Quality of life after pelvic radiotherapy with hypofractionated IMRT boost and long-term hormone therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
75 Background: Combined radiotherapy (RT) and long-term hormonal therapy (HT) is a standard treatment option for high-risk prostate cancer. Dose escalated RT alone has been shown to improve disease free survival. Increased sensitivity of prostate cancer to high doses per fraction has led to hypofractionation as a method to radiobiologically escalate dose.We report on the quality of life of patients treated with combined hypofractionated RT and HT. Methods: A prospective phase I/II study enrolling patients with any of: clinical T3, PSA ≥20, or Gleason 8-10. Forty-five Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction) was delivered to the pelvic nodes with a concomitant 22.5 Gy intensity-modulated RT boost to the prostate, for a total of 67.5 Gy (2.7 Gy/fraction) in 25 fractions over 5 weeks. Hormonal therapy was administered for 2-3 years. Patient reported outcomes were measured at baseline and every 6 months using the validated Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire, which measures urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal domains. Results: Sixty patients with a minimum 24 months of patient-reported outcomes were analyzed. Mean scores comparing baseline to 24 month values are reported. There were no statistically significant changes in the urinary summary scores (86.3 vs. 86.0, p=0.45) or any of the urinary subscales (function, bother, incontinence, irritative/obstructive). Domain summary score decreases were observed in: bowel by 4.4% (94.7 vs. 90.3, p<0.01), sexual by 27% (44.5 vs. 17.5, p<0.01), and hormonal by 11.9% (93.1 vs. 81.2, p<0.01). Examining time trends in outcomes, most changes occurred within the first 6 months with smaller changes thereafter. Conclusions: Hypofractionated RT combined with long-term HT is associated with good patient-reported urinary and bowel outcomes at 24 months. Sexual and hormonal summary scores are affected, largely due to continued androgen deprivation therapy. Further follow-up is needed to document patient reported outcomes after testosterone recovery. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".