Back to Search Start Over

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, proton therapy, or conformal radiation therapy and morbidity and disease control in localized prostate cancer

Authors :
Til Stürmer
Gregg H. Goldin
Nathan C. Sheets
YunKyung Chang
Paul A. Godley
Jordan A. Holmes
Yang Wu
Ronald C. Chen
Bryce B. Reeve
Anne Marie Meyer
William R. Carpenter
Source :
JAMA. 307(15)
Publication Year :
2012

Abstract

Context There has been rapid adoption of newer radiation treatments such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton therapy despite greater cost and limited demonstrated benefit compared with previous technologies. Objective To determine the comparative morbidity and disease control of IMRT, proton therapy, and conformal radiation therapy for primary prostate cancer treatment. Design, Setting, and Patients Population-based study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare-linked data from 2000 through 2009 for patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Main Outcome Measures Rates of gastrointestinal and urinary morbidity, erectile dysfunction, hip fractures, and additional cancer therapy. Results Use of IMRT vs conformal radiation therapy increased from 0.15% in 2000 to 95.9% in 2008. In propensity score–adjusted analyses (N = 12 976), men who received IMRT vs conformal radiation therapy were less likely to receive a diagnosis of gastrointestinal morbidities (absolute risk, 13.4 vs 14.7 per 100 person-years; relative risk [RR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96) and hip fractures (absolute risk, 0.8 vs 1.0 per 100 person-years; RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.93) but more likely to receive a diagnosis of erectile dysfunction (absolute risk, 5.9 vs 5.3 per 100 person-years; RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20). Intensity-modulated radiation therapy patients were less likely to receive additional cancer therapy (absolute risk, 2.5 vs 3.1 per 100 person-years; RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.89). In a propensity score–matched comparison between IMRT and proton therapy (n = 1368), IMRT patients had a lower rate of gastrointestinal morbidity (absolute risk, 12.2 vs 17.8 per 100 person-years; RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.79). There were no significant differences in rates of other morbidities or additional therapies between IMRT and proton therapy. Conclusions Among patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer, the use of IMRT compared with conformal radiation therapy was associated with less gastrointestinal morbidity and fewer hip fractures but more erectile dysfunction; IMRT compared with proton therapy was associated with less gastrointestinal morbidity.

Details

ISSN :
15383598
Volume :
307
Issue :
15
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
JAMA
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....474033add1b0a334e9558ba5ab671dd1