No abstract

Background To investigate whether the rate of stereotactic body radiation therapy-related (SBRT-related) genitourinary (GU) toxicity is lower in patients with prostate cancer treated with CyberKnife. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer at two institutions between 2017 and 2020. We analyzed 70 patients who were extracted by propensity score matching based on age, pre-treatment International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and prostate volume. The patients were treated with SBRT, with a total dose of 36.25 Gy in five fractions over five consecutive weekdays, using CyberKnife or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Results The low-, medium-, and high-risk patients were 2, 19, and 14, respectively, in the CyberKnife group and 4, 17, and 14, respectively, in the VMAT group. The median follow-up time in both groups was 3 years. One patient with CyberKnife died of unrelated causes. No biochemical or clinical recurrence, distant metastases, or death from prostate cancer was observed. The peak values of IPSS in the acute phase (< 3 months) were significantly lower in the CyberKnife than in the VMAT group (CyberKnife:16.2 vs VMAT:20.2, p = 0.025). In multiple regression analyses, the treatment modality (p = 0.03), age (p = 0.01), bladder medication pre-irradiation (p = 0.03), and neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (p = 0.04) contributed to the peak value of the acute-phase IPSS. The incidence of treatment-related grade 2 acute GU toxicity tended to be lower in the CyberKnife than the VMAT group (CyberKnife: 22.9% vs. VMAT: 45.7%, p = 0.077). No difference was noted between the groups with regard to late IPSS or GU toxicity and gastrointestinal toxicity in all phases. Toxicities of grade ≥ 3 have not been observed to date. Conclusions Regardless of treatment modality, SBRT is effective in treating prostate cancer without serious toxicity. However, CyberKnife has an advantage over VMAT in terms of acute prostate symptoms.

Background/Aim: To compare five radiotherapy methods for prostate cancer. Patients and Methods: During 2005-2018, the data of patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer were retrospectively analysed. Patients were treated with high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT); low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT); or external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT), including conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT), moderate-hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT), and ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy (UHRT). Results:

Background Standard treatments for small cell carcinoma of the cervix (SCCC) have not been established. In this study, we aimed to estimate the optimal treatment strategy for SCCC. Methods This was a multicenter retrospective study. Medical records of patients with pathologically proven SCCC treated between 2003 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival (OS) was plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank tests and Cox regression analysis were used to assess the differences in survival according to stage, treatment strategy, and chemotherapy regimen. Results Data of 78 patients were collected, and after excluding patients without immunohistopathological staining, 65 patients were evaluated. The median age of the included patients was 47 (range: 24–83) years. The numbers of patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stages I-IIA, IIB-IVA, IVB were 23 (35%), 34 (52%), and 8 (12%), respectively. Of 53 patients who had undergone chemotherapy, 35 and 18 received SCCC and non-SCCC regimens as their first-line chemotherapy regimen, respectively. The 5-year OS for all patients was 49%, while for patients with FIGO stages I-IIA, IIB-IVA, IVB, it was 60, 50, and 0%, respectively. The 5-year OS rates for patients who underwent treatment with SCCC versus non-SCCC regimens were 59 and 13% (p < 0.01), respectively. This trend was pronounced in locally advanced stages. Multivariate analysis showed that FIGO IVB at initial diagnosis was a significant prognostic factor in all patients. Among the 53 patients who received chemotherapy, the SCCC regimen was associated with significantly better 5-year OS in both the uni- and multivariate analyses. Conclusion Our results suggest that the application of an SCCC regimen such as EP or IP as first-line chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced SCCC may play a key role in OS. These findings need to be validated in future nationwide, prospective clinical studies.

Objective We aimed to report the 2-year results of stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer and identify the clinical and dosimetric factors that predict acute genitourinary toxicities. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer treated at Toyota Memorial Hospital between 2017 and 2020. The patients were treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy with a total dose of 36.25 Gy in five fractions on consecutive weekdays. While low-risk patients received radiotherapy alone, intermediate- to high-risk patients also received androgen deprivation therapy. Results We analysed a total of 104 patients, including 10, 60 and 34 low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively. The median follow-up duration was 2 years. We did not observe biochemical/clinical recurrence, distant metastasis or death from prostate cancer. One patient died of another cause. Grade 2 acute genitourinary toxicity was observed in 40 (38%) patients. Age (P = 0.021), genitourinary toxicity of grade ≥1 at baseline (P = 0.023) and bladder mean dose (P = 0.047) were significantly associated with the incidence of grade 2 acute genitourinary toxicity. The cut-off value of 65 years for age and 10.3 Gy for the bladder mean dose were considered the most appropriate. Grade 2 acute gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in five (5%) patients. None of the patients experienced grade ≥3 acute or late toxicity. Conclusions Stereotactic body radiation therapy is feasible for Japanese patients with prostate cancer, with acceptable acute toxicity. Age, genitourinary toxicity at baseline and bladder mean dose predict grade 2 acute genitourinary toxicity.