前列腺癌外束放疗伴或不伴高剂量率近距离放疗:挪威长期泌尿和肠道不良反应的经验。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Trude B Wedde, Milada C Smaastuen, Kari Vatne, Melanie Birthe Schulz-Jaavall, Sophie D Fosså, Wolfgang Lh Lilleby
{"title":"前列腺癌外束放疗伴或不伴高剂量率近距离放疗:挪威长期泌尿和肠道不良反应的经验。","authors":"Trude B Wedde,&nbsp;Milada C Smaastuen,&nbsp;Kari Vatne,&nbsp;Melanie Birthe Schulz-Jaavall,&nbsp;Sophie D Fosså,&nbsp;Wolfgang Lh Lilleby","doi":"10.2340/sju.v58.9571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are few studies utilizing the Expanded Prostate Index Composite questionnaire-26 (EPIC-26) questionnaire to examine the long-term association between Domain Summary Scores (DSSs) and Quality of Life (QoL) after External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT, 3DCRT [3D conventional radiotherapy]/IMRT [intensity modulated radiation therapy]) versus EBRT combined with High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy (BT+, 3DCRT [3D conventional radiotherapy]/IMRT). In this cross-sectional study we compare long-term adverse effects and QoL after BT+ with EBRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prostate Cancer Survivors who at least 5 years previously, had undergone BT+ at Oslo University Hospital between 2004 and 2010 (n = 259) or EBRT (multicentre cohort) between 2009 and 2010 (n = 99) completed a questionnaire containing EPIC-26, Short Form-12 and questions regarding comorbidity/social status. Results were presented as DSSs and Physical/Mental Composite Scores of QoL (PCS/MCS). Regression analyses explored firstly the associations between treatment modality and DSSs and secondly the impact of DSSs on QoL. We estimated the proportions of patients with big/moderate problems. Clinical relevance was set according to the lowest limit of published Minimal Important Differences. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In multivariate analysis, only the urinary incontinence DSS remained statistically (P < 0.05) and clinically significantly greater after BT+ than EBRT (90 vs. 83). The number of men with moderate/big urinary or bowel problems was halved after BT+ (P < 0.05). The number of patients with impaired PCS (score < 45) were lower in the BT+ group than the EBRT group (P = 0.02). Regression analysis showed that decreasing levels of bowel and urinary irritation/obstructive DSSs predicted worsening of PCS (P < 0.001) and MCS (P = 0.007), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dose-escalated radiotherapy by BT did not negatively impact long-term adverse effects, substantial problems or QoL compared with EBRT. Future randomised studies using improved EBRT techniques are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":21542,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Urology","volume":"58 ","pages":"68-75"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"External beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer with or without high dose-rate brachytherapy: the Norwegian experience with long-term urinary and bowel adverse effects.\",\"authors\":\"Trude B Wedde,&nbsp;Milada C Smaastuen,&nbsp;Kari Vatne,&nbsp;Melanie Birthe Schulz-Jaavall,&nbsp;Sophie D Fosså,&nbsp;Wolfgang Lh Lilleby\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/sju.v58.9571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are few studies utilizing the Expanded Prostate Index Composite questionnaire-26 (EPIC-26) questionnaire to examine the long-term association between Domain Summary Scores (DSSs) and Quality of Life (QoL) after External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT, 3DCRT [3D conventional radiotherapy]/IMRT [intensity modulated radiation therapy]) versus EBRT combined with High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy (BT+, 3DCRT [3D conventional radiotherapy]/IMRT). In this cross-sectional study we compare long-term adverse effects and QoL after BT+ with EBRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prostate Cancer Survivors who at least 5 years previously, had undergone BT+ at Oslo University Hospital between 2004 and 2010 (n = 259) or EBRT (multicentre cohort) between 2009 and 2010 (n = 99) completed a questionnaire containing EPIC-26, Short Form-12 and questions regarding comorbidity/social status. Results were presented as DSSs and Physical/Mental Composite Scores of QoL (PCS/MCS). Regression analyses explored firstly the associations between treatment modality and DSSs and secondly the impact of DSSs on QoL. We estimated the proportions of patients with big/moderate problems. Clinical relevance was set according to the lowest limit of published Minimal Important Differences. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In multivariate analysis, only the urinary incontinence DSS remained statistically (P < 0.05) and clinically significantly greater after BT+ than EBRT (90 vs. 83). The number of men with moderate/big urinary or bowel problems was halved after BT+ (P < 0.05). The number of patients with impaired PCS (score < 45) were lower in the BT+ group than the EBRT group (P = 0.02). Regression analysis showed that decreasing levels of bowel and urinary irritation/obstructive DSSs predicted worsening of PCS (P < 0.001) and MCS (P = 0.007), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dose-escalated radiotherapy by BT did not negatively impact long-term adverse effects, substantial problems or QoL compared with EBRT. Future randomised studies using improved EBRT techniques are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"58 \",\"pages\":\"68-75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/sju.v58.9571\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/sju.v58.9571","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前很少有研究利用前列腺指数扩展复合问卷-26 (EPIC-26)调查问卷来研究外束放射治疗(EBRT, 3DCRT [3D常规放疗]/IMRT[调强放疗])与EBRT联合高剂量率近距离放疗(BT+, 3DCRT [3D常规放疗]/IMRT)后领域总结评分(DSSs)与生活质量(QoL)之间的长期关系。在这项横断面研究中,我们比较了BT+与EBRT后的长期不良反应和生活质量。方法:2004年至2010年期间在奥斯陆大学医院接受BT+治疗至少5年的前列腺癌幸存者(n = 259)或2009年至2010年期间接受EBRT(多中心队列)治疗的前列腺癌幸存者(n = 99)完成了一份包含EPIC-26、Short Form-12和有关合并症/社会地位的问卷。结果以DSSs和Physical/Mental Composite score of QoL (PCS/MCS)表示。回归分析首先探讨了治疗方式与生存质量之间的关系,其次探讨了生存质量对生活质量的影响。我们估计了有严重/中度问题的患者的比例。临床相关性根据公布的最小重要差异的最低限度来确定。结果:在多因素分析中,BT+后仅尿失禁DSS有统计学意义(P < 0.05),且临床显著高于EBRT(90比83)。有中度/重度尿路或肠道问题的男性在BT+后减少了一半(P < 0.05)。BT+组PCS评分< 45的患者数量低于EBRT组(P = 0.02)。回归分析显示,肠道和尿液刺激/阻塞性DSSs水平的降低分别预示着PCS (P < 0.001)和MCS (P = 0.007)的恶化。结论:与EBRT相比,BT剂量递增放疗对长期不良反应、实质性问题或生活质量没有负面影响。未来需要使用改进的EBRT技术进行随机研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
External beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer with or without high dose-rate brachytherapy: the Norwegian experience with long-term urinary and bowel adverse effects.

Background: There are few studies utilizing the Expanded Prostate Index Composite questionnaire-26 (EPIC-26) questionnaire to examine the long-term association between Domain Summary Scores (DSSs) and Quality of Life (QoL) after External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT, 3DCRT [3D conventional radiotherapy]/IMRT [intensity modulated radiation therapy]) versus EBRT combined with High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy (BT+, 3DCRT [3D conventional radiotherapy]/IMRT). In this cross-sectional study we compare long-term adverse effects and QoL after BT+ with EBRT.

Methods: Prostate Cancer Survivors who at least 5 years previously, had undergone BT+ at Oslo University Hospital between 2004 and 2010 (n = 259) or EBRT (multicentre cohort) between 2009 and 2010 (n = 99) completed a questionnaire containing EPIC-26, Short Form-12 and questions regarding comorbidity/social status. Results were presented as DSSs and Physical/Mental Composite Scores of QoL (PCS/MCS). Regression analyses explored firstly the associations between treatment modality and DSSs and secondly the impact of DSSs on QoL. We estimated the proportions of patients with big/moderate problems. Clinical relevance was set according to the lowest limit of published Minimal Important Differences. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: In multivariate analysis, only the urinary incontinence DSS remained statistically (P < 0.05) and clinically significantly greater after BT+ than EBRT (90 vs. 83). The number of men with moderate/big urinary or bowel problems was halved after BT+ (P < 0.05). The number of patients with impaired PCS (score < 45) were lower in the BT+ group than the EBRT group (P = 0.02). Regression analysis showed that decreasing levels of bowel and urinary irritation/obstructive DSSs predicted worsening of PCS (P < 0.001) and MCS (P = 0.007), respectively.

Conclusions: Dose-escalated radiotherapy by BT did not negatively impact long-term adverse effects, substantial problems or QoL compared with EBRT. Future randomised studies using improved EBRT techniques are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Scandinavian Journal of Urology
Scandinavian Journal of Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Journal of Urology is a journal for the clinical urologist and publishes papers within all fields in clinical urology. Experimental papers related to clinical questions are also invited.Important reports with great news value are published promptly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信