PPP02 演讲时间:上午 10:39

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1016/j.brachy.2024.08.094
Irini Youssef MD, Rahul Barve MD, Victoria Brennan MD, Daniel Gorovets MD, Daniel Shasha MD, Sankalp Pandya BSc, MRes, Joel Beaudry MS, Antonio Damato PhD, Marisa Kollmeier MD
{"title":"PPP02 演讲时间:上午 10:39","authors":"Irini Youssef MD,&nbsp;Rahul Barve MD,&nbsp;Victoria Brennan MD,&nbsp;Daniel Gorovets MD,&nbsp;Daniel Shasha MD,&nbsp;Sankalp Pandya BSc, MRes,&nbsp;Joel Beaudry MS,&nbsp;Antonio Damato PhD,&nbsp;Marisa Kollmeier MD","doi":"10.1016/j.brachy.2024.08.094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Erectile function is a significant quality of life consideration for patients electing definitive radiation therapy. We compared erectile outcomes following low dose rate (LDR) relative to stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as monotherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer.</div></div><div><h3>Methods/Materials</h3><div>Using a prospectively collected institutional database, we retrospectively analyzed the charts of patients who underwent LDR (I-125; 144Gy or Pd-103; 125Gy) brachytherapy or SBRT as monotherapy for prostate cancer and were potent (IIEF-5&gt;20) at baseline. Patient-reported erectile function was measured at baseline at each post-treatment followup using IIEF-5 (International Index of Erectile Function). The use of erectile medications was also collected at each timepoint. Clinical (smoking history (none vs former/current), hypertension(yes/no) diabetes (yes/no) and dosimetric parameters were also collected.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The study cohort included 112 patients undergoing LDR and 171 patients undergoing SBRT with a median followup of 31 months for both cohorts. Mean D90% for brachytherapy patients was 111.4%. Median SBRT dose was 4000 (range 3750-4500). 92% of patients received 4000 cGy. Mean age for SBRT patients is 66.7 years (SD±6.8) and 60.5 (SD±71) for brachytherapy patients (p&lt;.001). There were no significant difference in smoking status (p=0.317), hypertension (p= 43) or diabetes (p= 0.18) between cohorts. There was no difference between cohorts with respect to mean baseline IIEF (27; range (21-30) (p=0.8). Mean IIEF at 12 mo ±3 was 20.6 for SBRT group versus 24.1 for brachytherapy group (P=.007). At 18 mo±3 mo, it was 20.35 for SBRT group versus 23.28 for brachytherapy group (P=.03). At 24 mo±3mo, it was 20.2 for the SBRT group versus 25.9 for the brachytherapy group (P&lt;.001). 63% (N=107) versus 72% (N=79) patients in the SBRT and brachytherapy group, respectively, were on ED medications following treatment (P=.07).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Overall erectile preservation with IIEF &gt;20 is high with both LDR and SBRT monotherapy. Higher mean IIEF scores were noted at multiple timepoints for LDR compared with SBRT. Further analyses are needed to assess whether these differences are clinically meaningful.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PPP02 Presentation Time: 10:39 AM\",\"authors\":\"Irini Youssef MD,&nbsp;Rahul Barve MD,&nbsp;Victoria Brennan MD,&nbsp;Daniel Gorovets MD,&nbsp;Daniel Shasha MD,&nbsp;Sankalp Pandya BSc, MRes,&nbsp;Joel Beaudry MS,&nbsp;Antonio Damato PhD,&nbsp;Marisa Kollmeier MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.brachy.2024.08.094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Erectile function is a significant quality of life consideration for patients electing definitive radiation therapy. We compared erectile outcomes following low dose rate (LDR) relative to stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as monotherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer.</div></div><div><h3>Methods/Materials</h3><div>Using a prospectively collected institutional database, we retrospectively analyzed the charts of patients who underwent LDR (I-125; 144Gy or Pd-103; 125Gy) brachytherapy or SBRT as monotherapy for prostate cancer and were potent (IIEF-5&gt;20) at baseline. Patient-reported erectile function was measured at baseline at each post-treatment followup using IIEF-5 (International Index of Erectile Function). The use of erectile medications was also collected at each timepoint. Clinical (smoking history (none vs former/current), hypertension(yes/no) diabetes (yes/no) and dosimetric parameters were also collected.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The study cohort included 112 patients undergoing LDR and 171 patients undergoing SBRT with a median followup of 31 months for both cohorts. Mean D90% for brachytherapy patients was 111.4%. Median SBRT dose was 4000 (range 3750-4500). 92% of patients received 4000 cGy. Mean age for SBRT patients is 66.7 years (SD±6.8) and 60.5 (SD±71) for brachytherapy patients (p&lt;.001). There were no significant difference in smoking status (p=0.317), hypertension (p= 43) or diabetes (p= 0.18) between cohorts. There was no difference between cohorts with respect to mean baseline IIEF (27; range (21-30) (p=0.8). Mean IIEF at 12 mo ±3 was 20.6 for SBRT group versus 24.1 for brachytherapy group (P=.007). At 18 mo±3 mo, it was 20.35 for SBRT group versus 23.28 for brachytherapy group (P=.03). At 24 mo±3mo, it was 20.2 for the SBRT group versus 25.9 for the brachytherapy group (P&lt;.001). 63% (N=107) versus 72% (N=79) patients in the SBRT and brachytherapy group, respectively, were on ED medications following treatment (P=.07).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Overall erectile preservation with IIEF &gt;20 is high with both LDR and SBRT monotherapy. Higher mean IIEF scores were noted at multiple timepoints for LDR compared with SBRT. Further analyses are needed to assess whether these differences are clinically meaningful.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1538472124002307\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1538472124002307","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的勃起功能是选择确定性放射治疗患者生活质量的一个重要考虑因素。我们比较了局部前列腺癌患者接受低剂量率(LDR)和立体定向体放射治疗(SBRT)作为单一疗法后的勃起功能结果。方法/材料利用前瞻性收集的机构数据库,我们回顾性分析了接受 LDR(I-125;144Gy 或 Pd-103;125Gy)近距离放射治疗或 SBRT 作为单一疗法治疗前列腺癌且基线时勃起功能良好(IIEF-5>20)的患者的病历。患者报告的勃起功能在治疗后的每次随访中使用 IIEF-5(国际勃起功能指数)进行基线测量。在每个时间点还收集了勃起药物的使用情况。此外,还收集了临床(吸烟史(无与曾经/现在)、高血压(是/否)、糖尿病(是/否))和剂量学参数。结果研究队列包括112名接受LDR治疗的患者和171名接受SBRT治疗的患者,两组患者的中位随访时间均为31个月。近距离放射治疗患者的平均 D90% 为 111.4%。中位 SBRT 剂量为 4000(范围为 3750-4500)。92%的患者接受了4000 cGy的治疗。SBRT患者的平均年龄为66.7岁(SD±6.8),近距离治疗患者的平均年龄为60.5岁(SD±71)(p<.001)。各组间的吸烟状况(p=0.317)、高血压(p= 43)或糖尿病(p= 0.18)无明显差异。各组间基线 IIEF 平均值(27;范围(21-30))无差异(p=0.8)。12个月(±3个月)时,SBRT组的平均IIEF为20.6,近距离治疗组为24.1(P=0.007)。在 18 个月(±3 个月)时,SBRT 组的平均 IIEF 为 20.35,而近距离治疗组为 23.28(P=.03)。在 24 个月(±3 个月)时,SBRT 组为 20.2,近距离治疗组为 25.9(P< .001)。SBRT组和近距离放射治疗组分别有63%(N=107)和72%(N=79)的患者在治疗后服用ED药物(P=.07)。与 SBRT 相比,LDR 在多个时间点的平均 IIEF 分数更高。这些差异是否具有临床意义还需要进一步分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
PPP02 Presentation Time: 10:39 AM

Purpose

Erectile function is a significant quality of life consideration for patients electing definitive radiation therapy. We compared erectile outcomes following low dose rate (LDR) relative to stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as monotherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer.

Methods/Materials

Using a prospectively collected institutional database, we retrospectively analyzed the charts of patients who underwent LDR (I-125; 144Gy or Pd-103; 125Gy) brachytherapy or SBRT as monotherapy for prostate cancer and were potent (IIEF-5>20) at baseline. Patient-reported erectile function was measured at baseline at each post-treatment followup using IIEF-5 (International Index of Erectile Function). The use of erectile medications was also collected at each timepoint. Clinical (smoking history (none vs former/current), hypertension(yes/no) diabetes (yes/no) and dosimetric parameters were also collected.

Results

The study cohort included 112 patients undergoing LDR and 171 patients undergoing SBRT with a median followup of 31 months for both cohorts. Mean D90% for brachytherapy patients was 111.4%. Median SBRT dose was 4000 (range 3750-4500). 92% of patients received 4000 cGy. Mean age for SBRT patients is 66.7 years (SD±6.8) and 60.5 (SD±71) for brachytherapy patients (p<.001). There were no significant difference in smoking status (p=0.317), hypertension (p= 43) or diabetes (p= 0.18) between cohorts. There was no difference between cohorts with respect to mean baseline IIEF (27; range (21-30) (p=0.8). Mean IIEF at 12 mo ±3 was 20.6 for SBRT group versus 24.1 for brachytherapy group (P=.007). At 18 mo±3 mo, it was 20.35 for SBRT group versus 23.28 for brachytherapy group (P=.03). At 24 mo±3mo, it was 20.2 for the SBRT group versus 25.9 for the brachytherapy group (P<.001). 63% (N=107) versus 72% (N=79) patients in the SBRT and brachytherapy group, respectively, were on ED medications following treatment (P=.07).

Conclusion

Overall erectile preservation with IIEF >20 is high with both LDR and SBRT monotherapy. Higher mean IIEF scores were noted at multiple timepoints for LDR compared with SBRT. Further analyses are needed to assess whether these differences are clinically meaningful.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Differential Costs of Raising Grandchildren on Older Mother-Adult Child Relations in Black and White Families. Does Resilience Mediate the Relationship Between Negative Self-Image and Psychological Distress in Middle-Aged and Older Gay and Bisexual Men? Intergenerational Relations and Well-being Among Older Middle Eastern/Arab American Immigrants During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Caregiving Appraisals and Emotional Valence: Moderating Effects of Activity Participation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1