Randomized EBRT versus cryo for CaP -- QofL issues

[Guest guest]

Radiotherapy (EBRT) and cryotherapy (cryo) are two treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer (CaP). However, few randomized trials exist comparing any primary CaP treatments. In the online version of Cancer,

researchers at the Tom Baker Cancer Center in

Calgary, Canada present their single institution series comparing EBRT

and cryo....Click on the below link for the full story:<http://www.urotoday.com/61/browse_categories/prostate_cancer/editorial__a_randomized_trial_of_external_beam_radiotherapy_versus_cryoablation_in_patients_with_localized_prostate_cancer_quality_of_life_outcomes01222010.html>

Non-doctors are welcome to browse within UroToday.combut you'll be requested to register, which you can safely do, since this professional medical site never sends spam!

[Guest guest]

An interesting study. I thought that the

last two sentences were important for a number of reason – and if only to

illustrate how important detail is in looking at this kind of Abstract. The

sentences deal with the issue that is regarded as of very significant importance

by most men – will I be able to have sexual intercourse. Although the

comments only refer to the position at 36 months – why when the median

follow up on the study was 100 months?? It is said that deterioration in sexual

function can continue for many years after radiation. Could that have something

to do with the relatively short reporting period? Surely not.

But here are the two sentences:

1. <snip> Regarding percent of

potent men pre-treatment who reported spontaneous erections at 36 months, there

were 14% in the cryo arm compared with 66.7% for the EBRT arm. <snip> That

looks bad for cryo as first choice – more than four times as many EBRT men

had spontaneous erections. BUT…..

2. <snip> At 36 months 29.1% of cryo

patients who were sexually active pre-treatment reported assisted or unassisted

intercourse compared with 29.8% in the EBRT arm. <snip> So…it

seems all those spontaneous erections in the EBRT men were mainly for show, and

with a bit of help the cryo men could perform as well as the EBRT men.

In passing, you’d have to look at

the study, maybe, to see if “potent men pre-treatment” means

precisely the same as “sexually active pre-treatment” and see if

you match the definitions.

All the best

Terry Herbert

I have no medical

qualifications but I was diagnosed in ‘96: and have learned a bit since

then.

My sites are at www.yananow.net and www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za

Dr

“Snuffy” Myers : " As a physician, I am painfully aware that most of

the decisions we make with regard to prostate cancer are made with inadequate

data "

From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of B

Sent: Friday, 22 January 2010 7:01

PM

To:

malemedicalproblems ; malemedicalproblemsgooglegroups; ProstateCancerSupport

Subject:

Randomized EBRT versus cryo for CaP -- QofL issues

Radiotherapy (EBRT) and cryotherapy (cryo)

are two treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer (CaP). However, few

randomized trials exist comparing any primary CaP treatments. In the online

version of Cancer,

researchers at the Tom Baker Cancer

Center in Calgary, Canada

present their single institution series comparing EBRT and cryo....

Click on the below link for the full story:

<http://www.urotoday.com/61/browse_categories/prostate_cancer/editorial__a_randomized_trial_of_external_beam_radiotherapy_versus_cryoablation_in_patients_with_localized_prostate_cancer_quality_of_life_outcomes01222010.html>

Non-doctors are welcome to browse within UroToday.com

but you'll be requested to register, which you can safely do,

since this professional medical site never sends spam!