Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / August 2006
IMRT vs. 3D-CRT
|
|
Thread rating:  |
MAP - 24 Jul 2006 16:43 GMT Hello All,
I have 2 opinions about radiation post surgery which was on May 10 (my PSA is "undetectable" after surgery. The prostate path report post surgery - seminal vesicle involvement, everything else negative)
Opinion #1: IMRT - dose 5000 units Opinion #2: 3D-CRT - dose 6600 units - This Rad Onc. told me that IMRT is an overkill in my case (he said that he can retire sooner if he does IMRT every time, as it costs more - I wish to get the best treatment no matter what it costs). He also said that 5000 units is not enough, I might as well not go for radiation at such a small dose!
I am leaning towards Option #2 based on my impression of the doctor/his reputation and not the technology. Any comments will be appreciated.
People who got radiation for 6 weeks - What was the fatigue like? Any other effects? Did you take time off from work? Is radiation best in the AM or PM if you continued working during it? I was advised to continue working as it may expedite recovery.
Thank you all in advance.
Steve Jordan - 24 Jul 2006 18:18 GMT > I have 2 opinions about radiation post surgery which was on May 10 (my > PSA is "undetectable" after surgery. The prostate path report post [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > might as well not go for radiation at such a small dose! > Why radiation with such a low PSA? If it's post-RP, then it's "salvage" radiation. Something about the result of the RP is not optimum.
What is to be treated via the RT?
What "units?" Grays?
> I am leaning towards Option #2 based on my impression of the doctor/his > reputation and not the technology. Any comments will be appreciated. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > continue working as it may expedite recovery. > I underwent 76 Gy (Grays) of IMRT ending October 2004. This does not make me an expert, though. I must observe, though, that the contemplated dosages seem rather low. This may be a function of what is to be treated.
Included was 45 Gy to seminal vesicles and 40 to pelvic lymph nodes.
It was "salvage" after unsuccessful cryotherapy.
Can't comment on fatigue, as I was also on adjuvant ADT. I have clocked 18 months of 0.01 ng/mL PSAs, even though I stopped ADT as of the March (monthly) injection.
Had some urinary and fecal urgency for a few weeks. Inconvenient but bearable.
I understand from others and my own experience that it is normally not necessary to take time off work, therefore the time of day of the tx is not important.
Once again, I recommend that MAP explore the authoritative website of the Prostate Cancer Research Institute to learn more. See, http://prostate-cancer.org/index.html
And last, my experience may very well not resemble that of anyone else in the universe. We are all different. Therein lies the risk of depending upon anecdotes of others to make tx decisions.
Regards,
Steve J
"The thing is to expect nothing in particular, but (to) be aware of the lack of enforceable guarantees or enforceable contracts with nature/god/entropy as to the condition or durability of our bodies." -- Brian Brunner, PCa survivor, December 12, 2005 on The Prostate Problems Mailing List Thank you, Brian.
Alan Meyer - 24 Jul 2006 20:18 GMT > Hello All, > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Thank you all in advance. I can't answer all your questions, but I'll share my own experience with you for whatever that's worth.
I was told by two different radiation oncologists that, for my case (radiation as an adjunct to high dose rate brachytherapy) there would be no difference between ordinary 3D and IMRT (which is a refinement of 3D). Both proposed ordinary 3D.
I suspect, but I'm not knowledgeable about this, that there is no difference in effectiveness between the two. If either one puts, say 66 grays on the target, then you get 66 grays either way. The difference is the intensity of the beam from each angle. So if there's a sensitive area, e.g., the anus or bladder that might be in the beam, IMRT can direct a bit less radiation that way by directing a bit more though a different path. At any rate, that's my non-expert understanding.
Whether the IMRT or 3D is important or not may also depend on the dosage. The higher the dose, the more important it may be to try to spare the most sensitive areas. But your rad onc knows vastly more about this than I do.
As to tiredness and working - I had radiation plus Lupron and never missed a day of work and never felt too tired. I got radiation in the morning and went to work afterwards. I was in very good physical shape before treatment and continued to work out during treatment. My ability to workout declined drastically. I went from running 4 miles in 36 minutes to 1 mile in 11 minutes before giving out. But I guess I had enough reserve energy that I never dipped into what I needed for daily life. I believe the loss of energy I did experience was more than 50% due to the Lupron.
Other side effects included bloody ejaculation during sex (such as it was with Lupron), aggravation of a pre-existing hemmorhoid - clearing up a few weeks after treatment, and urinary restriction due to swelling of the tissue around the urethra - causing frequent urination (up 7 times a night at the worst of it.) That lasted about 5 months but was much relieved by Flowmax.
I may also have had some reduction in potency, but it's hard to tell for sure. Getting older has that effect even without treatment.
My big questions for you are the same as Steve's questions.
Are you really sure you need radiation at all? You haven't yet seen a PSA rise. It's conceivable you could go for the rest of your life and never see a rise. If radiation will help you, it will probably help more if taken early than late, but you may not need it.
And secondly, is 66 "units" (grays?) enough? You might do some Pubmed searches for salvage radiation doses for prostate cancer, and look at the cancer.gov and some of the prostate cancer websites for more information.
As I understand it (and I may not understand it at all), you can't treat a small amount of cancer with a small dose and a bigger amount with a bigger dose. There's a certain minimum dose before the radiation starts to do real damage to any cancer cells whether there are few or many of them. Over the last decade or so, the recommendations for minimum dose have gone up.
Good luck.
Alan
Beverley - 25 Jul 2006 03:45 GMT My husband had 5 weeks of EBRT on an IMRT before his brachytherapy. He got in the morning, went to the local hospital, jumped on the table, then went to work, (he was only a few minutes late each day) and put in a full day behind his desk. By the end of his 5 weeks he was going to bed about an hour earlier and he took naps on the weekends. His is not a heavy physical job but it is a high stress "must be accurate" type of job. He works in a cube farm as a computer programmer for a national company. He was 56 YO at the time. He never missed work over it. Bev
> Hello All, > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Thank you all in advance. Bill - 25 Jul 2006 16:16 GMT MAP, first of all I don't think RT as a primary Tx or salvage after brachy or cryo is the same as SRT after RP so make sure you are comparing apples and apples. However, the general SEs may be similar. My retired neurosurgeon cousin recently put me in contact w/ another neuro buddy of his who had just undergone salvage IMRT after RP. Since I had been told in 4/04 at M.D. Anderson that 3D was just as good as IMRT for SRT, one of my first questions was why IMRT as opposed to 3D. This guy's daughter is a doctor at Johns Hopkins and he had consultation from many well-placed doctors. What I gathered is that IMRT is becoming the standard form of RT for all purposes. Supposedly you can get a bigger dose because it is more focused so I don't understand why your IMRT dose is less than the 3D. It could be that more of the IMRT will get to the right place than w/ 3D so it takes less - I don't know. But you need to know those things before you decide. You should also know that many uros and med-oncs consider seminal vesicle involvement not a reason to jump into SRT but a contraindication! You need to seriously evaluate the probability of non-local disease. Not much point in having SRT if you have systemic disease.
Bill Denton RP 2/12/02 PSA .93 Memphis
MAP - 21 Aug 2006 16:55 GMT Hello All,
After reading all your comments, I chose 3D-CRT and will start today at USC. My decision was based upon the reputation of the Radiation Oncologist as I felt more comfortable with his explaination. He also works on the same team as my Euro.
Thanks for your helpful comments.
Bill - 22 Aug 2006 16:20 GMT Good luck, MAP, but I have a couple of questions/observations. You said earlier that IMRT was more expensive but you wanted the best Tx regardless of cost. I think we can all agree w/ that but are you paying for it? If not, and you were, would that have made a difference? Also, Steve, this is adjuvant - not salvage - RT because he has not had a biological failure. Which brings me to the nagging question - MAP, why is is that you are having RT at this time? Did you discuss w/ any of your doctors that SVI is a contraindication? I'm not so much second-guessing but interested in the decision process and factors that went into it.
Bill Denton RP 2/12/02 PSA .96 Memphis
MAP - 23 Aug 2006 16:34 GMT Bill - Here are the answers to your questions
>I think we can all agree w/ that but are you paying for it? If not, and you were, would that have made a difference? I will be paying for very little of it. But if I had to pay for it all, it would not have made a diffrence.
> why is is that you are having RT at this time? Positive margins when they did the biopsy on my prostate post-surgery. They took 60 samples of lymph nodes, they were all negative.
I consulted five specialists before I made my decisions, 2 Uros, 2 Rad Oncologist and one Oncologist. And, I read and read and read... all your posts, a book and online.
Beverley - 22 Aug 2006 21:37 GMT I will not ponder the difference between IMRT and 3D-CRT. I think it is important that you are comfortable with the rad-onc and his reputation/statistics. You will now have an excuse for a nap. You know how they say there are things we can learn for our animals - one is never turn down the opportunity to pee and the other is to catch a nap whenever possible. Good luck! Bev
> Hello All, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Thanks for your helpful comments. Leonard Evens - 23 Aug 2006 16:15 GMT > I will not ponder the difference between IMRT and 3D-CRT. I think it is > important that you are comfortable with the rad-onc and his [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> >>Thanks for your helpful comments. I found Peter Scardino's description of different radiation methods particularly illuminating. According to him, IMRT is a refinement to 3D-CRT, not a separate treatment. Without IMRT, 3D-CRT allows does of about 75 Gys, but with IMRT added, they can go over 80 Gys. the higher the dose, the more likely a cure.
|
|
|