Does Treatment Duration Affect Outcome After Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer?

Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (Impact Factor: 4.26). 06/2008; 72(5):1402-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.011
Source: PubMed


The protraction of external beam radiotherapy (RT) time is detrimental in several disease sites. In prostate cancer, the overall treatment time can be considerable, as can the potential for treatment breaks. We evaluated the effect of elapsed treatment time on outcome after RT for prostate cancer.
Between April 1989 and November 2004, 1,796 men with prostate cancer were treated with RT alone. The nontreatment day ratio (NTDR) was defined as the number of nontreatment days divided by the total elapsed days of RT. This ratio was used to account for the relationship between treatment duration and total RT dose. Men were stratified into low risk (n = 789), intermediate risk (n = 798), and high risk (n = 209) using a single-factor model.
The 10-year freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rate was 68% for a NTDR <33% vs. 58% for NTDR >/=33% (p = 0.02; BF was defined as a prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2 ng/mL). In the low-risk group, the 10-year FFBF rate was 82% for NTDR <33% vs. 57% for NTDR >/=33% (p = 0.0019). The NTDR was independently predictive for FFBF (p = 0.03), in addition to T stage (p = 0.005) and initial prostate-specific antigen level (p < 0.0001) on multivariate analysis, including Gleason score and radiation dose. The NTDR was not a significant predictor of FFBF when examined in the intermediate-risk group, high-risk group, or all risk groups combined.
A proportionally longer treatment duration was identified as an adverse factor in low-risk patients. Treatment breaks resulting in a NTDR of >/=33% (e.g., four or more breaks during a 40-fraction treatment, 5 d/wk) should be avoided.

Download full-text


Available from: David J D'Ambrosio, Mar 27, 2015
1 Follower
16 Reads
  • Source
    • "First, individuals with comorbidities may not be treated aggressively for prostate cancer based on perceptions about their life expectancy , ability to tolerate therapy, and potential treatment side effects (Bechis et al., 2011; Post, Hansen, Kil, Janssen-Heijnen, & Coebergh, 2002). Second, side effects or complications are likely to cause interruptions in treatment, which may further lead to increased prostate cancer recurrence (Alibhai et al., 2005; D&apos;Ambrosio et al., 2008). The current study has a number of limitations. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify individual and contextual factors contributing to overall mortality among men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Florida, a random sample of patients (between October 1, 2001, and December 31, 2007) was taken from the Florida Cancer Data System. Patient's demographic and clinical information were obtained from the Florida Cancer Data System. Comorbidity was computed following the Elixhauser Index method. Census-tract-level socioeconomic status and farm house presence were extracted from Census 2000 and linked to patient data. The ratio of urologists and radiation oncologists to prostate cancer cases at the county level was computed. Multilevel logistic regression was conducted to identify significance of individuals and contextual factors in relation to overall mortality. A total of 18,042 patients were identified, among whom 2,363 died. No racial difference was found in our study. Being older at diagnosis, unmarried, current smoker, uninsured, diagnosed at late stage, with undifferentiated, poorly differentiated, or unknown tumor grade were significantly associated with higher odds of overall mortality. Living in a low-income area was significantly associated with higher odds of mortality (p = .0404). After adjusting for age, stage, and tumor grade, patients who received hormonal, combination of radiation with hormone therapy, and no definitive treatment had higher odds of mortality compared with those who underwent surgery only. A large number of comorbidities were associated with higher odds of mortality. Although disease-specific mortality was not examined, our findings suggest the importance of careful considerations of patient sociodemographic characteristics and their coexisting conditions in treatment decision making, which in turn affects mortality.
    American journal of men's health 12/2013; 8(4). DOI:10.1177/1557988313512862 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Radiobiologic modeling is increasingly used to estimate the effects of altered treatment plans, especially for dose escalation. The present article shows how much the linear-quadratic (LQ) (calculated biologically equivalent dose [BED] varies when individual parameters of the LQ formula are varied by +/-20% and by 1%. Equivalent total doses (EQD2 = normalized total doses (NTD) in 2-Gy fractions for tumor control, acute mucosal reactions, and late complications were calculated using the linear- quadratic formula with overall time: BED = nd (1 + d/ [alpha/beta]) - log(e)2 (T - Tk) / alphaTp, where BED is BED = total dose x relative effectiveness (RE = nd (1 + d/ [alpha/beta]). Each of the five biologic parameters in turn was altered by +/-10%, and the altered EQD2s tabulated; the difference was finally divided by 20. EQD2 or NTD is obtained by dividing BED by the RE for 2-Gy fractions, using the appropriate alpha/beta ratio. Variations in tumor and acute mucosal EQD ranged from 0.1% to 0.45% per 1% change in each parameter for conventional schedules, the largest variation being caused by overall time. Variations in "late" EQD were 0.4% to 0.6% per 1% change in the only biologic parameter, the alpha/beta ratio. For stereotactic body radiotherapy schedules, variations were larger, up to 0.6 to 0.9 for tumor and 1.6% to 1.9% for late, per 1% change in parameter. Robustness occurs similar to that of equivalent uniform dose (EUD), for the same reasons. Total dose, dose per fraction, and dose-rate cause their major effects, as well known.
    International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 05/2009; 73(5):1532-7. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.11.039 · 4.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment interruptions during radiotherapy may have a negative effect on patient outcome. D'Ambrosio et al. demonstrated that prolonging treatment duration has an adverse effect in low-risk patients with prostate cancer. Thus, limiting or modifying the overall elapsed time between treatments is necessary.
    Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology 07/2009; 6(6):312-3. DOI:10.1038/nrclinonc.2009.71 · 14.18 Impact Factor
Show more