Killian Nugent FFR, RCSI , Prantik Das FRCR , Dan Ford FRCR , Ami Sabharwal FRCR , Carla Perna FRCR , Nicola Dallas FRCR , Jason Lester FRCR , Philip Camilleri FRCR
{"title":"针对局部前列腺癌的立体定向 MR 引导日适应放疗(SMART):患者报告的急性和晚期毒性结果。","authors":"Killian Nugent FFR, RCSI , Prantik Das FRCR , Dan Ford FRCR , Ami Sabharwal FRCR , Carla Perna FRCR , Nicola Dallas FRCR , Jason Lester FRCR , Philip Camilleri FRCR","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To report acute and late bowel, urinary, and sexual dysfunction patient-reported outcome measures, among patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent stereotactic magnetic resonance–guided daily adaptive radiation therapy (SMART).</p></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><p>All patients who completed a baseline 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events questionnaire, before undergoing SMART with 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, were subsequently followed up with the same graded questionnaire at set time points. Latest prostate-specific antigen levels were recorded. The percentage of patients who reported no change from their baseline adverse event (AE) or reported a new ≥ “frequent or almost constant” or “severe grade or higher” AE grade during follow-up was calculated. The maximum 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade for each item was recorded for each patient. The percentage of toxicity levels for each separate AE item at set time points was calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The total number of patients was 69 with a median follow-up of 27 months. Median age of the cohort was 73 years (range, 54-85 years). The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level, T stage, and Gleason score were 7.5 mmol/L (range, 4.5-32 mmol/L), T2b (range, T2-T3b), and 7 (3 + 4; range, 6-9), respectively. No patient had biochemical failure during follow-up. Regarding bowel symptoms, >80% of men reported no change from baseline toxicity during follow-up. New ≥ frequent or almost constant diarrhea was reported in 9% of patients. “Almost constant” diarrhea peaked at 1 month but was absent at >33 months. Regarding urinary symptoms, increased urinary urgency was the most common complaint (39%). Twenty percent of men reported new ≥ frequent or almost constant urinary urgency incidence peaking at 1 month but absent at >33 months. New “severe” sexual dysfunction was seen in 26% of patients and was persistent at >33 months.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our study is one the largest patient-reported outcomes study after prostate SMART. It shows acceptable levels of toxicity even up to 2 years after treatment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"9 9","pages":"Article 101574"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001374/pdfft?md5=2f27057ef5715b14ca7d268453995e9f&pid=1-s2.0-S2452109424001374-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance–Guided Daily Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Acute and Late Patient-Reported Toxicity Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Killian Nugent FFR, RCSI , Prantik Das FRCR , Dan Ford FRCR , Ami Sabharwal FRCR , Carla Perna FRCR , Nicola Dallas FRCR , Jason Lester FRCR , Philip Camilleri FRCR\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101574\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To report acute and late bowel, urinary, and sexual dysfunction patient-reported outcome measures, among patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent stereotactic magnetic resonance–guided daily adaptive radiation therapy (SMART).</p></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><p>All patients who completed a baseline 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events questionnaire, before undergoing SMART with 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, were subsequently followed up with the same graded questionnaire at set time points. Latest prostate-specific antigen levels were recorded. The percentage of patients who reported no change from their baseline adverse event (AE) or reported a new ≥ “frequent or almost constant” or “severe grade or higher” AE grade during follow-up was calculated. The maximum 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade for each item was recorded for each patient. The percentage of toxicity levels for each separate AE item at set time points was calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The total number of patients was 69 with a median follow-up of 27 months. Median age of the cohort was 73 years (range, 54-85 years). The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level, T stage, and Gleason score were 7.5 mmol/L (range, 4.5-32 mmol/L), T2b (range, T2-T3b), and 7 (3 + 4; range, 6-9), respectively. No patient had biochemical failure during follow-up. Regarding bowel symptoms, >80% of men reported no change from baseline toxicity during follow-up. New ≥ frequent or almost constant diarrhea was reported in 9% of patients. “Almost constant” diarrhea peaked at 1 month but was absent at >33 months. Regarding urinary symptoms, increased urinary urgency was the most common complaint (39%). Twenty percent of men reported new ≥ frequent or almost constant urinary urgency incidence peaking at 1 month but absent at >33 months. New “severe” sexual dysfunction was seen in 26% of patients and was persistent at >33 months.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our study is one the largest patient-reported outcomes study after prostate SMART. It shows acceptable levels of toxicity even up to 2 years after treatment.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\"9 9\",\"pages\":\"Article 101574\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001374/pdfft?md5=2f27057ef5715b14ca7d268453995e9f&pid=1-s2.0-S2452109424001374-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001374\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance–Guided Daily Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Acute and Late Patient-Reported Toxicity Outcomes
Purpose
To report acute and late bowel, urinary, and sexual dysfunction patient-reported outcome measures, among patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent stereotactic magnetic resonance–guided daily adaptive radiation therapy (SMART).
Methods and Materials
All patients who completed a baseline 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events questionnaire, before undergoing SMART with 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, were subsequently followed up with the same graded questionnaire at set time points. Latest prostate-specific antigen levels were recorded. The percentage of patients who reported no change from their baseline adverse event (AE) or reported a new ≥ “frequent or almost constant” or “severe grade or higher” AE grade during follow-up was calculated. The maximum 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade for each item was recorded for each patient. The percentage of toxicity levels for each separate AE item at set time points was calculated.
Results
The total number of patients was 69 with a median follow-up of 27 months. Median age of the cohort was 73 years (range, 54-85 years). The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level, T stage, and Gleason score were 7.5 mmol/L (range, 4.5-32 mmol/L), T2b (range, T2-T3b), and 7 (3 + 4; range, 6-9), respectively. No patient had biochemical failure during follow-up. Regarding bowel symptoms, >80% of men reported no change from baseline toxicity during follow-up. New ≥ frequent or almost constant diarrhea was reported in 9% of patients. “Almost constant” diarrhea peaked at 1 month but was absent at >33 months. Regarding urinary symptoms, increased urinary urgency was the most common complaint (39%). Twenty percent of men reported new ≥ frequent or almost constant urinary urgency incidence peaking at 1 month but absent at >33 months. New “severe” sexual dysfunction was seen in 26% of patients and was persistent at >33 months.
Conclusions
Our study is one the largest patient-reported outcomes study after prostate SMART. It shows acceptable levels of toxicity even up to 2 years after treatment.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.