity rates. Combinations of radiotherapy and hormonal ablation improve local control rates in defined groups of patients. After prostatectomy with positive surgical margins, adjuvant radiotherapy improves disease-free survival rates; in cases of local relapse, salvage radiotherapy is the only potentially curative treatment approach.     

Adjuvant High-Dose Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy after Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: Clinical Results in 104 Patients

Background

Approximately 25% of patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) will develop a biochemical failure within 5 yr after RT when doses of 60–64 Gray (Gy) are used.

Objective

To report on the safety and biochemical outcome of adjuvant intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) with doses >70 Gy.

Design, setting, and participants

Between 1999 and 2008, 104 patients underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) followed by adjuvant IMRT with or without androgen deprivation (AD) with a median follow-up of 36 mo. Indications for adjuvant IMRT were capsule perforation, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) and/or positive surgical margins at prostatectomy specimen. All patients were irradiated at a single tertiary academic centre. AD was initiated on the basis of SVI, a preprostatectomy prostate-specific antigen level >20 ng/ml, Gleason score ≥4 + 3 (n = 36), or personal preference of the referring urologist (n = 32).

Intervention

A median dose of 74 Gy was prescribed to the planning target volume using IMRT in all patients. AD consisted out of a luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue for 6 mo.

Measurements

We report on acute and late toxicity, biochemical relapse–free survival (bRFS), and clinical progression. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate bRFS. Univariate analysis was used to examine the influence of patient- and treatment-related factors on bRFS.

Results and limitations

With respect to acute toxicity, no patients developed grade 3 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, and eight patients developed grade 3 genitourinary (GU) toxicity (8%). With respect to late toxicity, no patients developed grade 3 GI toxicity, and four patients (4%) developed grade 3 GU toxicity. A urethral stricture was observed in six patients (6%). The 3- and 5-yr actuarial bRFS was 93%. On univariate analysis, bRFS rates were worse when SVI (p < 0.02), Gleason score ≥4 + 3 (p < 0.02), or negative surgical margins (p < 0.02) were present. AD did not influence bRFS. Six patients had a clinical relapse.

Conclusions

Adjuvant high-dose IMRT after prostatectomy is safe and bRFS is excellent.     

Timing and patterns of recurrences and deaths from prostate cancer following adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy for pathologic stage T3/4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate

To determine the timing and patterns of late recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) alone or RP plus adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). Between 1970 and 1983, 159 patients underwent RP for newly diagnosed adenocarcinoma of the prostate and were found to have positive surgical margins, extracapsular extension and/or seminal vesicle invasion. Of these, 46 received adjuvant RT and 113 did not. The RT group generally received 45-50 Gy to the whole pelvis, then a boost to the prostate bed (total dose of 55-65 Gy). In the RP group, 62% received neoadjuvant/adjuvant androgen deprivation vs 17% in the RT group. Patients were analyzed with respect to timing and patterns of failure. Only one patient was lost to follow-up. The median follow-up for surviving patients was nearly 20 years. The median time to failure in the surgery group was 7.5 vs 14.7 years in the RT group (P=0.1). Late recurrences were less common in the surgery group than the RT group (9 and 1% at 10 and 15 years, respectively vs 17 and 9%). In contrast to recurrences, nearly half of deaths from prostate cancer occurred more than 10 years after treatment. Deaths from prostate cancer represented 55% of all deaths in these patients. Recurrences beyond 10 years after RP in this group of patients were relatively uncommon. Despite its long natural history, death from prostate cancer was the most common cause of mortality in this population with locally advanced tumors, reflecting the need for more effective therapy.     

Adjuvant and Salvage Radiation for Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Discussion During the ESOU 2010 Meeting

Adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for advanced localised prostate cancer (PCa) is now supported by the findings from three randomised controlled trials, having shown improved biochemical recurrence–free survival rates in three trials and an improved metastases-free survival in one trial. Patients with positive surgical margins are most likely to benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. In this article, the three trials are compared and the control groups scrutinised. Salvage RT at the time of a biochemical or local recurrence is still valid and seems particularly beneficial for men with more rapidly rising prostate-specific antigen values prior to salvage treatment, when disease-specific survival is considered.     

Management of biochemical failure following radical prostatectomy: salvage radiotherapy - a case series

A retrospective analysis of the outcome of radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer in a single centre and assessment of the role of salvage radiotherapy (RT) for patients with biochemical relapse. Hundred and thirty-seven patients underwent RP for adenocarcinoma of the prostate in our centre between December 1994 and June 2003. Fifty-four of these patients developed a biochemical relapse prostate-specific antigen (PSA > or = 0.2 ng/ml). Thirty-two patients including five from elsewhere (one with a palpable local recurrence) received salvage RT. Twenty-five of these had positive margins at resection and four had involvement of seminal vesicles. Nine had Gleason score > or = 8. Median PSA before RT was 0.55 ng/ml (range 0.2-5.0). Median age at surgery was 63.5 years (range 52-71). Median age at RT was 65 years (range 53-73). Median time from surgery to biochemical relapse was 11 months (range 0-37) and median interval from surgery to RT was 22 months (range 3-71). Twenty-seven patients received 64 Gy in 32 fractions, three patients received 55 Gy in 20 fractions and two patients received 50 Gy in 20 fractions. Twenty-seven patients were managed by observation or hormone therapy. Twenty-seven patients (84%) achieved complete biochemical remission following RT. Eighteen (56%) remain in complete remission with a median follow-up since RT for the whole group of 30 months (range 8-85). Fourteen patients have relapsed, eight of whom had either clear margins or PSA >1.0 ng/ml at the time of RT (PSA > or = 0.2 ng/ml). Salvage RT is an effective treatment for achieving biochemical remission in selected patients who relapse following RP.     

Long-term benefits of elective radiotherapy after prostatectomy for patients with positive surgical margins

PURPOSE: The benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy after prostatectomy for patients with pathological risk factors but with an undetectable postoperative PSA remains controversial. In this retrospective study we define the benefits of elective postoperative radiotherapy in this setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 44 patients received elective postoperative radiotherapy at a single institution in the PSA era (1989 to 1995) for positive surgical margins and undetectable postoperative PSA. Radiotherapy was delivered to a median dose of 60 Gy. Clinical target volume included the prostate bed. Pelvic nodes were not treated. The four-field box technique with customized blocking of bladder, rectum and small bowels was used and defined the planning target volume. The patients were then compared to a contemporaneous group of 189 patients with positive surgical margins who underwent radical prostatectomy without any adjuvant therapy. Failure was defined as biochemical (PSA) recurrence and was timed from first detectable PSA. RESULTS: The 5 and 10-year biochemical no evidence of disease was 90.9% and 90.9% for the elective postoperative radiotherapy group, and 66.4% and 54.5% for the observation group, respectively (p = 0.0012). Median time to biochemical failure was also longer in the elective postoperative radiotherapy group (88.6 months) compared to the observation group (43.5 months) (p <0.001). Risk factors for biochemical recurrence on multivariate analysis were Gleason score greater than 7 (p = 0.017), established extracapsular extension (p = 0.002) and lack of elective postoperative radiation (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the longest followup studies showing that elective postoperative radiation therapy is associated with improved bNED and prolonged time to recurrence. Combined radical prostatectomy and elective postoperative radiotherapy should be considered in the management of high risk prostate cancer, especially in the presence of positive surgical margins despite undetectable PSA.     

What is the best way to radiate the prostate in 2016?

Prostate cancer treatment with definitive radiation therapy (RT) has evolved dramatically in the past 2 decades. From the initial 2-dimensional planning using X-rays, advances in technology led to 3-dimensional conformal RT, which used computerized tomography-based planning. This has allowed delivery of higher doses of radiation to the prostate while reducing dose to the surrounding organs, resulting in improved cancer control. Today, intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) is considered standard, where radiation beams of different shapes and intensities can be delivered from a wide range of angles, thus further decreasing doses to normal organs and likely reducing treatment-related toxicity. In addition, image guidance ascertains the location of the prostate before daily treatment delivery.Brachytherapy is the placement of radioactive seeds directly in the prostate, and has a long track record as a monotherapy for low-risk prostate cancer patients with excellent long-term cancer control and quality of life outcomes. Recent studies including several randomized trials support the use of brachytherapy in combination with external beam RT for higher-risk patients.RT for prostate cancer continues to evolve. Proton therapy has a theoretical advantage over photons as it deposits most of the dose at a prescribed depth with a rapid dose fall-off thereafter; therefore it reduces some doses delivered to the bladder and rectum. Prospective studies have shown the safety and efficacy of proton therapy for prostate cancer, but whether it leads to improved patient outcomes compared to IMRT is unknown.Hypofractionated RT delivers a larger dose of daily radiation compared to conventional IMRT, and thus reduces the overall treatment time and possibly cost. An extreme form of hypofractionation is stereotactic body radiation therapy where highly precise radiation is used and treatment is completed in a total of 4 to 5 sessions. These techniques take advantage of the biological characteristic of prostate cancer, which is more sensitive to larger radiation doses per fraction, and therefore could be more effective than conventional IMRT. Multiple randomized trials have demonstrated noninferiority of moderately hypofractionated RT compared to conventional fractionation. There is also a growing body of data demonstrating the safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.     

Comparative Effectiveness of External-Beam Radiation Approaches for Prostate Cancer

Background

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is increasingly used to treat localized prostate cancer. Although allowing for the delivery of higher doses of radiation to the prostate, its effectiveness compared with the prior standard three-dimensional conformal therapy (3D-CRT) is uncertain.

Objective

To examine the comparative effectiveness of IMRT relative to 3D-CRT.

Design, setting, and participants

We performed a population-based cohort study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2001 and 2007 who underwent either 3D-CRT (n = 6976) or IMRT (n = 11 039).

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

We assessed our main outcomes (ie, the adjusted use of salvage therapy with androgen-deprivation therapy [ADT] and risk of a complication requiring an intervention) using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results and limitations

The percentage of men receiving IMRT increased from 9% in 2001 to 93% in 2007. Compared with those treated with 3D-CRT, low-risk patients treated with IMRT had similar likelihoods of using salvage therapy with ADT and similar risks of having a complication requiring an intervention (all p > 0.05). Conversely, a subset of higher risk patients treated with IMRT who did not receive concurrent ADT were less likely to use salvage therapy (p = 0.02) while maintaining similar complication rates. Because our cohort includes Medicare beneficiaries, our findings may not be generalizable to younger patients.

Conclusions

For a subset of higher risk patients, IMRT appears to show a benefit in terms of reduced salvage therapy without an increase in complications. For other patients, the risks of salvage therapy and complications are comparable between the two modalities.     

The role of surgery in high-risk localised prostate cancer

? The optimal management of high-risk localised prostate cancer is a major challenge for urologists and oncologists. It is clear that multimodal therapy including radical local treatment is needed in these men to achieve the best outcomes. ? External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is an essential component of therapy either as a primary or adjuvant treatment. However, the role of radical prostatectomy (RP) is more controversial. Both methods are currently valid therapy options. ? There have been many individual studies of EBRT and RP in high-risk disease, but no good quality large prospective randomized trials. ? In EBRT, combination with neoadjuvant plus long-term adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been conclusively shown to improve outcomes and is widely considered the standard of care. ? However, the role of RP has achieved recent prominence with several important studies. Published data from prospective randomized trials in patients after RP have shown that in men with adverse pathological features at surgery, the addition of adjuvant RT improves biochemical-free and progression-free survival. ? More recently, studies from large-volume centres comparing EBRT and RP have provided intriguing suggestions of better outcomes with RP as the primary treatment. ? An important question therefore, is which of the two methods provides the best outcome in men with localised high-risk disease. Crucially, does the combination of RP and selective adjuvant EBRT provide clinically significant better outcomes compared with EBRT alone? ? In this review we discuss the current evidence for the role of RP for high-risk localised prostate cancer and define the parameters and urgent need for a prospective trial to test the role of surgery for this group of patients.     

Selective use of whole breast radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer and DCIS

BackgroundRadiotherapy following breast conservation is routine in the treatment of invasive breast cancer and is commonly used in ductal carcinoma in situ to decrease local recurrence. However, adjuvant breast radiotherapy has significant short and longer-term side effects and consumes substantial health care resources. We aimed to review the randomised controlled trials and attempted to identify clinico-pathological factors and molecular markers associated with the risk of local recurrence.MethodsA literature search using the Medline and Ovid databases between 1965 and 2011 was conducted using the terms ‘breast conservation’ and radiotherapy, and radiotherapy and DCIS. Only papers with randomised clinical trials published in English in adult were included. Only Level 2 evidence and above was included.ResultsThree meta-analyses and 17 randomised controlled trials have been published in invasive disease and one meta-analysis and four randomised controlled trials for DCIS. Overall, adjuvant radiotherapy provides a 15.7% decrease in local recurrence and 3.8% decrease in 15-year risk of breast cancer death. The key clinico-pathological factors, which enable stratification into high, intermediate or low risk groups include age, oestrogen receptor positivity, use of tamoxifen and extent of surgery. Absolute reductions in 15-year risk of breast cancer death in these three prediction categories are 7.8%, 1·1%, and 0·1% respectively Adjuvant radiotherapy provides a 60% risk reduction in local recurrence in DCIS with no impact on distal metastases or overall survival. Size, pathological subtype and margins are major risk factors for local recurrence in DCIS.ConclusionsAdjuvant radiotherapy consistently decreases local recurrence across all subtypes of invasive and in-situ disease. While it has a survival advantage in those with invasive disease, this is not seen with DCIS and is minimal in invasive disease where the risk of local recurrence is low. This group includes women over 70 with node negative, ER positive tumours<2 cm.     

Seminal vesicle invasion: what is the best adjuvant treatment after radical prostatectomy?

Study Type – Therapy (individual cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What’s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer has a poor prognosis. Nowadays, there is no consensus about the best adjuvant treatment after radical prostatectomy when seminal vesicle invasion is observed in the specimen. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study between different adjuvant treatments after radical prostatectomy when seminal vesicle invasion is observed in the specimen.

OBJECTIVE

? To evaluate the biochemical‐failure free survival according to different adjuvant treatments in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) with seminal vesicle invasion (SVI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

? Between 1994 and 2008, 4090 men underwent RP in nine centres. Of these, 310 men had a SVI. ? Exclusion criteria were: detectable postoperative prostate‐specific antigen, lymph node metastases and follow‐up <18 months. ? Therefore, the study group included 199 patients. Of these, 41 received adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) only, 26 received adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) only, 50 received adjuvant ADT combined with RT and 82 were monitored. The endpoint for this analysis was biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED). ? Preoperative prostate‐specific antigen level, specimen Gleason score, age, clinical stage, surgical margin status and adjuvant treatment were evaluated in a multivariable analysis with respect to bNED survival.

RESULTS

? After a mean (range) follow‐up of 60.3 (18–185) months, 88 (44.2%) patients had a biochemical relapse. ? The estimated 5‐ and 7‐year bNED survival were 32.6% and 25.9% for the observation group, 44.4% and 28.6% for the RT only group, 48.4% and 32.3% for the ADT only group and 82.8% and 62.1% for the adjuvant ADT combined with RT group. ? On multivariate analysis, only adjuvant ADT combined with RT (P < 0.001) was an independent prognostic factor of biochemical relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

? RP appeared to be insufficient as a single treatment for patients with SVI. ? The findings of the present study suggest that adjuvant ADT combined with RT after RP for patients with SVI confers a substantial benefit on 5‐year bNED survival.     

调强适形放疗治疗前列腺癌的临床疗效分析（附13例报告）

目的分析调强适形放疗治疗前列腺癌的临床疗效及副反应。方法回顾性分析13例接受调强适形放射治疗（intensive modulated radiotherapy,IMRT）的前列腺癌患者资料,8例放疗前接受手术去势,5例接受药物去势。7例临床靶区包括前列腺或前列腺加精囊,另6例同步接受盆腔区域淋巴结照射,前列腺临床靶区的剂量为72 Gy（66～76 Gy）,盆腔区域淋巴结剂量为50 Gy（46～54 Gy）。结果完全缓解5例,部分缓解4例,稳定4例,1、3年总生存率分别为92.3%和84.6%。全组早期胃肠道副反应1级8例,2级4例,早期泌尿系副反应1级5例,2级3例,未见3级以上的胃肠道及泌尿系副反应。全组晚期胃肠道副反应1级3例,2级1例,晚期泌尿系副反应1级4例,2级2例,未见3级以上的胃肠道及泌尿系副反应。结论调强适形放疗治疗前列腺癌提高了前列腺肿瘤靶区剂量,降低了PSA生化复发率,前列腺周围器官放疗副反应发生率低,患者可获得较好的放疗耐受性与较高的生活质量。