Several retrospective analyses have suggested that obese men with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have outcomes inferior to those of normal-weight men. However, a recently presented analysis for the first time challenged this association between body mass index (BMI) and treatment failure. It is therefore important to provide further data on this issue.This was a retrospective analysis of 564 men treated with risk-adapted conformal EBRT at a single institution. Low-risk patients received EBRT alone, and the other patients received EBRT plus endocrine treatment. In addition, high-risk patients were treated to higher EBRT doses (74 Gy). A rectal balloon catheter for internal immobilization, which can be identified on portal images, was used in 261 patients (46%). Thus, localization did not rely on bony landmarks alone in these cases.The median BMI was 26, and 15% of patients had BMI >=30. Neither univariate nor multivariate analyses detected any significant impact of BMI on biochemical relapse, prostate cancer-specific survival, or overall survival. The 5-year biochemical relapse rate was 21% and prostate cancerspecific survival 96%.The present analysis of a large cohort of consecutively treated patients suggests that efforts to reduce prostate movement and geographic miss might result in comparable outcomes in obese and normal-weight patients.     «

Several retrospective analyses have suggested that obese men with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have outcomes inferior to those of normal-weight men. However, a recently presented analysis for the first time challenged this association between body mass index (BMI) and treatment failure. It is therefore important to provide further data on this issue.This was a retrospective analysis of 564 men treated with risk-adapted conformal EBRT at a single institution. Low...     »