A Patterns of Care Study of the Various Radiation Therapies for Prostate Cancer among Korean Radiation Oncologists in 2006.
- Author:
Jin Hee KIM
1
;
Jae Sung KIM
;
Sung Whan HA
;
Seong Soo SHIN
;
Won PARK
;
Jae Ho CHO
;
Chang Ok SUH
;
Young Taek OH
;
Sei Won SHIN
;
Jae Chul KIM
;
Ji Young JANG
;
Taek Keun NAM
;
Young Min CHOI
;
Il Han KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Keimyung University College of Medicine, Korea. jhkim@dsmc.or.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Prostate cancer;
Radiation;
Patterns of care study
- MeSH:
Biopsy;
Fees and Charges;
Humans;
Korea;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging;
Pelvis;
Prostate;
Prostatectomy;
Prostatic Neoplasms;
Surveys and Questionnaires;
Recurrence;
Seminal Vesicles
- From:The Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
2008;26(2):96-103
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To conduct a nationwide academic hospital patterns of the practice status and principles of radiotherapy for prostate cancer. The survey will help develop the framework of a database of Korean in Patterns of Case Study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire about radiation treatment status and principles was sent to radiation oncologists in charge of prostate cancer treatment at thirteen academic hospitals in Korea. The data was analyzed to find treatment principles among the radiation oncologists when treating prostate cancer. RESULTS: The number of patients with prostate cancer and treated with radiation ranged from 60 to 150 per academic hospital in Seoul City and 10 to 15 outside of Seoul City in 2006. The primary diagnostic methods of prostate cancer included the ultrasound guided biopsy on 6 to 12 prostate sites (mean=9), followed by magnetic resonance imaging and a whole body bone scan. Internal and external immobilizations were used in 61.5% and 76.9%, respectively, with diverse radiation targets. Whole pelvis radiation therapy (dose ranging from 45.0 to 50.4 Gy) was performed in 76.9%, followed by the irradiation of seminal vesicles (54.0~73.8 Gy) in 92.3%. The definitive radiotherapy doses were increased as a function of risk group, but the range of radiation doses was wide (60.0 to 78.5 Gy). Intensity modulated radiation therapy using doses greater than 70 Gy, were performed in 53.8% of academic hospitals. In addition, the simultaneous intra-factional boost (SIB) technique was used in three hospitals; however, the target volume and radiation dose were diverse. Radiation therapy to biochemical recurrence after a radical prostatectomy was performed in 84.6%; however, the radiation dose was variable and the radiation field ranged from whole pelvis to prostate bed. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that a nationwide Korean Patterns of Care Study is necessary for the recommendation of radiation therapy guidelines of prostate cancer.
