Secondary malignancies following radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Sountoulides, Petros; Koletsas, Nikolaos; Kikidakis, D.; Paschalidis, Konstantinos; Sofikitis, Nikolaos

doi:10.1177/1756287210374462

Cited by 38 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results derived from 647,857 patients demonstrated an increased overall risk of secondary malignancy of 17% in patients with prostate cancer receiving RT. This finding corroborated the reports from previous original studies, and it is consistent with the general concern about RT as well [31]. …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Radiation-Induced Secondary Malignancy in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the risk of radiation-induced secondary malignancy in patients with prostate cancer. Methods: We identified 690 references from PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library before August 1, 2012, that reported secondary malignancy in patients with prostate cancer after receiving radiation therapy (RT), and finally four studies were included. We calculated summary estimates using random-effects meta-analysis. Results: The overall standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of secondary malignancy in patients with prostate cancer receiving RT to the general population was 1.14 (95% CI 1.04-1.32). In the subgroup analysis, no increment in radiation-induced secondary malignancy risk was detected. In terms of SIR with different follow-up intervals, there was no difference in SIR (>6 months; <5 years) (SIR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.75-1.89) and SIR (>5 years; <10 years) (SIR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.87-2.23). When the follow-up extended to >10 years, a significantly increased secondary malignancy risk was observed (SIR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.23-1.72). There is no significantly increased secondary malignancy risk in patients receiving no RT. Conclusion: RT is associated with increased secondary malignancy in patients with prostate cancer; this effect only become conspicuous more than 10 years after treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Radiation-Induced Secondary Malignancy in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clinicians should be aware of a small increased risk of secondary malignancies after radiation therapy compared with men receiving surgery . Several large‐scale studies of irradiated patients have indicated a slightly increased risk of secondary neoplasms in the irradiated area in both the bladder and colon/rectum .…”

Section: Screening For Second Primary Cancersmentioning

confidence: 99%

American Cancer Society prostate cancer survivorship care guidelines

Skolarus

Wolf

Erb

et al. 2014

CA A Cancer J Clinicians

357

320

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

https://www.wileyhealthlearning.com/acs.aspx Prostate cancer survivors approach 2.8 million in number and represent 1 in 5 of all cancer survivors in the United States. While guidelines exist for timely treatment and surveillance for recurrent disease, there is limited availability of guidelines that facilitate the provision of posttreatment clinical follow‐up care to address the myriad of long‐term and late effects that survivors may face. Based on recommendations set forth by a National Cancer Survivorship Resource Center expert panel, the American Cancer Society developed clinical follow‐up care guidelines to facilitate the provision of posttreatment care by primary care clinicians. These guidelines were developed using a combined approach of evidence synthesis and expert consensus. Existing guidelines for health promotion, surveillance, and screening for second primary cancers were referenced when available. To promote comprehensive follow‐up care and optimal health and quality of life for the posttreatment survivor, the guidelines address health promotion, surveillance for prostate cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, long‐term and late effects assessment and management, psychosocial issues, and care coordination among the oncology team, primary care clinicians, and nononcology specialists. A key challenge to the development of these guidelines was the limited availability of published evidence for management of prostate cancer survivors after treatment. Much of the evidence relies on studies with small sample sizes and retrospective analyses of facility‐specific and population databases. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:225–249. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

show abstract

“…With regard to the emergence of cross-sectional images (CT, MRI, and PET) and modern radiotherapy (IMRT, VMAT, SBRT and IGRT), the correctness and precision of treatments have increased [6][7][8][9]. However, the incidence of secondary cancer following radiotherapy is still remarkable and its incidence increases with the advancement of treatment technology [10]. In pharmaceutical strategies, radioprotectors and radiosensitizers are used as a moderator of free radical damage in the targeted radiotherapy [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of radiation dose-reduction factor for cerium oxide nanoparticles in MRC-5 human lung fibroblastic cells and MCF-7 breast-cancer cells

Goushbolagh

Firouzjah

Gorji

et al. 2018

Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the current study, radiation dose-reduction factor (DRF) of nanoceria or cerium oxide nanoparticles (CONPs) in MRC-5 Human Lung Fibroblastic Cells and MCF-7 Breast-Cancer Cells was estimated. Characterization of CONPs was determined using scanner electron microscope (SEM), energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and spectrophotometer. Then, six plans were designed with different radiation dose values on planning target value. The obtained MRC-5 and MCF-7 cells were treated with non-toxic concentrations of CONPs and then exposed. Finally, cell viability (%) of the cell lines was determined using MTT assay. The findings showed that CONPs have no significant radioprotective effect against 10 cGy radiation dose value. Nevertheless, 70 lM CONPs resulted in a significant radioprotection against 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 cGy radiation dose values compared with the control group in MRC-5 cells. For all radiation dose values, mean cell viability (%) of MCF-7 had not increased significantly at the presence of nanoceria compared with control group. According to the findings, it was revealed that the use of CONPs have a significant radioprotective effect on normal lung cells, while they do not provide any protection for MCF-7 cancer cells. These properties can help to increase therapeutic ratio of radiotherapy.

show abstract

Secondary malignancies following radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Cited by 38 publications

References 44 publications

Radiation-Induced Secondary Malignancy in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Radiation-Induced Secondary Malignancy in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

American Cancer Society prostate cancer survivorship care guidelines

Estimation of radiation dose-reduction factor for cerium oxide nanoparticles in MRC-5 human lung fibroblastic cells and MCF-7 breast-cancer cells

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About