IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Presentation and Outcomes of First-Degree Relatives Treated with Brachytherapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer


  • Oren Factor
  • Nelson Stone
  • Richard Stocku

    (Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA)


Purpose- To determine if first-degree relatives treated with definitive radiation for clinically localized prostate cancers have similar baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes. Methods- From a prospectively assembled database, we identified a set of first-degree relatives with clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma. Patients were treated with brachytherapy with or without external beam radiation therapy. Biochemical failure was the primary outcome. Toxicities were measured with the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Mount Sinai Erectile Function Score (MSEF). Results - We identified 41 patients including 22 pairs of first-degree relatives. One family included 3 separately treated brothers. The median follow up was 72 months. Eight pairs of first-degree relatives presented with the same Gleason score, representing 36% of pairs. Eleven pairs of relatives (50%) fell in the same NCCN risk category. There were 4 total biochemical failures, representing 9.8% of the cohort. In a single pair of brothers both patients experienced a biochemical failure. Therefore, in two pairs of relatives (9.1%) a different biochemical outcome was experienced. In the pair of brothers who both experienced biochemical failure, both brothers developed metastatic disease. One of the brothers died due to prostate cancer. Amongst pairs of first-degree relatives, 10 pairs (52%) experienced a concordant change in IPSS relative to the average. Fifty percent of pairs experienced concordant changes in MSEF score.

Suggested Citation

  • Oren Factor & Nelson Stone & Richard Stocku, 2018. "Presentation and Outcomes of First-Degree Relatives Treated with Brachytherapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer," Journal Of Urology & Nephrology Studies, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 1(2), pages 33-37, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:abr:oajuns:v:1:y:2018:i:2:p:33-37
    DOI: 10.32474/JUNS.2018.01.000107

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:abr:oajuns:v:1:y:2018:i:2:p:33-37. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mary John). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.