Analysis of the frequency of radiation therapy complications in patients with prostate cancer

Cover Page


Aim. Study of the frequency of radiation therapy complications in patients with prostate cancer.

Methods. The study included 142 patients who underwent radiation therapy combined with hormonal therapy in 2001-2015. Average age of patients was 68 years. All of them received 3D-conformal radiotherapy by linear accelerators with 6 to 15 MV photon beams. Single boost dose was 2 Gy, total boost dose was 75 Gy. We studied frequency and severity of acute hematological toxicity and early and late gastroenterological and urological complications of the treatment. Treatment-related toxicity was assessed by RTOG/ EORTC and CTCAE v. 4.0 scales.

Results. Early radiation-induced proctitis of I, II and III degree were registered in 95 (66.9%), 32 (22.5%) and 8 (5.6%) patients, respectively. Acute cystitis of I, II and III degree were noted in 22 (15.5%), 87 (61.3%) and 16 (11.3%) patients, respectively. Signs of late radiation-induced proctitis of I degree was diagnosed in 21 (14.8%) cases. Late radiation-induced cystitis of I degree was diagnoswed in 37 (26.1%) patients. No late complications of higher severity occurred.

Conclusion. The results of the conducted study showed that use of high-tech precision external-beam radiotherapy techniques in the treatment of prostate cancer along with high efficacy allows to reduce the number of early and late complications.

I G Isaev

Author for correspondence.
National center of oncology Baku, Azerbaijan

F A Guliev
National center of oncology Baku, Azerbaijan

K S Akperov
National center of oncology Baku, Azerbaijan

N R Alieva
National center of oncology Baku, Azerbaijan

  • Hoyer M., Muren L., Glimelius B. The evolution of radiotherapy techniques in the management of prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2015; 54 (6): 821-824. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2015.1048555.
  • Kang S.W., Chung J.B., Kim J.S. et al. Optimal planning strategy among various arc arrangements for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy with volumetric modulated arc therapy technique. Radiol. Oncol. 2017; 51 (1): 112-120. doi: 10.1515/raon-2017-0005.
  • Mason M., Moore R., Jones G. et al. Radiotherapy for prostate cancer: is it «what you do» or «the way that you do it»? A UK perspective on technique and quality assurance. Clin. Oncol. 2016; 28 (9): 92-100. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2016.05.011.
  • Nabavizadeh N., Elliott D., Chen Y. et al. Image Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) practice patterns and IGRT’s impact on workflow and treatment planning: Results from a National Survey of American Society for Radiation Oncology Members. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2016; 94 (4): 850-857. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.09.035.
  • Saad A., Goldstein J., Lawrence Y. et al. Classifying high-risk versus very high-risk prostate cancer: is it relevant to outcomes of conformal radiotherapy and androgen deprivation? Radiat. Oncol. 2017; 12 (1): 14-16. doi: 10.1186/s13014-016-0743-2.
  • Stankovic V., Nikitovic M., Pekmezovic T. et al. Toxicity of the lower gastrointestinal tract and its predictive factors after 72 Gy conventionally fractionated 3D conformal radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer. J. BUON. 2016; 21 (5): 1224-1232.
  • Diao K., Lobos E., Yirmibesoglu E. et al. Patient-reported quality of life during definitive and postprostatectomy image-guided radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Pract. Radiat. Oncol. 2017; 7 (2): 117-124. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2016.08.004.
  • Mirjolet C., Walker P., Gauthier M. et al. Absolute volume of the rectum and AUC from rectal DVH between 25 Gy and 50 Gy predict acute gastrointestinal toxicity with IG-IMRT in prostate cancer. Radiat. Oncol. 2016; 11 (1): 145-147. doi: 10.1186/s13014-016-0721-8.
  • Shimizuguchi T., Nihei K., Okano T. et al. A comparison of clinical outcomes between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Int. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017; 22 (2): 373-379. doi: 10.1007/s10147-016-1057-y.
  • Bedford J., Smyth G., Hanson I. et al. Quality of treatment plans and accuracy of in vivo portal dosimetry in hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer. Radiother. Oncol. 2016; 120 (2): 320-326. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.07.004.
  • Jereczek-Fossa B., Ciardo D., Ferrario S. et al. No increase in toxicity of pelvic irradiation when intensity modulation is employed: clinical and dosimetric data of 208 patients treated with post-prostatectomy radiotherapy. Br. J. Radiol. 2016; 89 (1063): 20150985. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20150985.
  • Drozdz S., Schwedas M., Salz H. et al. Prostate cancer treated with image-guided helical TomoTherapy® and image-guided LINAC-IMRT: Correlation between high-dose bladder volume, margin reduction, and genitourinary toxicity. Strahlenther Onkol. 2016; 192 (4): 223-231. doi: 10.1007/s00066-015-0935-y.
  • Sini C., Fiorino C., Perna L. et al. Dose-volume effects for pelvic bone marrow in predicting hematological toxicity in prostate cancer radiotherapy with pelvic node irradiation. Radiother. Oncol. 2016; 118 (1): 79-84. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.11.020.
  • Morikawa L.K., Roach M. 3rd. Pelvic nodal radiotherapy in patients with unfavorable intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer: evidence, rationale, and future directions. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011; 80 (1): 6-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.11.074.
  • Cox J., Stetz J., Pajak T. Toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Researchand Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1995; 1 (5): 1341-1346. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(95)00060-C.
  • Holch P., Henry A., Davidson S. et al. Acute and late adverse events associated with radical radiation therapy prostate cancer treatment: A systematic review of clinician and patient toxicity reporting in randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2017; 97 (3): 495-510. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.11.008.
  • Bruner D., Hunt D., Michalski J. et al. Preliminary patient-reported outcomes analysis of 3-dimensional radiation therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy on the high-dose arm of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0126 prostate cancer trial. Cancer. 2015; 121 (14): 2422-2430. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29362.
  • Wortel R., Incrocci L., Pos F. et al. Acute toxicity after image-guided intensity modulated radiation therapy compared to 3D conformal radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2015; 91 (4): 737-744. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.12.017.
  • Girelli G., Franco P., Sciacero P. et al. Image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer employing hypofractionation and simultaneous integrated boost: Results of a consecutive case series with focus on erectile function. Anticancer Res. 2015; 35 (7): 4177-4182. PMID: 26124375.
  • Cakir A., Akgun Z., Fayda M. Comparison of three dimensional conformal radiation therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for low radiation exposure of normal tissue in patients with prostate cancer. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2015; 16 (8): 3365-3370. doi: 10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.8.3365.


Abstract - 10

PDF (Russian) - 11

© 2017 Isaev I.G., Guliev F.A., Akperov K.S., Alieva N.R.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.