The use of hydrogel spacer in men undergoing high-dose prostate cancer radiotherapy: results of a prospective phase 2 clinical trial

One-year clinical outcomes of MR-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy with rectal spacer for patients with localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This prospective study aimed to investigate adaptive magnetic resonance (MR)-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy (MRgSBRT) with rectal spacer for localized prostate cancer (PC) and report 1-year clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-four consecutive patients with low- to high-risk localized PC that underwent 5-fraction adaptive MRgSBRT with rectal spacer were enrolled. The dosimetric comparison was performed on a risk- and age-matched cohort treated with MRgSBRT but without a spacer at a similar timepoint. Clinician-reported outcomes were based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Patient-reported outcomes were based on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire at baseline, acute (1-3 months), subacute (4-12 months), and late (> 12 months) phases.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 390 days (range 28-823) and the median age was 70 years (range 58-82). One patient experienced rectal bleeding soon after spacer insertion that subsided before MRgSBRT. The median distance between the midline of the prostate midgland and the rectum after spacer insertion measured 7.8 mm (range 2.6-15.3), and the median length of the spacer was 45.9 mm (range 16.8-62.9) based on T2-weighted MR imaging. The use of spacer resulted in significant improvements in target coverage (V100% > 95% = 98.6% [range 93.4-99.8] for spacer vs. 97.8% [range 69.6-99.7] for non-spacer) and rectal sparing (V95% < 3 cc = 0.7 cc [range 0-4.6] for spacer vs. 4.9 cc [range 0-12.5] for non-spacer). Nine patients (26.5%) experienced grade 1 gastrointestinal toxicities, and no grade ≥ 2 toxicities were observed. During the 1-year follow-up period, EPIC scores for the bowel domain remained stable and were the highest among all other domains.

CONCLUSIONS

MRgSBRT with rectal spacer for localized PC showed exceptional tolerability with minimal gastrointestinal toxicities and satisfactory patient-reported outcomes. Improvements in dosimetry, rectal sparing, and target coverage were achieved with a rectal spacer. Randomized trials are warranted for further validation.

Comprehensive review of the use of hydrogel spacers prior to radiation therapy for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive narrative review of the published data on the impact of hydrogel spacers on rectal dosimetry and toxicity and to outline the practicalities of inserting hydrogel spacers.

RESULTS

A growing body of evidence suggests that the administration of hydrogel spacers is safe and is associated with limited peri-operative morbidity. The impact on rectal dosimetry has been clearly established and use of hydrogel spacers is associated with reduced rectal morbidity. These results have been corroborated by several Phase II and III clinical trials and subsequent meta-analysis. There are several areas for future research, including the role of hydrogel spacers in prostate stereotactic beam radiotherapy and post-radiotherapy local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrogel spacers provide a low-morbidity method to potential reduce rectal toxicity after radiation therapy in men with prostate cancer. Data outlining sexual function and oncological outcomes are limited to date. Future studies, currently being conducted, may provide further clarification of the role of hydrogel spacers in prostate cancer management.

Prostate Cancer Treatment with Pencil Beam Proton Therapy Using Rectal Spacers sans Endorectal Balloons

Purpose

Proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) has been used for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer with low rates of high-grade toxicity and excellent patient-reported quality-of-life metrics. Technological advances such as pencil beam scanning (PBS), Monte Carlo dose calculations, and polyethylene glycol gel rectal spacers have optimized prostate proton therapy. Here, we report the early clinical outcomes of patients treated for localized prostate cancer using modern PBS–PBT with hydrogel rectal spacing and fiducial tracking without the use of endorectal balloons.

Materials and Methods

This is a single institutional review of consecutive patients treated with histologically confirmed localized prostate cancer. Prior to treatment, all patients underwent placement of fiducials into the prostate and insertion of a hydrogel rectal spacer. Patients were typically given a prescription dose of 7920 cGy at 180 cGy per fraction using a Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm. Acute and late toxicity were evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 5. Biochemical failure was defined using the Phoenix definition.

Results

From July 2018 to April 2020, 33 patients were treated (median age, 75 years). No severe acute toxicities were observed. The most common acute toxicity was urinary frequency. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there were no high-grade genitourinary late toxicities; however, one grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. Late erectile dysfunction was common. One treatment failure was observed at 21 months in a patient treated for high-risk prostate cancer.

Conclusion

Early clinical outcomes of patients treated with PBS–PBT using Monte Carlo–based planning, fiducial placement, and rectal spacers sans endorectal balloons demonstrate minimal treatment-related toxicity with good oncologic outcomes. Rectal spacer stabilization without the use of endorectal balloons is feasible for the use of PBS–PBT.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in men with underlying inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Historically, IBD has been thought to increase the underlying risk of radiation related toxicity in the treatment of prostate cancer. In the modern era, contemporary radiation planning and delivery may mitigate radiation-related toxicity in this theoretically high-risk cohort. This is the first manuscript to report clinical outcomes for men diagnosed with prostate cancer and underlying IBD curatively treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

METHODS

A large institutional database of patients (n = 4245) treated with SBRT for adenocarcinoma of the prostate was interrogated to identify patients who were diagnosed with underlying IBD prior to treatment. All patients were treated with SBRT over five treatment fractions using a robotic radiosurgical platform and fiducial tracking. Baseline IBD characteristics including IBD subtype, pre-SBRT IBD medications, and EPIC bowel questionnaires were reviewed for the IBD cohort. Acute and late toxicity was evaluated using the CTCAE version 5.0.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were identified who had underlying IBD prior to SBRT for the curative treatment of prostate cancer. The majority (n = 18) were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis and were being treated with local steroid suppositories for IBD. No biochemical relapses were observed in the IBD cohort with early follow up. High-grade acute and late toxicities were rare (n = 1, grade 3 proctitis) with a median time to any GI toxicity of 22 months. Hemorrhoidal flare was the most common low-grade toxicity observed (n = 3).

CONCLUSION

To date, this is one of the largest groups of patients with IBD treated safely and effectively with radiation for prostate cancer and the only review of patients treated with SBRT. Caution is warranted when delivering therapeutic radiation to patients with IBD, however modern radiation techniques appear to have mitigated the risk of GI side effects.

Perirectal hydrogel spacer placement prior to prostate radiation therapy using a probe-mounted needle guide

•

Perirectal spacer placement minimizes the risk of bowel toxicity from prostate radiation therapy.

•

We show that a novel probe-mounted needle guide can be safely used for perirectal spacer insertion.

•

The main advantage of this device is that it ensures needle visualization throughout the procedure.

In this report we describe our successful adoption of a single-use, probe-mounted, needle guide for perirectal hydrogel spacer placement prior to radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Use of this device eliminates the need for a mechanical stepper unit and facilitates perirectal hydrogel placement by ensuring alignment of the injection needle with the ultrasound probe.

Planning With Patient-Specific Rectal Sub-Region Constraints Decreases Probability of Toxicity in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy

Background: A rectal sub-region (SRR) has been previously identified by voxel-wise analysis in the inferior-anterior part of the rectum as highly predictive of rectal bleeding (RB) in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Translating the SRR to patient-specific radiotherapy planning is challenging as new constraints have to be defined. A recent geometry-based model proposed to optimize the planning by determining the achievable mean doses (AMDs) to the organs at risk (OARs), taking into account the overlap between the planning target volume (PTV) and OAR. The aim of this study was to quantify the SRR dose sparing by using the AMD model in the planning, while preserving the dose to the prostate.

Material and Methods: Three-dimensional volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning dose distributions for 60 patients were computed following four different strategies, delivering 78 Gy to the prostate, while meeting the genitourinary group dose constraints to the OAR: (i) a standard plan corresponding to the standard practice for rectum sparing (STD_pl), (ii) a plan adding constraints to SRR (SRR_pl), (iii) a plan using the AMD model applied to the rectum only (AMD_RECT_pl), and (iv) a final plan using the AMD model applied to both the rectum and the SRR (AMD_RECT_SRR_pl). After PTV dose normalization, plans were compared with regard to dose distributions, quality, and estimated risk of RB using a normal tissue complication probability model.

Results: AMD_RECT_SRR_pl showed the largest SRR dose sparing, with significant mean dose reductions of 7.7, 3, and 2.3 Gy, with respect to the STD_pl, SRR_pl, and AMD_RECT_pl, respectively. AMD_RECT_SRR_pl also decreased the mean rectal dose by 3.6 Gy relative to STD_pl and by 3.3 Gy relative to SRR_pl. The absolute risk of grade ≥1 RB decreased from 22.8% using STD_pl planning to 17.6% using AMD_RECT_SRR_pl considering SRR volume. AMD_RECT_SRR_pl plans, however, showed slightly less dose homogeneity and significant increase of the number of monitor units, compared to the three other strategies.

Conclusion: Compared to a standard prostate planning, applying dose constraints to a patient-specific SRR by using the achievable mean dose model decreased the mean dose by 7.7 Gy to the SRR and may decrease the relative risk of RB by 22%.

Proposed Hydrogel-Implant Quality Score and a Matched-Pair Study for Prostate Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

SpaceOAR hydrogel has been Food and Drug Administration approved to reduce rectal toxicity in prostate radiation therapy. Training and certification for this procedure is performed by the manufacturer, without independent quality measures. We propose a Hydrogel-Implant Quality Score (HIQS) as a surrogate to quantify hydrogel placement accuracy, to assist clinicians in tracking their implant proficiency, and to support quality improvement. A matched-pair study was designed to investigate the benefit of SpaceOAR in rectal dose reduction for low-dose-rate brachytherapy and to validate the principle of the proposed HIQS.

METHODS

Eighty-one prostate patients were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient had SpaceOAR implantation under manufacturer supervision. Postprocedure computed tomography and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging were acquired for radiation planning. A HIQS system was proposed to evaluate the hydrogel placement quality. Hydrogel implantation was performed immediately after LDR seed placement. For each LDR patient, a non-SpaceOAR patient was matched based upon intraoperative rectal dose and prostate coverage. Intraoperative and postoperative rectal dose reduction was compared between SpaceOAR and non-SpaceOAR groups.

RESULTS

The average HIQS was 77 ± 10.8 (range, 49-97). Rectal anatomic distortions were seen in 17 cases. Significant rectal dose reductions between intraoperative and postoperative plans were found for SpaceOAR patients compared with non-SpaceOAR patients (25.1 Gy vs -5.0 Gy for ΔD_2cc and 65.7 Gy vs 13.0 for ΔD_0.1cc). Additional rectal dose reductions (8.4 Gy for ΔD_2cc and 12.7 Gy for ΔD_0.1cc) were found for patients without rectal distortion when SpaceOAR was used.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed HIQS system measured the hydrogel placement quality and provided insights into clinician learning and DVH outcome. SpaceOAR was shown to be effective in reducing rectal dose for LDR patients.