Comparison of Treatment-Related Toxicity With Hypofractionated or Conventionally Fractionated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A National Population-Based Study.

AIMS: Randomised controlled trials have shown comparable early oncological outcomes after hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy in the radical treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). The effect of hypofractionation on treatment-related gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity remains uncertain, especially in older men and those with locally advanced PCa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A population-based study of all patients treated with radical conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (n = 9106) and hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 3027) in all radiotherapy centres in the English National Health Service between 2014 and 2016 was carried out. We identified severe gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity using a validated coding framework and compared conventionally fractionated and hypofractionated radiotherapy using a competing-risks proportional hazards regression analysis. RESULTS: The median age in our cohort was 72 years old and most patients had locally advanced disease (65%). There was no difference in gastrointestinal toxicity (conventionally fractionated radiotherapy: 5.0 events/100 person-years; hypofractionated radiotherapy: 5.2 events/100 person-years; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio: 1.00, 95% confidence interval: 0.89-1.13; P = 0.95) or genitourinary toxicity (conventionally fractionated radiotherapy: 2.3 events/100 person-years; hypofractionated radiotherapy: 2.3 events/100 person-years; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio: 0.92, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-1.10; P = 0.35) between patients who received conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and those who received hypofractionated radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: This national cohort study has shown that the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the radical treatment of PCa does not increase rates of severe gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity. Our findings also support the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy in older men and those with locally advanced PCa.

Epithelializing stent for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature.

PURPOSE: We systematically reviewed the literature on the effectiveness, durability and safety of the UroLume stent for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for 1989 to 2005. Reference lists of included studies and review articles were also searched. We contacted the UroLume manufacturer and key authors for additional information. Primary outcomes were treatment failure and urological symptom scores. Secondary outcomes were uroflow parameters and minor complications. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies and extracted data. RESULTS: A total of 20 case series evaluated the UroLume stent in a total of 990 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Of the patients 84% who were catheter dependent voided spontaneously after stent insertion. Ten studies assessed symptoms before stent insertion and at some point within 1 year after stent insertion. All reported decreases in symptom scores, including Madsen-Iversen by 7.9 to 14.3 points and International Prostate Symptom Score by 10 to 12.4 points. Peak urine flow rates increased by 4.2 to 13.1 ml per second. A total of 104 stents (16%) failed in 606 patients who were evaluable at 1 year and migration was the commonest cause of failure (38 stents or 37%). Most patients initially experienced perineal pain or irritative voiding symptoms following stent placement. CONCLUSIONS: Of men who were catheter dependent 84% voided spontaneously after insertion of a UroLume stent and the improvement in symptoms was similar to that seen after transurethral prostate resection. However, 1 of 6 men needed the UroLume removed within a year because of complications. Inadequate followup prevented conclusions on stent durability beyond 1 year. This review supports the recommendation that stents should be considered only in patients at high risk.