Clinical Outcomes of CyberKnife Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Patients: Short-term, Single-Center Experience.
10.4111/kju.2014.55.3.172
- Author:
Dong Hoon KOH
1
;
Jin Bum KIM
;
Hong Wook KIM
;
Young Seop CHANG
;
Hyung Joon KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Konyang University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea. hjkim@kyuh.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Prostate cancer;
Recurrence;
Stereotactic radiosurgery;
Toxicity
- MeSH:
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Lost to Follow-Up;
Prostate*;
Prostatic Neoplasms*;
Radiosurgery;
Radiotherapy*;
Recurrence;
Retrospective Studies
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2014;55(3):172-177
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: In this retrospective study, we analyzed the outcomes of prostate cancer patients treated with the CyberKnife radiotherapy system (Accuray). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2007 and 2010, 31 patients were treated for prostate cancer by use of the CyberKnife radiotherapy system. After excluding six patients who were lost to follow-up, data for the remaining 25 patients were analyzed. Patients were divided into the CyberKnife monotherapy group and a postexternal beam radiotherapy boost group. Clinicopathologic features and treatment outcomes were compared between the groups. The primary endpoint was biochemical recurrence-free survival period based on the Phoenix definition. Toxicities were evaluated by using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scoring criteria. RESULTS: Of 25 patients, 17 (68%) and 8 (32%) were classified in the monotherapy and boost groups, respectively. With a median follow-up of 29.3 months, most of the toxicities were grade 1 or 2 except for one patient in the boost group who experienced late grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity. The overall biochemical recurrence rate was 20% (5/25) and the median time to biochemical recurrence was 51.9 months. None of the patients with low or intermediate risk had experienced biochemical recurrence during follow-up. Among D'Amico high-risk populations, 16.7% (1/6) in the monotherapy group and 50.0% (4/8) in the boost group experienced biochemical recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support that prostate cancer treatment by use of the CyberKnife radiotherapy system is feasible. The procedure can be a viable option for managing prostate cancer either in a monotherapy setting or as a boost after conventional radiotherapy regardless of the patient's risk stratification.
