Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) ; 30(9): 527-533, 2018 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29903505

RESUMO

AIMS: We conducted a multicentre feasibility study to assess the ability to randomise patients between image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and IGRT + high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost and to adhere to appropriate radiation quality assurance standards. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The primary end point was to determine the ability to randomise 60 patients over an 18 month period. Arm 1 (IGRT) patients received 78 Gy in 39 fractions or 60 Gy in 20 fractions (physician's preference), whereas arm 2 (IGRT + HDR) received 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions with HDR boost of 15 Gy. The secondary end points included >grade 3 acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity, using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 at 3 months, validation of a prospectively defined radiation oncology quality assurance to assess treatment compliance. All analyses were descriptive; no formal comparisons between treatment arms were carried out. RESULTS: Between April 2014 and September 2015, 57 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-defined intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients were randomised between IGRT alone (arm 1; n = 29) and IGRT plus HDR brachytherapy boost (arm 2; n = 28). Overall, 93% received the treatment as randomised. There were four patients (one on IGRT arm 1 and three patients on the IGRT + HDR arm 2) who were treated differently from randomisation assignment. For the 29 patients receiving IGRT (arm 1), there were 14 cases reported with minor deviations and three with major deviations. For patients on IGRT + HDR (arm 2), there were 18 cases reported with minor deviations and two with major deviations. At 3 months in the IGRT group (arm 1), one patient reported grade 3 diarrhoea, whereas in the IGRT + HDR group (arm 2), two patients reported grade 3 haematuria. No other gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were reported. CONCLUSION: The pilot study showed the feasibility of randomisation between treatment with IGRT alone versus IGRT + HDR boost. Treatment compliance was good, including adherence to quality assurance standards.


Assuntos
Braquiterapia , Neoplasias da Próstata/radioterapia , Radioterapia Guiada por Imagem , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Braquiterapia/efeitos adversos , Diarreia/etiologia , Fracionamento da Dose de Radiação , Estudos de Viabilidade , Trato Gastrointestinal/efeitos da radiação , Hematúria/etiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Projetos Piloto , Lesões por Radiação/etiologia , Radioterapia Guiada por Imagem/efeitos adversos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/efeitos adversos , Sistema Urogenital/efeitos da radiação
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...