- Large patient cohort prospective study with more than 500 patients and more than 5 years follow up have shown that CyberKnife is equally effective as long coures RT - SBRT/ CyberKnife is now standard of care treatment for localized prostate cancer - Outcome of CyberKnife treatment is similar to long course RT - Side-effect after Cyberknife is less than 1% in prostate cancer - CyberKnife is safe, out patient, short course treatment in both primary and metastatic CyberKnife in prostate cancer
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
- Large patient cohort prospective study with more than 500 patients and more than 5
years follow up have shown that CyberKnife is equally effective as long coures RT
- SBRT/ CyberKnife is now standard of care treatment for localized prostate cancer
- Outcome of CyberKnife treatment is similar to long course RT
- Side-effect after Cyberknife is less than 1% in prostate cancer
- CyberKnife is safe, out patient, short course treatment in both primary and metastatic
diseases.
- High dose radiation may be effective in many of the ‘radioresistant’ disease.
CyberKnife in prostate cancer
• Most prevalent malignancy in males in western community
• 2nd MC cause of mortality in the west
• Uncommon in Asians, probably shorter lifespan
• In TMH, constitutes 2.4% of all registered pts in 2000
• In recent years, more early prostate cancer patients are diagnosed
with prostate cancer
• Prostate cancer is slow growing tumour, risk of bone metastasis is
Hypofractionation schedule: - High dose per fraction, short course treatment - Equivalent loco-regional control
Ultra-hypofractionation schedule: - Very short course, high dose per fraction - Usual treatment duration 5 to 7 days
Conformal Radiation therapy reduces toxicity
• RCT• Royal Marsden Tait et al.
Gr 2 or more 5 Vs 15%.• Rotterdam trial Koper et al.
Grade 2 GI toxicity (32% vs. 19%, p = 0.02).
• M.D. Anderson Storey et al.No dif but Dose 78 vs 70.
• Nonrandomized trials• 15/27 improvement • Most pronounced when dose
escalation was not used.• When dose escalation was used, no
increased toxicity was demonstrated, except when the dose to the rectum >75 Gy.
• No article suggested increased toxicity with 3D-CRT for similar doses delivered compared withconventional RT.
WPRT VS PORT:RTOG trial 9413
• WP RT NCHT improves PFS compared with PO RT and NCHT or PO RT and AHT, and compared with WPRT + AHT in patients with a risk of LN involvement of 15%.
•Median follow-up : 59.5 mnths
• No OS advantage JCO 2003
Subset analysis of RTOG 9413
•Median PFS was 5.2, 3.7, and 2.9 years ( p 0.02). •7-year PFS was 40%, 35%, and 27%•RT field size has a major impact on PFS, and it is advised thatnodal treatment should be done in patients with a risk of LN inv >15% .
Roach IJROBP 2006
Dose escalation: improve LC
Author Study type Patient criteria Study details ResultsKurban et al Prospective
multi-institutional
N= 48391986-95T1-2 low risk prostate cancer
No neo-adj HTRT dose 60-78 Gy3DCRT planmingMedian FU 6.3 yrs
8-year PSA control rates were 72 to 93%. Dose >72 Gy had lower PSA relapse rate.