Expert Point of View: Fewer Rectal Side Effects with IMRT than with 3D-CRT for Prostate Cancer

Get Permission

2.17.09_crook.jpgAlthough the early toxicity findings of RTOG 0126 seem to favor IMRT over 3D-CRT, formal discussant of this trial, Juanita Crook, MD, FRCPC, of the British Columbia Cancer Agency, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, put the study’s findings in perspective. “Whether or not this is a significant finding depends on the importance of dose escalation,” she stated.

Dr. Crook added that although dose escalation is clearly desirable, IMRT may not be the most effective means of achieving this. Current trials are comparing the efficacy of IMRT to other means of dose escalation, such as brachytherapy boost using either LDR or HDR implants.

In addition, Dr. Crook addressed two other caveats about these preliminary toxicity findings. First, RTOG 0126 is not a randomized comparison, but rather, a planned stratification. “We often seem to embrace technology without level 1 evidence and then have to pursue the evidence after widespread adoption,” she declared. Second, the study was conducted largely in the era before image-guided radiation therapy. ■

Disclosure: Dr. Crook reported no potential conflicts of interest.

Related Articles

Fewer Rectal Side Effects with IMRT than with 3D-CRT for Prostate Cancer

The use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is associated with fewer acute and late toxic effects than is three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in men with localized prostate cancer, according to preliminary analysis of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0126...




By continuing to browse this site you permit us and our partners to place identification cookies on your browser and agree to our use of cookies to identify you for marketing. Read our Privacy Policy to learn more.