High dose rate brachytherapy boost for prostate cancer: A systematic review

Safety of high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for patients with prostate cancer and history of prior chemoradiation for rectal cancer: A case series

PURPOSE

A history of prior pelvic radiation therapy (RT) for rectal cancer is a relative contraindication for definitive RT for prostate cancer. High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy can significantly limit the dose to surrounding tissues compared to external beam RT. However, there is limited data surrounding its safety in patients with prior pelvic RT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective chart review was performed at the University of California, San Francisco to identify patients diagnosed with prostate cancer with a history of pelvic RT for rectal cancer who were treated with high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) between 2006 and 2022. Inclusion criteria were biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer with no evidence of distant disease on clinical examination or imaging, and at least one post-treatment clinic appointment.

RESULTS

Seven patients were treated with salvage HDR-BT at a median interval of 17.7 years after RT for rectal cancer. HDR-BT doses included 3600 cGy in six fractions (n = 5), 2700 cGy in 2 fractions (n=1), or 2800 cGy in four fractions (n = 1). There was no acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity, and 1 patient developed late grade 2 rectal bleeding. Two patients developed acute grade 2 genitourinary toxicity consisting of urinary frequency and urgency, which persisted through long-term follow up. At a median follow up of 29.5 months after HDR brachytherapy, one patient developed regional and distant failure, and another had seminal vesicle recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR-BT is a safe treatment for patients with prostate cancer who previously received RT for rectal cancer. Further studies are needed to better characterize the long-term toxicity of HDR-RT in this population.

Alterations of Sexual and Erectile Functions after Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer Based on Patient-Reported Questionnaires

The aim of the study was to compare the side effects of high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDRBT), with a particular focus on the effects on sexual functions and sexual well-being (PROMOBRA study, NCT02258087). Localized low-risk and low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients were treated with mono LDR (N = 123, 145 Gy dose) or mono HDR brachytherapy (N = 117, 19/21 Gy). Prior to the treatment and during follow-up (at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment, and then annually after two years), patients completed patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) questionnaires EORTC QLQ-PR-25, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and IIEF-5 (SHIM). We compared the patients in different group breakdowns (HDR vs. LDR, hormone naïve and hormone-receiving HDR vs. LDR, hormone naïve and hormone-receiving patients in general, and 19 Gy HDR vs. 21 Gy HDR). In the hormone-naive LDR group, erectile function, orgasm function, sexual desire, satisfaction with intercourse, and overall satisfaction functions significantly decreased compared to baseline throughout the whole follow-up period. However, there were significant decreases in function at a maximum of three time points after HDR therapy without hormone therapy. In hormone-receiving patients, the orgasm function was significantly better in the HDR group at multiple time points compared to the baseline, and sexual desire improved at four time points. According to our results, both LDRBT and HDRBT can be safely administered to patients with localized prostate cancer. In hormone-naive patients, the HDR group showed only recovering decreases in sexual functions, while the LDR group showed a lasting decline in multiple areas. Thus, HDR appears to be more advantageous to hormone-naive patients.

Targeted Radiation and Immune Therapies-Advances and Opportunities for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most diagnosed malignancy in men in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer-related death. For localized disease, radiation therapy is a standard treatment that is often curative. For metastatic disease, radiation therapy has been primarily used for palliation, however, several newer systemic radiation therapies have been demonstrated to significantly improve patient outcomes and improve survival. In particular, several targeted radionuclide therapies have been approved for the treatment of advanced-stage cancer, including strontium-89, samarium-153, and radium-223 for bone-metastatic disease, and lutetium-177-labeled PSMA-617 for patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-expressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Contrarily, immune-based treatments have generally demonstrated little activity in advanced prostate cancer, with the exception of the autologous cellular vaccine, sipuleucel-T. This has been attributed to the presence of an immune-suppressive prostate cancer microenvironment. The ability of radiation therapy to not only eradicate tumor cells but also potentially other immune-regulatory cells within the tumor immune microenvironment suggests that targeted radionuclide therapies may be well poised to combine with immune-targeted therapies to eliminate prostate cancer metastases more effectively. This review provides an overview of the recent advances of targeted radiation agents currently approved for prostate cancer, and those being investigated in combination with immunotherapy, and discusses the challenges as well as the opportunities in this field.

Acute toxicity and health-related quality of life outcomes of localized prostate cancer patients treated with magnetic resonance imaging-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy: A prospective phase II trial

PURPOSE

To report acute toxicity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes of a phase II clinical trial of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided prostate high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) were eligible. Treatment consisted of a single 15 Gy MRI-guided HDR-BT followed by external beam radiotherapy (37.5-46 Gy depending on their risk category). Dosimetry, toxicity and HRQoL outcomes were collected prospectively at baseline, 1 and 3 months using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0 and the expanded PCa index composite, respectively. General linear mixed modeling was conducted to assess the changes in expanded PCa index composite domain scores over time. A minimally important difference was defined as a deterioration of HRQoL scores at 3 months compared to baseline ≥ 0.5 standard deviation. A p value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were included. Acute grade (G)2 urinary toxicity was observed in 18 (30%) patients while 1 (2%) patient had G3 toxicity, and none had G4 toxicity. Two patients had an acute urinary retention. G2 gastrointestinal toxicity was reported by 5 (8%) patients with no G3-4. Compared to baseline, urinary HRQoL scores significantly declined at 1 month (p < 0.001) but recovered at 3 months (p > 0.05). Bowel (p < 0.001) and sexual (p < 0.001) domain scores showed a significant decline over the 3-month follow-up period. At 3 months, 44%, 49% and 57% of patients reported a minimally important difference respectively in the urinary bowel and sexual domains.

CONCLUSION

MRI-guided HDR-BT boost is a safe and well tolerated treatment of intermediate- and high-risk PCa in the acute setting. A longer follow-up and a comparison to ultrasound-based HDR-BT are needed to assess the potential benefit of MRI-guided prostate HDR-BT.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy versus Brachytherapy: Relative Strengths of Two Highly Efficient Options for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a valid option for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In randomized trials, it was found not inferior to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). It also compares favorably to brachytherapy (BT) even if level 1 evidence is lacking. However, BT remains a strong competitor, especially for young patients, as series with 10-15 years of median follow-up have proven its efficacy over time. SBRT will thus have to confirm its effectiveness over the long-term as well. SBRT has the advantage over BT of less acute urinary toxicity and, more hypothetically, less sexual impairment. Data are limited regarding SBRT for high-risk disease while BT, as a boost after EBRT, has demonstrated superiority against EBRT alone in randomized trials. However, patients should be informed of significant urinary toxicity. SBRT is under investigation in strategies of treatment intensification such as combination of EBRT plus SBRT boost or focal dose escalation to the tumor site within the prostate. Our goal was to examine respective levels of evidence of SBRT and BT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicity and quality of life, and to discuss strategies of treatment intensification.

Conventional dose versus dose escalated radiotherapy including high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for patients with Gleason score 9-10 clinical localized prostate cancer

As several recent researches focus on the importance of Gleason 9-10, we examine the role of radiotherapy dose escalation in those patients. We analyzed 476 patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. Of them, 127 patients were treated with conventional-dose external beam radiotherapy (Conv RT) and 349 patients were treated with high-dose radiotherapy (HDRT; 249 patients received high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost + external beam radiotherapy [HDR boost] and 100 patients received intensity-modulated radiotherapy [IMRT]). We compared these treatment groups using multi-institutional retrospective data. The patients had a median follow-up period of 66.3 months. HDRT showed superior biochemical disease-free survival (bDFS) rate (85.2%; HDR boost 84.7% and IMRT 86.6%) to Conv RT (71.1%, p < 0.0001) at 5 years, with a hazard ratio of 0.448. There were borderline difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM; 4.3% and 2.75%, p = 0.0581), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS; 94.4% and 89.6%, p = 0.0916) rates at 5-years between Conv RT and HDRT group. Dose escalated radiotherapy showed better bDFS, borderline improvement in PCSM, and equivocal outcome in DMFS in with clinically localized Gleason 9-10 prostate cancer.

Treatment Strategies for High-Risk Localized and Locally Advanced and Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

The definitions of locally advanced and oligometastatic prostate cancer are ambiguous, and there are no standard treatments for these. Although multidisciplinary treatment combining systemic and local treatment may be effective, there are many unresolved issues such as the choice of local treatment, use of new endocrine agents and chemotherapy, and selection of optimal patients. The present article discusses the definitions, diagnoses, and treatment of very high-risk prostate cancer and oligometastatic prostate cancer.

Abstract

Despite the significant advances in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer, patients with very high-risk features such as being locally advanced (clinical stage T3–4 or minimal nodal involvement), having a high Gleason pattern, or with oligometastasis may still have a poor prognosis despite aggressive treatment. Multidisciplinary treatment with both local and systemic therapies is thought to be effective, however, unfortunately, there is still no standard treatment. However, in recent years, local definitive therapy using a combination of radiotherapy and androgen deprivation is being supported by several randomized clinical trials. This study reviews the current literature with a focus on the definition of very high-risk prostate cancer, the role of modern imaging, and its treatment options.

Catheter position prediction using deep-learning-based multi-atlas registration for high-dose rate prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

High-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy involves treatment catheter placement, which is currently empirical and physician dependent. The lack of proper catheter placement guidance during the procedure has left the physicians to rely on a heuristic thinking-while-doing technique, which may cause large catheter placement variation and increased plan quality uncertainty. Therefore, the achievable dose distribution could not be quantified prior to the catheter placement. To overcome this challenge, we proposed a learning-based method to provide HDR catheter placement guidance for prostate cancer patients undergoing HDR brachytherapy.

METHODS

The proposed framework consists of deformable registration via registration network (Reg-Net), multi-atlas ranking, and catheter regression. To model the global spatial relationship among multiple organs, binary masks of the prostate and organs-at-risk are transformed into distance maps, which describe the distance of each local voxel to the organ surfaces. For a new patient, the generated distance map is used as fixed image. Reg-Net is utilized to deformably register the distance maps from multi-atlas set to match this patient's distance map and then bring catheter maps from multi-atlas to this patient via spatial transformation. Several criteria, namely prostate volume similarity, multi-organ semantic image similarity, and catheter position criteria (far from the urethra and within the partial prostate), are used for multi-atlas ranking. The top-ranked atlas' deformed catheter positions are selected as the predicted catheter positions for this patient. Finally, catheter regression is used to refine the final catheter positions. A retrospective study on 90 patients with a fivefold cross-validation scheme was used to evaluate the proposed method's feasibility. In order to investigate the impact of plan quality from the predicted catheter pattern, we optimized the source dwell position and time for both the clinical catheter pattern and predicted catheter pattern with the same optimization settings. Comparisons of clinically relevant dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics were completed.

RESULTS

For all patients, on average, both the clinical plan dose and predicted plan dose meet the common dose constraints when prostate dose coverage is kept at V100 = 95%. The plans from the predicted catheter pattern have slightly higher hotspot in terms of V150 by 5.0% and V200 by 2.9% on average. For bladder V75, rectum V75, and urethra V125, the average difference is close to zero, and the range of most patients is within ±1 cc.

CONCLUSION

We developed a new catheter placement prediction method for HDR prostate brachytherapy based on a deep-learning-based multi-atlas registration algorithm. It has great clinical potential since it can provide catheter location estimation prior to catheter placement, which could reduce the dependence on physicians' experience in catheter implantation and improve the quality of prostate HDR treatment plans. This approach merits further clinical evaluation and validation as a method of quality control for HDR prostate brachytherapy.

Stereotactic Ablative Brachytherapy: Recent Advances in Optimization of Radiobiological Cancer Therapy

Brachytherapy (BT), a type of focal anti-cancer radiotherapy, delivers a highly focused radiation dose to localized tumors, sparing surrounding normal tissues. Recent technological advances have helped to increase the accuracy of BT and, thus, improve BT-based cancer treatment. Stereotactic ablative brachytherapy (SABT) was designed to improve the ablative effect of radiation, which was achieved via improved image guidance, and calculation of ablative dose, shorter treatment duration, and better organ preservation. Recently collected data characterized SABT as having the potential to cure various early-stage cancers. The method provides higher tumor control rate levels that were previously achievable only by surgical resection. Notably, SABT is suitable for application with unresectable malignancies. However, the pathological assessment of SABT irradiated tumors is limited due to difficulties in specimen acquisition. Prostate, lung, liver, and gynecological cancers are the most commonly reported SABT-treated malignancies. This study will give an overview of SABT, focusing on the advances in SABT optimization, and provide insights on the future benefits of the combined application of SABT with cancer immunotherapies.

Radiotherapy for Clinically Localized T3b or T4 Very-High-Risk Prostate Cancer-Role of Dose Escalation Using High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost or High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

Simple Summary

Recently, high-risk prostate cancer was subdivided to a very-high-risk group considered to have the worst prognosis, including clinical stage T3b–T4, primary Gleason pattern 5, or more than four biopsy cores with Gleason score 8–10. Among these, T3b–T4 stage is a special interest in radiotherapy because of their wider target volume outside the prostate. We examined this subgroup and found that dose escalation in radiotherapy both with brachytherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) improved biochemical free survival rate but not in prostate cancer specific survival rate and overall survival rate.

Abstract

To examine the efficacy of dose escalating radiotherapy into patients with cT3b or T4 localized prostate cancer, we compared Group A (86 conventional dose external beam radiotherapy: EBRT group, treated with 70–72 Gy) and group B (39 high dose EBRT group (HDEBRT group, 74–80 Gy) and 124 high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR) + EBRT (HDR boost)) using multi-institutional retrospective data. The actuarial 5-year biochemical disease-free survival (bDFS) rate, prostate cancer specific survival rate (PSS), and overall survival rate (OS) were 75.8%, 96.8%, and 93.5%. Group B showed superior 5-year bDFS rate (81.2%) as compared to the group A (66.5%) (p < 0.0001) with a hazard ratio of 0.397. Equivocal 5-year PSS (98.3% and 94.8% in group B and group A) and OS (both 93.7%) were found between those groups. Accumulated late grade ≥ 2 toxicities in gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts were similar among those three groups. Therefore, both HDEBRT and HDR boost could be good options for improving the bDFS rate in cT3–T4 localized prostate cancer without affecting PSS and OS.

Simulation of an HDR "Boost" with Stereotactic Proton versus Photon Therapy in Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Feasibility Study

Purpose/Objectives

To compare the dose escalation potential of stereotactic body proton therapy (SBPT) versus stereotactic body photon therapy (SBXT) using high-dose rate prostate brachytherapy (HDR-B) dose-prescription metrics.

Patients and Methods

Twenty-five patients previously treated with radiation for prostate cancer were identified and stratified by prostate size (≤ 50cc; n = 13, > 50cc; n = 12). Initial CT simulation scans were re-planned using SBXT and SBPT modalities using a prescription dose of 19Gy in 2 fractions. Target coverage goals were designed to mimic the dose distributions of HDR-B and maximized to the upper limit constraint for the rectum and urethra. Dosimetric parameters between SBPT and SBXT were compared using the signed-rank test and again after stratification for prostate size (≤ 50cm³ and >50cm³) using the Wilcoxon rank test.

Results

Prostate volume receiving 100% of the dose (V100) was significantly greater for SBXT (99%) versus SBPT (96%) (P ≤ 0.01), whereas the median V125 (82% vs. 73%, P < 0.01) and V200 (12% vs. 2%, P < 0.01) was significantly greater for SBPT compared to SBXT. Median V150 was 49% for both cohorts (P = 0.92). V125 and V200 were significantly correlated with prostate size. For prostates > 50cm³, V200 was significantly greater with SBPT compared to SBXT (14.5% vs. 1%, P = 0.005), but not for prostates 50cm³ (9% vs 4%, P = 0.11). Median dose to 2cm³ of the bladder neck was significantly lower with SBPT versus SBXT (9.6 Gy vs. 14 Gy, P < 0.01).

Conclusion

SBPT and SBXT can be used to simulate an HDR-B boost for locally advanced prostate cancer. SBPT demonstrated greater dose escalation potential than SBXT. These results are relevant for future trial design, particularly in patients with high risk prostate cancer who are not amenable to brachytherapy.

Brachytherapy in Belgium in 2018. A national survey of the brachytherapy study group of the Belgian SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (BeSTRO)

PURPOSE

To explore the current practices patterns and evaluate the actual brachytherapy (BT) resources in Belgium.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 2019, the Brachytherapy Study Group proposed to conduct a survey on behalf of the Belgian SocieTy of Radiation Oncology (BeSTRO) in order to identify current BT practice patterns. An electronic questionnaire was sent to all primary radiotherapy centers in Belgium. This questionnaire was based on the questionnaire that was used by the Italian Association of Radiation Oncology (AIRO) in 2016, asking for: (a) General information on the Radiation Oncology Centre; (b) BT equipment and human resources; (c) BT procedures; (d) BT assessment (number of patients treated annually, treated sites, and different modalities of treatments).

RESULTS

All 24 radiation oncology centers (100% response rate) answered the questionnaire and gave also information on the performance of brachytherapy in their (eventual) satellite centers. Eighteen (18) BT afterloader units were installed and operational in 2018. Thirteen centers mentioned a prostate seed implant program, one center a prostate and eye plaque program and one center only an eye plaque program. Less than 50% of centers have the infrastructure to offer the full-range of BT in their own department. In 2018, 1486 patients received a BT-treatment, 28% of them were treated by prostate seed implant, 8% were treated by eye-(seed) BT and 64% by high dose rate (HDR)/pulsed dose rate (PDR) BT. Forty-five percent of HDR/PDR patients were treated by vaginal dome BT, 22% by intra-uterine BT, 11% by skin BT, 10% by breast BT (almost exclusively in one centre), 8% for benign pathology (keloid) and the remaining 4% were treated for prostate (as a boost or as salvage in one centre), anal, penile, lung or oesophageal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Belgian radiotherapy departments often perform BT only in a (highly) selected group of pathologies, resulting in a limited number of patients treated by this technique despite the sufficient availability of BT equipment. Modern indications are often not covered, hence patients do not have regular access to recognized treatment options, possibly leading to inferior oncological outcome. BeSTRO will use the results of this survey to stimulate improvements in training, awareness, education, implementation, collaboration and cooperation in the field of brachytherapy.

A planning study of focal dose escalations to multiparametric MRI-defined dominant intraprostatic lesions in prostate proton radiation therapy

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to investigate the dosimetric effect and clinical impact of delivering a focal radiotherapy boost dose to multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI)-defined dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs) in prostate cancer using proton therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 36 patients with pre-treatment mp-MRI and CT images who were treated using pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton radiation therapy to the whole prostate. DILs were contoured on co-registered mp-MRIs. Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plans using intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) were created based on conventional whole-prostate-irradiation for each patient and optimized with additional DIL coverage goals and urethral constraints. DIL dose coverage and organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing were compared between conventional and SIB plans. Tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were estimated to evaluate the clinical impact of the SIB plans.

RESULTS

Optimized SIB plans significantly escalated the dose to DILs while meeting OAR constraints. SIB plans were able to achieve 125, 150 and 175% of prescription dose coverage in 74, 54 and 17% of 36 patients, respectively. This was modeled to result in an increase in DIL TCP by 7.3-13.3% depending on α / β and DIL risk level.

CONCLUSION

The proposed mp-MRI-guided DIL boost using proton radiation therapy is feasible without violating OAR constraints and demonstrates a potential clinical benefit by improving DIL TCP. This retrospective study suggested the use of IMPT-based DIL SIB may represent a strategy to improve tumor control.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study investigated the planning of mp-MRI-guided DIL boost in prostate proton radiation therapy and estimated its clinical impact with respect to TCP and NTCP.

Impact of Radiation Therapy Dose Escalation on Prostate Cancer Outcomes and Toxicities

OBJECTIVES

Freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) is a common primary outcome of randomized-controlled trials of prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to determine how increasing the PCa biologically equivalent dose (BED) of external radiation therapy (RT) is correlated with FFBF and overall patient outcomes: overall survival (OS), distant metastasis (DM), and cancer-specific mortality (CSM); as well as genitourinary (GU), and gastrointestinal toxicities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of 6884 PCa patients from 12 randomized-controlled trials of external beam RT. Mixed effects regression models were used to estimate weighted linear relationships between BED and observed percentages of 5- and 10-year outcomes. For toxicities, a subset analysis of using 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) versus intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) was performed.

RESULTS

Increasing BED correlated with improved FFBF: 10-year absolute improvement of 9.6% and 7.2% for low-risk and intermediate-risk patients, respectively (P<0.05); but not with improvement of OS, DM, or CSM at either time point. BED escalation was not correlated with increased acute toxicities; it was correlated with increased late gastrointestinal toxicities in patients treated with 3D-CRT (1.5% increase over BED range, P<0.01). IMRT patients had significantly fewer late toxicities, despite being treated at higher BED.

CONCLUSIONS

RT BED escalation has resulted in significantly improved PCa FFBF at up to 10 years; but not with improvement in OS, DM, or CSM. Thus, FFBF is a poor surrogate of overall patient outcomes for trials of RT. Late toxicities were less frequent with IMRT than with 3D-CRT, even at higher BED.

Multiparametric MRI-guided dose boost to dominant intraprostatic lesions in CT-based High-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate the dosimetric feasibility of delivering focal dose to multiparametric (mp) MRI-defined DILs in CT-based high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy with MR/CT registration and estimate its clinical benefit.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated a total of 17 patients with mp-MRI and CT images acquired pre-treatment and treated by HDR prostate brachytherapy. 21 dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs) were contoured on mp-MRI and propagated to CT images using a deformable image registration method. A boost plan was created for each patient and optimized on the original needle pattern. In addition, separate plans were generated using a virtually implanted needle around the DIL to mimic mp-MRI guided needle placement. DIL dose coverage and organ-at-rick (OAR) sparing were compared with original plan results. Tumor control probability (TCP) was estimated to further evaluate the clinical impact on the boost plans.

RESULTS

Overall, optimized boost plans significantly escalated dose to DILs while meeting OAR constraints. The addition of mp-MRI guided virtual needles facilitate increased coverage of DIL volumes, achieving a V150 > 90% in 85 % of DILs compared with 57 % of boost plan without an additional needle. Compared with original plan, TCP models estimated improvement in DIL control by 28 % for patients with external-beam treatment and by 8 % for monotherapy patients.

CONCLUSION

With MR/CT registration, the proposed mp-MRI guided DIL boost in CT-based HDR brachytherapy is feasible without violating OAR constraints, and indicates significant clinical benefit in improving TCP of DIL. It may represent a strategy to personalize treatment delivery and improve tumor control.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study investigated the feasibility of mp-MRI guided DIL boost in HDR prostate brachytherapy with CT-based treatment planning, and estimated its clinical impact by TCP and NTCP estimation.

RETRACTED: Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l’AFU – Actualisation 2018–2020 : cancer de la prostate French ccAFU guidelines – Update 2018–2020: Prostate cancer

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). Cet article est retiré de la publication à la demande des auteurs car ils ont apporté des modifications significatives sur des points scientifiques après la publication de la première version des recommandations. Le nouvel article est disponible à cette adresse: DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007. C’est cette nouvelle version qui doit être utilisée pour citer l’article. This article has been retracted at the request of the authors, as it is not based on the definitive version of the text because some scientific data has been corrected since the first issue was published. The replacement has been published at the DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007. That newer version of the text should be used when citing the article.

UK & Ireland Prostate Brachytherapy Practice Survey 2014-2016

Purpose

To document the current prostate brachytherapy practice across the UK and Ireland and compare with previously published audit results.

Material and methods

Participants from 25 centers attending the annual UK & Ireland Prostate Brachytherapy Conference were invited to complete an online survey. Sixty-three questions assessed the center’s experience and staffing, clinician’s experience, clinical selection criteria and scheduling, number of cases per modality in the preceding three years, low-dose-rate (LDR) pre- and post-implant technique and high-dose-rate (HDR) implant technique. Responses were collated, and descriptive statistical analysis performed.

Results

Eighteen (72%) centers responded with 17 performing LDR only, 1 performing HDR only, and 6 performing both LDR and HDR. Seventy-one percent of centers have > 10 years of LDR brachytherapy experience, whereas 71% centers that perform HDR brachytherapy have > 5 years of experience. Thirteen centers have 2 or more clinicians performing brachytherapy with 61% of lead consultants performing > 25 cases (LDR + HDR) in 2016. The number of implants (range), that includes LDR and HDR, performed by individual practitioners in 2016 was > 50 by 21%, 25-50 by 38%, and < 25 by 41%. Eight centers reported a decline in LDR monotherapy case numbers in 2016. Number of center’s performing HDR brachytherapy increased in last five years. Relative uniformity in patient selection is noted, and LDR pre- and post-implant dosimetry adheres to published quality guidelines, with an average post-implant D₉₀ of > 145 Gy in 69% of centers in 2014 and 2015 compared to 63% in 2016. The median CT/US volume ratios were > 0.9 ≤ 1.0 (n = 4), > 1.0 ≤ 1.1 (n = 7), and > 1.1 (n = 2).

Conclusion

There is considerable prostate brachytherapy experience in the UK and Ireland. An apparent fall in LDR case numbers is noted. Maintenance of case numbers and ongoing compliance with published quality guidelines is important to sustain high quality outcomes.

Hypofractionated stereotactic boost in intermediate risk prostate carcinoma: Preliminary results of a multicenter phase II trial (CKNO-PRO)

PURPOSE

Dose escalation may improve curability in intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma. A multicenter national program was developed to assess toxicity and tumor response with hypofractionated stereotactic boost after conventional radiotherapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

Between August 2010 and April 2013, 76 patients with intermediated-risk prostate carcinoma were included in the study. A first course delivered 46 Gy by IMRT (68.4% of patients) or 3D conformal radiotherapy (31.6% of patients). The second course delivered a boost of 18 Gy (3x6Gy) within 10 days. Gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were evaluated as defined by NCI-CTCAE (v4.0). Secondary outcome measures were local control, overall and metastasis-free survival, PSA kinetics, and patient functional status (urinary and sexual) according to the IIEF5 and IPSS questionnaires.

RESULTS

The overall treatment time was 45 days (median, range 40-55). Median follow-up was 26.4 months (range, 13.6-29.9 months). Seventy-seven per cent (n = 58) of patients presented a Gleason score of 7. At 24 months, biological-free survival was 98.7% (95% CI, 92.8-99.9%) and median PSA 0.46 ng/mL (range, 0.06-6.20 ng/mL). Grade ≥2 acute GI and GU toxicities were 13.2% and 23.7%, respectively. Grade ≥2 late GI and GU toxicities were observed in 6.6% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. No grade 4 toxicity was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated stereotactic boost is effective and safely delivered for intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma after conventional radiation. Mild-term relapse-free survival and tolerance results are promising, and further follow-up is warranted to confirm the results at long term.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01596816.

Hypofractionated radiation therapy for basal and squamous cell skin cancer: A meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To characterize the cosmetic outcomes and local recurrence (LR) rates of various hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) regimens for skin basal and squamous cell cancers (BCCs/SCCs).

METHODS

A PICOS/PRISMA/MOOSE selection protocol was performed to identify 344 articles published between 1985-2016 evaluating patients with T1-2 N0 SCCs/BCCs treated with definitive RT. Biologically equivalent doses with α/β=3 (BED3s) were calculated. The primary endpoint was post-treatment cosmesis. Mixed effects regression models were used to estimate weighted linear relationships between BED3 and cosmetic outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were identified detailing the treatment of 9729 skin BCC/SCC patients, across seven countries, with external beam RT (n=9255) or brachytherapy (n=474). Median follow-up was 36months (range: 12-77). Median dose was 45Gy/11 fractions (interquartile range: 37.5Gy/6-55Gy/18) at 4Gy/fraction (interquartile range: 2.5-6Gy); most hypofractionated 18.75Gy/1. There was a trend to decreased "good" cosmesis with higher total dose: -3.4% "good" cosmesis/10Gy BED3, p=0.01. Similarly, there was a trend to increased "fair" cosmesis with higher dose: +3.8% "fair" cosmesis/10Gy BED3,p=0.006. At a BED3 of 100Gy, the expected rate of "good" cosmesis is 79% (95% confidence interval: 70%, 88%). Hypofractionated schedules produced similar cosmesis to conventionally fractionated schedules, at the same BED3. Fewer than 8% of patients experienced "poor" cosmesis, independent of dose or fractionation regimen.

CONCLUSION

Hypofractionated RT has favorable cosmesis for patients with skin BCCs/SCCs. We recommend clinicians consider these commonly-used regimens, which all have BED3 of ∼100Gy: 50Gy/15 fractions, 36.75Gy/7 fractions, or 35Gy/5 fractions, as they result in "good" cosmesis in 80% of patients.

Focal therapy for prostate cancer: the technical challenges

Focal therapy for prostate cancer has been proposed as an alternative treatment to whole gland therapy, offering the opportunity for tumor dose escalation and/or reduced toxicity. Brachytherapy, either low-dose-rate or high-dose-rate, provides an ideal approach, offering both precision in dose delivery and opportunity for a highly conformal, non-uniform dose distribution. Whilst multiple consensus documents have published clinical guidelines for patient selection, there are insufficient data to provide clear guidelines on target volume delineation, treatment planning margins, treatment planning approaches, and many other technical issues that should be considered before implementing a focal brachytherapy program. Without consensus guidelines, there is the potential for a diversity of practices to develop, leading to challenges in interpreting outcome data from multiple centers. This article provides an overview of the technical considerations for the implementation of a clinical service, and discusses related topics that should be considered in the design of clinical trials to ensure precise and accurate methods are applied for focal brachytherapy treatments.

The evolution of brachytherapy for prostate cancer

Brachytherapy (BT), using low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent seed implantation or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary source implantation, is an acceptable treatment option for select patients with prostate cancer of any risk group. The benefits of HDR-BT over LDR-BT include the ability to use the same source for other cancers, lower operator dependence, and - typically - fewer acute irritative symptoms. By contrast, the benefits of LDR-BT include more favourable scheduling logistics, lower initial capital equipment costs, no need for a shielded room, completion in a single implant, and more robust data from clinical trials. Prospective reports comparing HDR-BT and LDR-BT to each other or to other treatment options (such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or surgery) suggest similar outcomes. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure rates for patients with low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease are >85%, 69-97%, and 63-80%, respectively. Brachytherapy with EBRT (versus brachytherapy alone) is an appropriate approach in select patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease. The 10-year rates of overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer-specific mortality are >85%, <10%, and <5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated with HDR-BT and LDR-BT are rare, at <4% in most series, and quality of life is improved in patients who receive brachytherapy compared with those who undergo surgery.

[CCAFU french national guidelines 2016-2018 on prostate cancer]

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the guidelines national committee CCAFU was to propose updated french guidelines for localized and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A Medline search was achieved between 2013 and 2016, as regards diagnosis, options of treatment and follow-up of PCa, to evaluate different references with levels of evidence.

RESULTS

Epidemiology, classification, staging systems, diagnostic evaluation are reported. Disease management options are detailed. Recommandations are reported according to the different clinical situations. Active surveillance is a major option in low risk PCa. Radical prostatectomy remains a standard of care of localized PCa. The three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy is the technical standard. A dose of > 74Gy is recommended. Moderate hypofractionation provides short-term biochemical control comparable to conventional fractionation. In case of intermediate risk PCa, radiotherapy can be combined with short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In case of high risk disease, long-term ADT remains the standard of care. ADT is the backbone therapy of metastatic disease. In men with metastases at first presentation, upfront chemotherapy combined with ADT should be considered as a new standard. In case of metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC), new hormonal treatments and chemotherapy provide a better control of tumor progression and increase survival.

CONCLUSIONS

These updated french guidelines will contribute to increase the level of urological care for the diagnosis and treatment for prostate cancer. © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Splenic irradiation for splenomegaly: A systematic review

Splenic irradiation (SI) is a palliative treatment option for symptomatic splenomegaly (i.e. for pain, early satiety, pancytopenia from sequestration) secondary to hematologic malignancies and disorders. The purpose of the current article is to review the literature on SI for hematologic malignancies and disorders, including: (1) patient selection and optimal technique; (2) efficacy of SI; and (3) toxicities of SI. PICOS/PRISMA methods are used to select 27 articles including 766 courses of SI for 486 patients from 1960 to 2016. The most common cancers treated included chronic lymphocytic leukemia and myeloproliferative disorders; the most common regimen was 10Gy in 1Gy fractions over two weeks, and 27% of patients received retreatment. A partial or complete response (for symptoms, lab abnormalities) was obtained in 85-90% of treated patients, and 30% were retreated within 6-12months. There was no correlation between biologically equivalent dose of radiation therapy and response duration, pain relief, spleen reduction, or cytopenia improvement (r2 all <0.4); therefore, lower doses (e.g. 5Gy in 5 fractions) may be as effective as higher doses. Grade 3-4 toxicity (typically leukopenia, infection) was noted in 22% of courses, with grade 5 toxicity in 0.7% of courses. All grade 5 toxicities were due to either thrombocytopenia with hemorrhage or leukopenia with sepsis (or a combination of both); they were sequelae of cancer and not directly caused by SI. In summary, SI is generally a safe and efficacious method for treating patients with symptomatic splenomegaly.

Results of multiparametric transrectal ultrasound-based focal high-dose-rate dose escalation combined with supplementary external beam irradiation in intermediate- and high-risk localized prostate cancer patients

PURPOSE

Clinical results of a biologic information-based focused dose escalation combined with dose de-escalation for the whole organ in external beam radiotherapy + high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost application for localized prostate cancer in a consecutively treated patient cohort.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred thirty patients were treated with external beam radiotherapy (50 Gy) complementary to two multiparametric transrectal ultrasound-guided 15 Gy HDR-BT fractions. Real-time multiparametric transrectal ultrasound-based biologic planning for high-dose-rate boost dose planning used the summation of gray scale and Doppler sonography imaging + biopsy information. Target subvolumes received HDR-BT dose escalation up to 60 Gy/fraction. Dose-volume histogram parameters, organ at risks doses, and toxicity results were investigated.

RESULTS

The median followup was 4.3 years, the median age was 68.62 years, and the mean initial prostate-specific antigen was 18.69 ng/mL. Low-, intermediate-, and high-risk constituted 69%, 21%, and 10% of the patients, respectively. The mean peripheral dose was 3.9 Gy per fraction. Prostate-specific antigen nadir was in 93% of the patients ≤1 ng/mL. Quality parameters were as follows: D₉₀: 6.58 Gy, V₁₀₀: 30.36%, V₁₅₀: 9.96%, V₂₀₀: 3.16%, uD_0.1: 7.34 Gy, uD₂: 9.34 Gy, rD₀₁: 10.56 Gy, and rD₂: 8.32 Gy, respectively. We observed G1, G2, G3 urinary toxicity in 17/130, 11/130, and 2/130 patients, respectively. Rectal toxicity: G1 and G2 occurred in 19/130 and 2/130 patients with mean dose values G1: 8.2 Gy and G2: 8.76 Gy. Analysis of variance test resulted in no correlation between toxicities and any other investigated factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Focused extreme dose escalation with low prostate mean peripheral dose results in excellent long-term outcome data and very high focal boost doses and is causing no enhancement in late treatment toxicity.

Acute and Late Adverse Events Associated With Radical Radiation Therapy Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Clinician and Patient Toxicity Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

This review aimed to determine the clinician and patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments currently usedin randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of radical radiation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer to report acute and late adverse events (AEs), review the quality of methodology and PRO reporting, and report the prevalence of acute and late AEs.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched between April and August 2014 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Identified reports were reviewed according to the PRO Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. In all, 1149 records were screened, and 21 articles were included in the final review.

RESULTS

We determined the acute and late AEs for 9040 patients enrolled in 15 different RCTs. Only clinician reported instruments were used to report acute AEs <3 months (eg, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]). For late clinician reporting, the Late Effects on Normal Tissues-Subjective, Objective, Management and Analytic scale and RTOG were used and were often augmented with additional items to provide comprehensive coverage of sexual functioning and anorectal symptoms. Some late AEs were reported (48% articles) using PROs (eg, ULCA-PCI [University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index], FACT-G and P [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General & Prostate Module], EORTC QLQC-30 + PR25 [European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire & Prostate Module]); however, a definitive "preferred" instrument was not evident.

DISCUSSION

Our findings are at odds with recent movements toward including patient voices in reporting of AEs and patient engagement in clinical research. We recommend including PRO to evaluate radical radiation therapy before, during, and after the treatment to fully capture patient experiences, and we support the development of predictive models for late effects based on the severity of early toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Patient reporting of acute and late AEs is underrepresented in radiation therapy trials. We recommend working toward a consistent approach to PRO assessment of radiation therapy-related AEs.

Prostate external beam radiotherapy combined with high-dose-rate brachytherapy: dose-volume parameters from deformably-registered plans correlate with late gastrointestinal complications

BACKGROUND

Derivation of dose-volume correlated with toxicity for multi-modal treatments can be difficult due to the perceived need for voxel-by-voxel dose accumulation. With data available for a single-institution cohort with long follow-up, an investigation was undertaken into rectal dose-volume effects for gastrointestinal toxicities after deformably-registering each phase of a combined external beam radiotherapy (EBRT)/high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy prostate treatment.

METHODS

One hundred and eighteen patients received EBRT in 23 fractions of 2 Gy and HDR (TG43 algorithm) in 3 fractions of 6.5 Gy. Results for the Late Effects of Normal Tissues - Subjective, Objective, Management and Analytic toxicity assessments were available with a median follow-up of 72 months. The HDR CT was deformably-registered to the EBRT CT. Doses were corrected for dose fractionation. Rectum dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters were calculated in two ways. (1) Distribution-adding: parameters were calculated after the EBRT dose distribution was 3D-summed with the registered HDR dose distribution. (2) Parameter-adding: the EBRT DVH parameters were added to HDR DVH parameters. Logistic regressions and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to correlate parameters with late peak toxicity (dichotomised at grade 1 or 2).

RESULTS

The 48-80, 40-63 and 49-55 Gy dose regions from distribution-adding were significantly correlated with rectal bleeding, urgency/tenesmus and stool frequency respectively. Additionally, urgency/tenesmus and anorectal pain were associated with the 25-26 Gy and 44-48 Gy dose regions from distribution-adding respectively. Parameter-adding also indicated the low-mid dose region was significantly correlated with stool frequency and proctitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms significant dose-histogram effects for gastrointestinal toxicities after including deformable registration to combine phases of EBRT/HDR prostate cancer treatment. The findings from distribution-adding were in most cases consistent with those from parameter-adding. The mid-high dose range and near maximum doses were important for rectal bleeding. The distribution-adding mid-high dose range was also important for stool frequency and urgency/tenesmus. We encourage additional studies in a variety of institutions using a variety of dose accumulation methods with appropriate inter-fraction motion management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT NCT00193856 . Retrospectively registered 12 September 2005.

Prostate Cancer Patients With Unmanaged Diabetes or Receiving Insulin Experience Inferior Outcomes and Toxicities After Treatment With Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on outcomes and toxicities among men with localized prostate cancer receiving definitive radiation therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 3217 patients, from 1998 to 2013, subdivided into 5 subgroups: (I) no T2DM; (II) T2DM receiving oral antihyperglycemic agent that contains metformin, no insulin; (III) T2DM receiving nonmetformin oral agent alone, no insulin; (IV) T2DM receiving any insulin; and (V) T2DM not receiving medication. Outcome measures were overall survival, freedom from biochemical failure (BF), freedom from distant metastasis, cancer-specific survival, and toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log rank tests, Fine and Gray competing risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), Cox models, and subdistribution hazard ratios (sHRs) were used.

RESULTS

Of the 3217 patients, 1295 (40%) were low-risk, 1192 (37%) were intermediate-risk, and 652 (20%) were high risk. The group I to V distribution was 81%, 8%, 5%, 3%, and 4%. The median dose was 78 Gy, and the median follow-up time was 50 (range, 1-190) months. Group V had increased mortality (sHR, 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.54), BF (sHR, 2.14; 0.88-1.83), and cause-specific mortality (sHR, 3.87; 95% CI, 1.31-11). Acute toxicities were higher in group IV versus group I (genitourinary: 38% vs. 26%; P = .01; gastrointestinal: 21% vs. 5%; P = 001). Late toxicities were higher in groups IV and V versus group I (12%-14% vs. 2%-6%; P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Men with T2DM not receiving medication and men with T2DM receiving insulin had worse outcomes and toxicities compared to other patients.

A comparison of robotic arm versus gantry linear accelerator stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer diagnosed in men in the United States besides skin cancer. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT; 6–15 Gy per fraction, up to 45 minutes per fraction, delivered in five fractions or less, over the course of approximately 2 weeks) is emerging as a popular treatment option for prostate cancer. The American Society for Radiation Oncology now recognizes SBRT for select low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. SBRT grew from the notion that high doses of radiation typical of brachytherapy could be delivered noninvasively using modern external-beam radiation therapy planning and delivery methods. SBRT is most commonly delivered using either a traditional gantry-mounted linear accelerator or a robotic arm-mounted linear accelerator. In this systematic review article, we compare and contrast the current clinical evidence supporting a gantry vs robotic arm SBRT for prostate cancer. The data for SBRT show encouraging and comparable results in terms of freedom from biochemical failure (>90% for low and intermediate risk at 5–7 years) and acute and late toxicity (<6% grade 3–4 late toxicities). Other outcomes (eg, overall and cancer-specific mortality) cannot be compared, given the indolent course of low-risk prostate cancer. At this time, neither SBRT device is recommended over the other for all patients; however, gantry-based SBRT machines have the abilities of treating larger volumes with conventional fractionation, shorter treatment time per fraction (~15 minutes for gantry vs ~45 minutes for robotic arm), and the ability to achieve better plans among obese patients (since they are able to use energies >6 MV). Finally, SBRT (particularly on a gantry) may also be more cost-effective than conventionally fractionated external-beam radiation therapy. Randomized controlled trials of SBRT using both technologies are underway.

Comparison of outcomes and toxicities among radiation therapy treatment options for prostate cancer

We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics.

Evaluation of tolerance and toxicity of high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost combined with interstitial hyperthermia for prostate cancer

Purpose The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the tolerance and early as well as late toxicity of high dose rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) boost combined with interstitial hyperthermia (IHT) in patients treated for prostate cancer. Material and methods Between January 2011 and June 2013 76 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer received treatment consisting of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), followed by a HDRBT boost combined with IHT. IHT was performed before each brachytherapy fraction. Results The median follow-up time was 26.3 months (range 7-43 months). Early genitourinary (GU) grade 1 and 2 toxicities were common, but only two patients (2.6%) experienced acute urinary retention requiring temporary catheterisation (grade 2 toxicity). No grade 3 or 4 genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicities were observed. In the group analysed, 59 of 76 patients had follow-up times longer than 18 months. The incidence of grade 2 late toxicity in the group studied did not exceed 23.7%. There were no late grade 2 or higher complications from the gastrointestinal tract. Conclusions The tolerance of HDRBT boost combined with IHT is good. The profile and the percentage of early and late complications are acceptable.

Dosimetric coverage of the prostate, normal tissue sparing, and acute toxicity with high-dose-rate brachytherapy for large prostate volumes

Purpose

To evaluate dosimetric coverage of the prostate, normal tissue sparing, and acute toxicity with HDR brachytherapy for large prostate volumes.

Materials and Methods

One hundred and two prostate cancer patients with prostate volumes >50 mL (range: 5-29 mL) were treated with high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy ± intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to 4,500 cGy in 25 daily fractions between 2009 and 2013. HDR brachytherapy monotherapy doses consisted of two 1,350-1,400 cGy fractions separated by 2-3 weeks, and HDR brachytherapy boost doses consisted of two 950-1,150 cGy fractions separated by 4 weeks. Twelve of 32 (38%) unfavorable intermediate risk, high risk, and very high risk patients received androgen deprivation therapy. Acute toxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.

Results

Median follow-up was 14 months. Dosimetric goals were achieved in over 90% of cases. Three of 102 (3%) patients developed Grade 2 acute proctitis. No variables were significantly associated with Grade 2 acute proctitis. Seventeen of 102 (17%) patients developed Grade 2 acute urinary retention. American Urological Association (AUA) symptom score was the only variable significantly associated with Grade 2 acute urinary retention (p=0.04). There was no ≥ Grade 3 acute toxicity.

Conclusions

Dosimetric coverage of the prostate and normal tissue sparing were adequate in patients with prostate volumes >50 mL. Higher pre-treatment AUA symptom scores increased the relative risk of Grade 2 acute urinary retention. However, the overall incidence of acute toxicity was acceptable in patients with large prostate volumes.

Is robotic arm stereotactic body radiation therapy “virtual high dose ratebrachytherapy” for prostate cancer? An analysis of comparative effectiveness using published data [corrected]

High-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) monotherapy and robotic arm (i.e., CyberKnife) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) are emerging technologies that have become popular treatment options for prostate cancer. Proponents of both HDR-BT monotherapy and robotic arm SBRT claim that these modalities are as efficacious as intensity-modulated radiation therapy in treating prostate cancer. Moreover, proponents of robotic arm SBRT believe it is more effective than HDR-BT monotherapy because SBRT is non-invasive, touting it as 'virtual HDR-BT.' We perform a comparative effective analysis of the two technologies. The tumor control rates and toxicities of HDR-BT monotherapy and robotic arm SBRT are promising. However, at present, it would be inappropriate to state that HDR-BT monotherapy and robotic arm SBRT are as efficacious or effective as other treatment modalities for prostate cancer, which have stronger foundations of evidence. Studies reporting on these technologies have relatively short follow-up time, few patients and are largely retrospective.

[What is the level of evidence of new techniques in prostate cancer radiotherapy?]

Prostate cancer radiotherapy has evolved from the old 2D technique to conformal, and then to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic radiotherapy. At the same time, image-guidance (IGRT) is routinely used. New techniques such as protontherapy or carbontherapy are being developed with the objective of increased efficacy, decreased treatment duration, toxicity or cost. This review summarizes the evidence-based medicine of new technologies in the treatment of prostate cancer.