PMID- 26523442
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20190129
LR  - 20190129
IS  - 1537-453X (Electronic)
IS  - 0277-3732 (Linking)
VI  - 41
IP  - 2
DP  - 2018 Feb
TI  - Hypofractionated Versus Standard Fractionated Proton-beam Therapy for Low-risk 
      Prostate Cancer: Interim Results of a Randomized Trial PCG GU 002.
PG  - 115-120
LID - 10.1097/COC.0000000000000241 [doi]
AB  - OBJECTIVE: To identify differences in terms of quality of life, the American 
      Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA), or adverse events (AEs) among 
      patients with prostate cancer treated with either standard fractionation or 
      hypofractionation proton-beam therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were 
      prospectively randomized to receive 38 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) 
      in 5 treatments (n=49) or 79.2 Gy RBE in 44 treatments (n=33). All patients had 
      low-risk prostate cancer and were treated with proton therapy using fiducial 
      markers and daily image guidance. RESULTS: Median follow-up for both groups was 
      18 months; 33 patients had follow-up of 2 years or longer. Baseline median 
      (range) AUA was 4.7 (0 to 13) for the 38 Gy RBE arm and 4.8 (0 to 17) for the 
      79.2 Gy RBE arm. We observed no difference between the groups regarding the 
      Expanded Prostate Index Composite urinary, bowel, or sexual function scores at 3, 
      6, 12, 18, or 24 months after treatment. The only significant difference was the 
      AUA score at 12 months (8 for the 38 Gy RBE arm vs. 5 for the 79.2 Gy RBE arm; 
      P=0.04); AUA scores otherwise were similar between groups. No grade 3 or higher 
      AEs occurred in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with proton therapy in 
      this randomized trial tolerated treatment well, with excellent quality-of-life 
      scores, persistent low AUA, and no grade 3 or higher AEs on either arm. We showed 
      no apparent clinical difference in outcomes with hypofractionated proton-beam 
      therapy compared with standard fractionation on the basis of this interim 
      analysis.
FAU - Vargas, Carlos E
AU  - Vargas CE
AD  - Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, AZ.
FAU - Hartsell, William F
AU  - Hartsell WF
AD  - CDH Proton Center.
FAU - Dunn, Megan
AU  - Dunn M
AD  - Proton Collaborative Group, Warrenville, IL.
FAU - Keole, Sameer R
AU  - Keole SR
AD  - Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, AZ.
FAU - Doh, Lucius
AU  - Doh L
AD  - Radiation Medicine Associates, PC, Radiation Oncology, Oklahoma City, OK.
FAU - Eisenbeisz, Elaine
AU  - Eisenbeisz E
AD  - Omega Statistics, Murrieta, CA.
FAU - Larson, Gary L
AU  - Larson GL
AD  - Radiation Medicine Associates, PC, Radiation Oncology, Oklahoma City, OK.
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Randomized Controlled Trial
PL  - United States
TA  - Am J Clin Oncol
JT  - American journal of clinical oncology
JID - 8207754
SB  - IM
MH  - Aged
MH  - Disease-Free Survival
MH  - Dose Fractionation, Radiation
MH  - Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation
MH  - Follow-Up Studies
MH  - Humans
MH  - Male
MH  - Middle Aged
MH  - Neoplasm Grading
MH  - Neoplasm Invasiveness
MH  - Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality/*pathology/*radiotherapy
MH  - Proton Therapy/adverse effects/*methods
MH  - *Radiation Dose Hypofractionation
MH  - Radiation Injuries/*prevention & control
MH  - Radiation Tolerance
MH  - Risk Assessment
MH  - Survival Analysis
MH  - Time Factors
MH  - Treatment Outcome
MH  - United States
EDAT- 2015/11/03 06:00
MHDA- 2019/01/30 06:00
CRDT- 2015/11/03 06:00
PHST- 2015/11/03 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2019/01/30 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2015/11/03 06:00 [entrez]
AID - 10.1097/COC.0000000000000241 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Am J Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb;41(2):115-120. doi: 10.1097/COC.0000000000000241.