Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09

Background: Although pencil beam scanning (PBS) is the most conformal method for proton beam therapy (PBT) delivery, it is unknown if outcomes differ compared to treatment with passive scatter/uniform scanning (PS/US). This analysis compares patient reported outcomes (PRO) changes following PBS and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mark V. Mishra, Rahul Khairnar, Søren M. Bentzen, Gary Larson, Henry Tsai, Christopher Sinesi, Carlos Vargas, George Laramore, Carl Rossi, Lane Rosen, Kai Sun, William Hartsell
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-05-01
Series:Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630820300161
id doaj-fb5699f1503b4a6e8d256d059d7b84f7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fb5699f1503b4a6e8d256d059d7b84f72021-06-02T12:33:24ZengElsevierClinical and Translational Radiation Oncology2405-63082020-05-01225054Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09Mark V. Mishra0Rahul Khairnar1Søren M. Bentzen2Gary Larson3Henry Tsai4Christopher Sinesi5Carlos Vargas6George Laramore7Carl Rossi8Lane Rosen9Kai Sun10William Hartsell11Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States; Corresponding author at: Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 S. Greene Street, GGK 0101, Baltimore, MD 21201, United States.Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD, United StatesDepartment of Epidemiology & Public Health, Greenebaum Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United StatesProCure Proton Therapy Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United StatesProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ, United StatesHampton University Proton Therapy Institute, Hampton, VA, United StatesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, United StatesUniversity of Washington, Department of Radiation Oncology, Seattle, WA, United StatesCalifornia Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, United StatesWillis-Knighton Proton Therapy Center, Shreveport, LA, United StatesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United StatesNorthwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, Warrenville, IL, United StatesBackground: Although pencil beam scanning (PBS) is the most conformal method for proton beam therapy (PBT) delivery, it is unknown if outcomes differ compared to treatment with passive scatter/uniform scanning (PS/US). This analysis compares patient reported outcomes (PRO) changes following PBS and PS/US for prostate cancer (PC) in a prospective multicenter registry study. Methods: We evaluated PROs with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) instrument for men with localized PC enrolled in PCG 001-09 (NCT01255748). PROs were assessed at baseline and through 12 months of follow-up. We compared mean changes in EPIC scores, as well as the proportions of men experiencing a one- and two-fold minimally important difference (MID) in domain scores, between PBS and PS/US. Multivariate analyses (MVAs) were performed to further evaluate the association between proton modality and PRO changes. Results: Three-hundred-and-four men completed EPIC at baseline; 72 received PBS and 232 received PS/US. The average quality-of-life (QOL) declines from baseline through 12 months did not significantly differ between the two groups. The proportion of men reporting a 1-MID decline at 12 months for PBS and PS/US was 34.3% and 27.4%, respectively, for urinary QOL (P = 0.27); 40. 1% and 40.9% for bowel QOL (P = 0.36); and 30. 1% and 36.6% for sexual QOL (P = 0.94). Corresponding 2-MID declines for PBS and PS/US were observed in 26.9% and 13.2% of men for urinary QOL (P = 0.01), 35.3% and 29.1% for bowel QOL (P = 0.33); and 16.4% and 18.1% for sexual QOL (P = 0.76). The association between proton modality and 2-MID changes in urinary QOL at 12-months remained significant on MVA (P = 0.007). Conclusions: The results of this analysis show differences between PBS and PS/US with regards to two-fold MID changes in urinary function at 12 months, but no differences for average score declines over time. Future studies evaluating PRO measures between the two PBT modalities are warranted.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630820300161
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mark V. Mishra
Rahul Khairnar
Søren M. Bentzen
Gary Larson
Henry Tsai
Christopher Sinesi
Carlos Vargas
George Laramore
Carl Rossi
Lane Rosen
Kai Sun
William Hartsell
spellingShingle Mark V. Mishra
Rahul Khairnar
Søren M. Bentzen
Gary Larson
Henry Tsai
Christopher Sinesi
Carlos Vargas
George Laramore
Carl Rossi
Lane Rosen
Kai Sun
William Hartsell
Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09
Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology
author_facet Mark V. Mishra
Rahul Khairnar
Søren M. Bentzen
Gary Larson
Henry Tsai
Christopher Sinesi
Carlos Vargas
George Laramore
Carl Rossi
Lane Rosen
Kai Sun
William Hartsell
author_sort Mark V. Mishra
title Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09
title_short Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09
title_full Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09
title_fullStr Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09
title_full_unstemmed Patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of PCG 001-09
title_sort patient reported outcomes following proton pencil beam scanning vs. passive scatter/uniform scanning for localized prostate cancer: secondary analysis of pcg 001-09
publisher Elsevier
series Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology
issn 2405-6308
publishDate 2020-05-01
description Background: Although pencil beam scanning (PBS) is the most conformal method for proton beam therapy (PBT) delivery, it is unknown if outcomes differ compared to treatment with passive scatter/uniform scanning (PS/US). This analysis compares patient reported outcomes (PRO) changes following PBS and PS/US for prostate cancer (PC) in a prospective multicenter registry study. Methods: We evaluated PROs with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) instrument for men with localized PC enrolled in PCG 001-09 (NCT01255748). PROs were assessed at baseline and through 12 months of follow-up. We compared mean changes in EPIC scores, as well as the proportions of men experiencing a one- and two-fold minimally important difference (MID) in domain scores, between PBS and PS/US. Multivariate analyses (MVAs) were performed to further evaluate the association between proton modality and PRO changes. Results: Three-hundred-and-four men completed EPIC at baseline; 72 received PBS and 232 received PS/US. The average quality-of-life (QOL) declines from baseline through 12 months did not significantly differ between the two groups. The proportion of men reporting a 1-MID decline at 12 months for PBS and PS/US was 34.3% and 27.4%, respectively, for urinary QOL (P = 0.27); 40. 1% and 40.9% for bowel QOL (P = 0.36); and 30. 1% and 36.6% for sexual QOL (P = 0.94). Corresponding 2-MID declines for PBS and PS/US were observed in 26.9% and 13.2% of men for urinary QOL (P = 0.01), 35.3% and 29.1% for bowel QOL (P = 0.33); and 16.4% and 18.1% for sexual QOL (P = 0.76). The association between proton modality and 2-MID changes in urinary QOL at 12-months remained significant on MVA (P = 0.007). Conclusions: The results of this analysis show differences between PBS and PS/US with regards to two-fold MID changes in urinary function at 12 months, but no differences for average score declines over time. Future studies evaluating PRO measures between the two PBT modalities are warranted.
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630820300161
work_keys_str_mv AT markvmishra patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT rahulkhairnar patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT sørenmbentzen patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT garylarson patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT henrytsai patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT christophersinesi patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT carlosvargas patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT georgelaramore patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT carlrossi patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT lanerosen patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT kaisun patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
AT williamhartsell patientreportedoutcomesfollowingprotonpencilbeamscanningvspassivescatteruniformscanningforlocalizedprostatecancersecondaryanalysisofpcg00109
_version_ 1721404473059835904