Premium
The National Cancer Data Base Report on increased use of brachytherapy for the treatment of patients with prostate carcinoma in the U.S.
Author(s) -
Mettlin Curtis J.,
Murphy Gerald P.,
McDonald Charles J.,
Menck Herman R.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.052
H-Index - 304
eISSN - 1097-0142
pISSN - 0008-543X
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19991101)86:9<1877::aid-cncr32>3.0.co;2-5
Subject(s) - brachytherapy , medicine , prostate cancer , prostatectomy , stage (stratigraphy) , cancer , radiation therapy , carcinoma , surgery , urology , paleontology , biology
BACKGROUND An increase in the proportion of prostate carcinomas diagnosed at early, potentially curable stages has led to several changes in treatment of patients with this disease. Greater use of radical prostatectomy and external beam radiation has been documented, and recent data suggest that the use of radiation implant (brachytherapy) also has increased. Recent results from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) are available to explore this trend in greater detail. METHODS Data provided by 1758 hospital cancer registries for 435,264 patients diagnosed between 1992 and 1996 were studied. Reported use of brachytherapy was analyzed by year of diagnosis, region, patient age at diagnosis, and tumor grade. RESULTS The proportion of all prostate carcinoma patients treated with brachytherapy increased from 1.4% in 1992 to 3.0% in 1995. Ninety‐six percent of brachytherapy patients were American Joint Committee on Cancer Stage I or II (with tumors classified as T1 or T2). As a proportion of patients in a stage group, the use of brachytherapy was greatest in Stage I; 3.7% of patients in this stage were treated by this modality. The increase in brachytherapy also was greatest among Stage I patients, rising from 2.0% in 1992 to 5.8% in 1996. Rates of use were greatest in the northeastern and southeastern U.S. and least frequently reported by institutions in the Midwest and the South. Brachytherapy was used across a wide range of patient age groups. Analysis by grade showed that 89.8% of patients treated with brachytherapy had well‐differentiated or moderately differentiated tumors. CONCLUSIONS Brachytherapy represented a small component of the overall pattern of care for prostate carcinoma patients in the U.S. during the interval studied. However, the rate of use of this modality for patients with localized prostate carcinoma increased substantially over the 5‐year interval. This may reflect a trend toward more conservative management of prostate carcinoma. Additional monitoring and analysis of the more recent use of brachytherapy for the treatment of prostate carcinoma patients is warranted. [See editorial on pages 1632–4, this issue.] Cancer 1999;86:1877–82. © 1999 American Cancer Society.