A recent medical study has revealed that shorter radiation therapy after prostate surgery is just as safe and effective as traditional, longer-duration treatments. Researchers found that stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT)—a high-dose radiation treatment delivered in just five sessions—results in similar side effects and quality-of-life outcomes compared to conventional radiotherapy schedules. This discovery could provide a more convenient and cost-effective treatment path for prostate cancer patients without compromising clinical effectiveness.
The study was conducted by a team at UCLA Health’s Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center and published in JAMA Oncology in May 2025. It evaluated the safety and efficacy of SBRT as a postoperative treatment for prostate cancer, comparing it to conventional external beam radiation therapy that typically requires over 30 sessions. The findings suggest that SBRT can offer comparable outcomes while significantly reducing the treatment timeline.
Dr. Amar Kishan, senior author of the study and executive vice chair of radiation oncology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, emphasized the multiple benefits of SBRT. He noted that shorter treatment times not only ease the burden on patients but also reduce healthcare system costs. Dr. Kishan stated that this approach might offer biological advantages by delivering radiation more precisely and effectively over fewer sessions.
The researchers highlighted that recent advancements in imaging and treatment planning technologies have made SBRT increasingly viable. With better targeting capabilities, high-dose radiation can now be delivered more accurately to tumor sites while minimizing exposure to surrounding healthy tissue. These improvements reduce the risk of complications and enhance the safety profile of this treatment option.
The study followed a group of post-surgery prostate cancer patients over time, monitoring for side effects, cancer recurrence, and changes in quality of life. Outcomes such as urinary, gastrointestinal, and sexual function were assessed, and the results showed no significant differences between those who received SBRT and those treated with conventional methods. These consistent outcomes bolster confidence in adopting SBRT more widely in clinical practice.
This research supports an evolving shift in cancer care that prioritizes patient convenience and improved quality of life alongside treatment efficacy. For prostate cancer patients, the burden of daily radiation appointments can be a major concern, especially for those who live far from treatment centers. A five-session approach could dramatically ease this logistical challenge, potentially improving treatment adherence and outcomes.
Medical institutions and healthcare policymakers are already taking notice of these findings. If further validated in larger, long-term studies, SBRT could become a new standard of care for prostate cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy after surgery. It would also free up healthcare resources, allowing radiotherapy departments to treat more patients in less time.
In conclusion, the study provides strong evidence that shorter courses of radiation using SBRT are a safe and effective alternative for men recovering from prostate cancer surgery. With the promise of maintaining treatment efficacy while enhancing convenience, this approach may soon redefine best practices in radiation oncology. Further research and continued technological innovation will be key in expanding access to this treatment option for more patients.