Intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus radical prostatectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer: long-term follow-up

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMerino Lara, Tomas Rodrigo
dc.contributor.authorSan Francisco Reyes, Ignacio Felipe
dc.contributor.authorRojas, Pablo A.
dc.contributor.authorBettoli, Piero.
dc.contributor.authorZúñiga Díaz, Alvaro
dc.contributor.authorBesa, Pelayo.
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-17T14:07:04Z
dc.date.available2019-10-17T14:07:04Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.date.updated2019-10-14T18:35:19Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background The objective of this work was to assess the overall survival, cause-specific survival and biochemical failure-free survival of a contemporary cohort of patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods We did a retrospective cohort study of our institution’s registry of patients undergoing either IMRT or RP between January 1999 and March 2010, and assessed Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA), age at diagnosis, Gleason score, and digital rectal examination. Two groups were separated according to RP or IMRT treatment and these groups were in turn divided into risk groups according to the D’Amico classification. Overall survival (OS), cause-specific survival (CSS), mortality from other causes (MOC), and biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) were assessed. Results Twelve-hundred patients were included: 993 in the RP group and 207 in the IMRT group. The IMRT group had older age, PSA at diagnosis and a significantly higher percentage of cancer on the needle biopsy (p <0.001). Of the 207 patients who underwent IMRT, 54% presented comorbidities. Median follow-up was 91.7 months for the RP group and 76 months for the IMRT group. The OS at 5 and 7 was 96.2, and 93.7 for the RP group respectively and 88.4, and 83.1 for the IMRT group respectively (p <0.001). There were no significant differences in the CSS in relation to treatment received among the low- and high-risk groups, while in the intermediate-risk group, patients who underwent to RP had a higher CSS than patients who underwent IMRT (99.6% vs 94.1%, p = 0.003). The IMRT group had a significantly better BDFS than the RP group (86.4% vs. 74.3%, respectively, p = 0.016). Conclusions Patients treated with RP were significantly younger and had a better prognosis than patients treated using IMRT, and according to our results, RP had better outcomes in terms of OS while IMRT had greater MOC. Treatment modality did not affect the CSS.
dc.fuente.origenBiomed Central
dc.identifier.citationBMC Cancer. 2013 Nov 08;13(1):530
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1471-2407-13-530
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/26674
dc.issue.numeroNo. 530
dc.language.isoen
dc.pagina.final9
dc.pagina.inicio1
dc.revistaBMC Canceres_ES
dc.rightsacceso abierto
dc.rights.holderMerino et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.subject.ddc610
dc.subject.deweyMedicina y saludes_ES
dc.subject.otherCáncer de próstataes_ES
dc.subject.otherCáncer de próstata - Diagnósticoes_ES
dc.subject.otherCáncer de próstata - Radioterapiaes_ES
dc.titleIntensity-modulated radiotherapy versus radical prostatectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer: long-term follow-upes_ES
dc.typeartículo
dc.volumenVol. 13
sipa.codpersvinculados119017
sipa.codpersvinculados152729
sipa.codpersvinculados99112
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
12885_2013_Article_4162.pdf
Size:
825.47 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
0 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos de revistas