■尽管调强放射治疗(IMRT)和质子束治疗(PBT)都为局部前列腺癌(PCa)提供了有效的长期疾病控制,有有限的数据直接比较两种模式。
■回顾性分析了334例接受常规分割(79.2GyRBE,44个分次)PBT或IMRT治疗的患者的数据。倾向评分匹配用于平衡与无生化衰竭生存(BFFS)相关的因素。年龄,种族,和合并症(不是BFFS关联)在匹配后仍然不平衡。使用单变量和协变量调整的多变量(MVA)Cox回归模型来确定模态是否影响BFFS。
■在334名患者中,176(52.7%)被纳入与国家综合癌症网络(NCCN)风险组完全匹配的匹配队列。中位随访时间为9.0年(四分位数范围[IQR]:7.8-10.2年),IMRT和PBT匹配组之间的长期BFFS相似,8年估计为85%(95%CI:76%-91%)和91%(95%CI:82%-96%,P=.39),分别。在MVA上,在不匹配(风险比[HR]=0.75,95%CI:0.35-1.63,P=.47)和匹配(HR=0.87,95%CI:0.33-2.33,P=.78)队列中,模态与BFFS均无显著相关.前列腺癌特异性生存期(PCSS)和总生存期(OS)也相似(P>0.05)。然而,在无与伦比的分析中,PBT组的继发性癌症发生率明显较低(0.6%,95%CI:0.0%-3.1%对4.5%,95%CI:1.8%-9.0%,P=.028)。
■PBT和IMRT都为PCa提供了出色的长期疾病控制,两种模式在BFFS中没有显着差异,PCSS,匹配患者的OS。在无与伦比的队列中,在PBT组中,继发性恶性肿瘤的发生率较低;然而,由于两组之间继发性癌症的总体发病率低和患者特征不平衡,这些数据是严格的假设生成,需要进一步调查。
UNASSIGNED: Although both intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) offer effective long-term disease control for localized prostate cancer (PCa), there are limited data directly comparing the 2 modalities.
UNASSIGNED: The data from 334 patients treated with conventionally fractionated (79.2 GyRBE in 44 fractions) PBT or IMRT were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to balance factors associated with biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS). Age, race, and comorbidities (not BFFS associates) remained imbalanced after matching. Univariable and covariate-adjusted multivariable (MVA) Cox regression models were used to determine if modality affected BFFS.
UNASSIGNED: Of 334 patients, 176 (52.7%) were included in the matched cohort with exact matching to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group. With a median follow-up time of 9.0 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 7.8-10.2 years), long-term BFFS was similar between the IMRT and PBT matched arms with 8-year estimates of 85% (95% CI: 76%-91%) and 91% (95% CI: 82%-96%, P = .39), respectively. On MVA, modality was not significantly associated with BFFS in both the unmatched (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.35-1.63, P = .47) and matched (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.33-2.33, P = .78) cohorts. Prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) and overall survival (OS) were also similar (P > .05). However, in an unmatched analysis, the PBT arm had significantly fewer incidences of secondary cancers within the irradiated field (0.6%, 95% CI: 0.0%-3.1% versus 4.5%, 95% CI: 1.8%-9.0%, P = .028).
UNASSIGNED: Both PBT and IMRT offer excellent long-term disease control for PCa, with no significant differences between the 2 modalities in BFFS, PCSS, and OS in matched patients. In the unmatched cohort, fewer incidences of secondary malignancy were noted in the PBT group; however, owing to overall low incidence of secondary cancer and imbalanced patient characteristics between the 2 groups, these data are strictly hypothesis generating and require further investigation.