Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy

Nicholas Zaorsky, Amy S. Harrison, Edouard J. Trabulsi, Leonard G. Gomella, Timothy N. Showalter, Mark D. Hurwitz, Adam P. Dicker, Robert B. Den

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Conventional treatment options for clinically localized, low-risk prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Advances in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) since the 1980s, the development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) during the 1990s and evidence from radiobiological models - which support the use of high doses per fraction - have developed alongside novel advanced radiotherapy modalities that include high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and proton beam therapy. The relationship between the outcomes of and toxicities experienced by patients with prostate cancer treated with HDR-BT, SBRT and particle-beam therapy should provide urologists and oncologists an understanding of the continually evolving technology in prostate radiotherapy. On the basis of published evidence, conventionally fractionated EBRT with IMRT is considered the standard of care over conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy, whereas HDR-BT boost is an acceptable treatment option for selected patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. SBRT and proton therapy should not be used for patients (regardless of disease risk group) outside the setting of a clinical trial. Finally, comparative effectiveness research should be conducted to provide a framework for evaluating advanced radiotherapy technologies by comparing the benefits and harms of available therapeutic options to optimize the risk:benefit ratio and improve cost effectiveness.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)565-579
Number of pages15
JournalNature Reviews Urology
Volume10
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2013

Fingerprint

Brachytherapy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Radiotherapy
Radiosurgery
Technology
Proton Therapy
Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy
Comparative Effectiveness Research
Image-Guided Radiotherapy
Conformal Radiotherapy
Therapeutics
Standard of Care
Prostatectomy
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Prostate
Odds Ratio
Clinical Trials

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Urology

Cite this

Zaorsky, N., Harrison, A. S., Trabulsi, E. J., Gomella, L. G., Showalter, T. N., Hurwitz, M. D., ... Den, R. B. (2013). Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Nature Reviews Urology, 10(10), 565-579. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.185
Zaorsky, Nicholas ; Harrison, Amy S. ; Trabulsi, Edouard J. ; Gomella, Leonard G. ; Showalter, Timothy N. ; Hurwitz, Mark D. ; Dicker, Adam P. ; Den, Robert B. / Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy. In: Nature Reviews Urology. 2013 ; Vol. 10, No. 10. pp. 565-579.
@article{4372ce0c991c45faa9ce99f9d48322fa,
title = "Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy",
abstract = "Conventional treatment options for clinically localized, low-risk prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Advances in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) since the 1980s, the development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) during the 1990s and evidence from radiobiological models - which support the use of high doses per fraction - have developed alongside novel advanced radiotherapy modalities that include high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and proton beam therapy. The relationship between the outcomes of and toxicities experienced by patients with prostate cancer treated with HDR-BT, SBRT and particle-beam therapy should provide urologists and oncologists an understanding of the continually evolving technology in prostate radiotherapy. On the basis of published evidence, conventionally fractionated EBRT with IMRT is considered the standard of care over conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy, whereas HDR-BT boost is an acceptable treatment option for selected patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. SBRT and proton therapy should not be used for patients (regardless of disease risk group) outside the setting of a clinical trial. Finally, comparative effectiveness research should be conducted to provide a framework for evaluating advanced radiotherapy technologies by comparing the benefits and harms of available therapeutic options to optimize the risk:benefit ratio and improve cost effectiveness.",
author = "Nicholas Zaorsky and Harrison, {Amy S.} and Trabulsi, {Edouard J.} and Gomella, {Leonard G.} and Showalter, {Timothy N.} and Hurwitz, {Mark D.} and Dicker, {Adam P.} and Den, {Robert B.}",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1038/nrurol.2013.185",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "565--579",
journal = "Nature Reviews Urology",
issn = "1759-4812",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "10",

}

Zaorsky, N, Harrison, AS, Trabulsi, EJ, Gomella, LG, Showalter, TN, Hurwitz, MD, Dicker, AP & Den, RB 2013, 'Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy', Nature Reviews Urology, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 565-579. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.185

Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy. / Zaorsky, Nicholas; Harrison, Amy S.; Trabulsi, Edouard J.; Gomella, Leonard G.; Showalter, Timothy N.; Hurwitz, Mark D.; Dicker, Adam P.; Den, Robert B.

In: Nature Reviews Urology, Vol. 10, No. 10, 01.10.2013, p. 565-579.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy

AU - Zaorsky, Nicholas

AU - Harrison, Amy S.

AU - Trabulsi, Edouard J.

AU - Gomella, Leonard G.

AU - Showalter, Timothy N.

AU - Hurwitz, Mark D.

AU - Dicker, Adam P.

AU - Den, Robert B.

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Conventional treatment options for clinically localized, low-risk prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Advances in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) since the 1980s, the development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) during the 1990s and evidence from radiobiological models - which support the use of high doses per fraction - have developed alongside novel advanced radiotherapy modalities that include high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and proton beam therapy. The relationship between the outcomes of and toxicities experienced by patients with prostate cancer treated with HDR-BT, SBRT and particle-beam therapy should provide urologists and oncologists an understanding of the continually evolving technology in prostate radiotherapy. On the basis of published evidence, conventionally fractionated EBRT with IMRT is considered the standard of care over conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy, whereas HDR-BT boost is an acceptable treatment option for selected patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. SBRT and proton therapy should not be used for patients (regardless of disease risk group) outside the setting of a clinical trial. Finally, comparative effectiveness research should be conducted to provide a framework for evaluating advanced radiotherapy technologies by comparing the benefits and harms of available therapeutic options to optimize the risk:benefit ratio and improve cost effectiveness.

AB - Conventional treatment options for clinically localized, low-risk prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Advances in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) since the 1980s, the development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) during the 1990s and evidence from radiobiological models - which support the use of high doses per fraction - have developed alongside novel advanced radiotherapy modalities that include high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and proton beam therapy. The relationship between the outcomes of and toxicities experienced by patients with prostate cancer treated with HDR-BT, SBRT and particle-beam therapy should provide urologists and oncologists an understanding of the continually evolving technology in prostate radiotherapy. On the basis of published evidence, conventionally fractionated EBRT with IMRT is considered the standard of care over conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy, whereas HDR-BT boost is an acceptable treatment option for selected patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. SBRT and proton therapy should not be used for patients (regardless of disease risk group) outside the setting of a clinical trial. Finally, comparative effectiveness research should be conducted to provide a framework for evaluating advanced radiotherapy technologies by comparing the benefits and harms of available therapeutic options to optimize the risk:benefit ratio and improve cost effectiveness.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885587059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84885587059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/nrurol.2013.185

DO - 10.1038/nrurol.2013.185

M3 - Review article

C2 - 24018567

AN - SCOPUS:84885587059

VL - 10

SP - 565

EP - 579

JO - Nature Reviews Urology

JF - Nature Reviews Urology

SN - 1759-4812

IS - 10

ER -

Zaorsky N, Harrison AS, Trabulsi EJ, Gomella LG, Showalter TN, Hurwitz MD et al. Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Nature Reviews Urology. 2013 Oct 1;10(10):565-579. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.185