{"title":"决定前列腺癌的放射治疗:医生的观点。","authors":"E B Krisch, C D Koprowski","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multiple treatment options are available for the radiation therapy of prostate cancer including whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT), prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), as well as proton or neutron beam based therapies and brachytherapy. Numerous technical variations hamper objective assessment of these different treatment modalities. These variations are extensive and often subtle (dose to the prostate, the dose per fraction, number and size of fields, the photon energy, patient positioning, prostatic motion, the use of immobilization devices, 2D or 3D planning for treatment, and others) may cause interpretive uncertainty. Despite this confusion, there is some consensus. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadirs, as well as pretreatment PSA levels, significantly alter outcome. Low-risk patients do well no matter which treatment they receive, although the question of dose-escalation therapy to improve results remains unanswered. High-risk patients do poorly regardless of treatment, although the addition of androgen ablation and dose-escalation therapy may improve results. Quality of life (QOL) studies continue to show a problem for radical prostatectomy (RP) patients secondary to impotence and incontinence and a problem for radiotherapy patients due to gastrointestinal (GI) disturbances. Patients can have access to any specific study through technologies such as the Internet. Although this information can be useful, the subtleties of each different article are usually beyond the understanding of most patients. This report examines some of the new radiotherapy modalities as well as corrects some misconceptions regarding radiotherapy results and morbidity. In addition, we discuss some studies comparing surgery and radiotherapy and attempt to objectively compare different radiation therapy strategies for localized prostate cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":79436,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in urologic oncology","volume":"18 3","pages":"214-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deciding on radiation therapy for prostate cancer: the physician's perspective.\",\"authors\":\"E B Krisch, C D Koprowski\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Multiple treatment options are available for the radiation therapy of prostate cancer including whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT), prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), as well as proton or neutron beam based therapies and brachytherapy. Numerous technical variations hamper objective assessment of these different treatment modalities. These variations are extensive and often subtle (dose to the prostate, the dose per fraction, number and size of fields, the photon energy, patient positioning, prostatic motion, the use of immobilization devices, 2D or 3D planning for treatment, and others) may cause interpretive uncertainty. Despite this confusion, there is some consensus. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadirs, as well as pretreatment PSA levels, significantly alter outcome. Low-risk patients do well no matter which treatment they receive, although the question of dose-escalation therapy to improve results remains unanswered. High-risk patients do poorly regardless of treatment, although the addition of androgen ablation and dose-escalation therapy may improve results. Quality of life (QOL) studies continue to show a problem for radical prostatectomy (RP) patients secondary to impotence and incontinence and a problem for radiotherapy patients due to gastrointestinal (GI) disturbances. Patients can have access to any specific study through technologies such as the Internet. Although this information can be useful, the subtleties of each different article are usually beyond the understanding of most patients. This report examines some of the new radiotherapy modalities as well as corrects some misconceptions regarding radiotherapy results and morbidity. In addition, we discuss some studies comparing surgery and radiotherapy and attempt to objectively compare different radiation therapy strategies for localized prostate cancer.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in urologic oncology\",\"volume\":\"18 3\",\"pages\":\"214-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in urologic oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in urologic oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deciding on radiation therapy for prostate cancer: the physician's perspective.
Multiple treatment options are available for the radiation therapy of prostate cancer including whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT), prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), as well as proton or neutron beam based therapies and brachytherapy. Numerous technical variations hamper objective assessment of these different treatment modalities. These variations are extensive and often subtle (dose to the prostate, the dose per fraction, number and size of fields, the photon energy, patient positioning, prostatic motion, the use of immobilization devices, 2D or 3D planning for treatment, and others) may cause interpretive uncertainty. Despite this confusion, there is some consensus. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadirs, as well as pretreatment PSA levels, significantly alter outcome. Low-risk patients do well no matter which treatment they receive, although the question of dose-escalation therapy to improve results remains unanswered. High-risk patients do poorly regardless of treatment, although the addition of androgen ablation and dose-escalation therapy may improve results. Quality of life (QOL) studies continue to show a problem for radical prostatectomy (RP) patients secondary to impotence and incontinence and a problem for radiotherapy patients due to gastrointestinal (GI) disturbances. Patients can have access to any specific study through technologies such as the Internet. Although this information can be useful, the subtleties of each different article are usually beyond the understanding of most patients. This report examines some of the new radiotherapy modalities as well as corrects some misconceptions regarding radiotherapy results and morbidity. In addition, we discuss some studies comparing surgery and radiotherapy and attempt to objectively compare different radiation therapy strategies for localized prostate cancer.