A combined single high-dose rate brachytherapy boost with hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy results in a high rate of biochemical disease free survival in localised intermediate and high risk prostate cancer patients

High weekly integral dose and larger fraction size increase risk of fatigue and worsening of functional outcomes following radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

Introduction

We hypothesized that increasing the pelvic integral dose (ID) and a higher dose per fraction correlate with worsening fatigue and functional outcomes in localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

Methods

The study design was a retrospective analysis of two prospective observational cohorts, REQUITE (development, n=543) and DUE-01 (validation, n=228). Data were available for comorbidities, medication, androgen deprivation therapy, previous surgeries, smoking, age, and body mass index. The ID was calculated as the product of the mean body dose and body volume. The weekly ID accounted for differences in fractionation. The worsening (end of radiotherapy versus baseline) of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 scores in physical/role/social functioning and fatigue symptom scales were evaluated, and two outcome measures were defined as worsening in ≥2 (WS2) or ≥3 (WS3) scales, respectively. The weekly ID and clinical risk factors were tested in multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results

In REQUITE, WS2 was seen in 28% and WS3 in 16% of patients. The median weekly ID was 13.1 L·Gy/week [interquartile (IQ) range 10.2-19.3]. The weekly ID, diabetes, the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and the dose per fraction were significantly associated with WS2 [AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve) =0.59; 95% CI 0.55-0.63] and WS3 (AUC=0.60; 95% CI 0.55-0.64). The prevalence of WS2 (15.3%) and WS3 (6.1%) was lower in DUE-01, but the median weekly ID was higher (15.8 L·Gy/week; IQ range 13.2-19.3). The model for WS2 was validated with reduced discrimination (AUC=0.52 95% CI 0.47-0.61), The AUC for WS3 was 0.58.

Conclusion

Increasing the weekly ID and the dose per fraction lead to the worsening of fatigue and functional outcomes in patients with localized PCa treated with EBRT.

Prostate cancer brachytherapy: SFRO guidelines 2021

Prostate brachytherapy techniques are described, concerning both permanent seed implant and high dose rate brachytherapy. The following guidelines are presented: brachytherapy indications, implant procedure for permanent low dose rate implants and high dose rate with source projector, as well as dose and dose-constraints objectives, immediate postoperative management, post-treatment evaluation, and long-term follow-up.

The Prognosis of Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy plus Brachytherapy, and External Beam Radiotherapy Alone for Patients above 70 Years with Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Population-Matched Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy (EBRT + BT), and EBRT alone among elderly men (aged 70 years and above) with very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

We identified elderly men diagnosed with VHR PCa between 2004 and 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The propensity score-matching method was adopted to balance the covariates and generate new cohorts. -Kaplan-Meier and Cox analyses were conducted to build up survival curves and evaluate the overall survival (OS) and PCa-specific survival (PCSS) outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 9,818 patients were identified. Of them, 5,839 were in the EBRT group, 725 in the EBRT + BT group, and 3,254 in the RP group. The survival curves of the overall cohort showed that RP was associated with the best OS, followed by EBRT + BT and EBRT (p < 0.001). As for the PCSS, RP shared similar outcomes with EBRT + BT (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.25 [0.93-1.69], p = 0.175). EBRT was associated with significantly worse PCSS than both RP (HR: 1.88, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] [1.64-2.15], p < 0.001) and EBRT + BT (HR: 1.48, 95% CI [1.19-1.85], p = 0.002). In the matched cohorts, RP presented better OS (HR: 1.41, 95% CI [1.07-1.86], p = 0.041) and similar PCSS with EBRT + BT (HR: 1.50, 95% CI [0.91-2.47], p = 0.12). RP was associated with significantly better OS and PCSS outcomes than EBRT alone (OS HR: 1.58, 95% CI [1.59-2.12], p < 0.001; PCSS HR: 2.08 [1.60-2.72], p < 0.001). EBRT + BT also had significantly better OS and PCSS outcomes than EBRT alone (OS HR: 1.33, 95% CI [1.11-1.60], p < 0.001; PCSS HR: 1.57 [1.13-2.19], p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients above 70 years with VHR PCa, RP was associated with better OS and similar PCSS than EBRT + BT. Both RP and EBRT + BT have better OS and PCSS than EBRT alone.

Low-/high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy: long-term results from a single institution team experience

Purpose

To compare brachytherapy (BT) boost of low-dose-rate (LDR) and high-dose-rate (HDR) techniques in patients diagnosed with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Material and methods

Between January 2005 and February 2018, 142 patients (50 LDR and 92 HDR) with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with a BT boost, and retrospectively analyzed. Prescribed dose was 45 Gy with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus 100-108 Gy with LDR-BT, and 60 Gy with EBRT plus one fraction of 10 Gy with HDR-BT. 99% of patients received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for 6 months. Primary endpoint was to compare LDR and HDR boosts in terms of biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS). Secondary endpoint, after re-classifying patients into "favorable" and "unfavorable" sub-groups, was to analyze differences with a similar treatment intensity.

Results

Median overall follow-up for the total cohort was 66.5 months (range, 16-185 months). There were no significant differences in bPFS, overall survival, cause specific survival, local failure, lymph node failure, or distant failure when LDR or HDR was employed. bPFS at 90 months was 100% for favorable, and 89% and 85% for unfavorable patients at 60 months and 90 months, respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.017). The crude incidence of genitourinary acute and chronic toxicity grade 3 was 0.7% and 4%, respectively. Twelve patients (8%) had chronic rectal hemorrhage grade 2, in whom argon was applied (4 LDR and 8 HDR).

Conclusions

Combined treatment is an excellent therapeutic option in patients with intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma, with similar results in both LDR and HDR approaches and very low toxicities. Importantly, the current literature has indicated that unfavorable-risk patients belong to a different category, and should be treated as patients with high-risk factors. Therefore, the stratification and identification of both risk groups is extremely relevant.

Brachytherapy boost (BT-boost) or stereotactic body radiation therapy boost (SBRT-boost) for high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa)

Systematic review for the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa, D'Amico classification risk system) with external body radiation therapy (EBRT)+brachytherapy-boost (BT-boost) or with EBRT+stereotactic body RT-boost (SBRT-boost). In March 2020, 391 English citations on PubMed matched with search terms "high risk prostate cancer boost". Respectively 9 and 48 prospective and retrospective studies were on BT-boost and 7 retrospective studies were on SBRT-boost. Two SBRT-boost trials were prospective. Only one study (ASCENDE-RT) directly compared the gold standard treatment [dose-escalation (DE)-EBRT+androgen deprivation treatment (ADT)] versus EBRT+ADT+BT-boost. Biochemical control rates at 9 years were 83% in the experimental arm versus 63% in the standard arm. Cumulative incidence of late grade 3 urinary toxicity in the experimental arm and in the standard arm was respectively 18% and 5%. Two recent studies with HR-PCa (National Cancer Database) demonstrated better overall survival with BT-boost (low dose rate LDR or high dose rate HDR) compared with DE-EBRT. These recent findings demonstrate the superiority of EBRT+BT-boost+ADT versus DE-EBRT+ADT for HR-PCa. It seems that EBRT+BT-boost+ADT could now be considered as a gold standard treatment for HR-PCa. HDR or LDR are options. SBRT-boost represents an attractive alternative, but the absence of randomised trials does not allow us to conclude for HR-PCa. Prospective randomised international phase III trials or meta-analyses could improve the level of evidence of SBRT-boost for HR-PCa.

Risk factors for urethral stricture following external beam radiotherapy and HDR brachytherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

A potential late side effect of high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is urethral stricture. The purpose of this study was to evaluate dosimetric parameters possibly contributing to stricture development, including dose to bladder base and D2cc(Gy) within 10 mm of prostatic urethra (D2cc _10 mm), which has, so far, not been reported in the literature.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients developing urethral stricture, and matched controls, were identified from a prospective database of those receiving 46 Gy in 23 fractions of EBRT, followed by a single 15 Gy HDR brachytherapy dose. Patients had locally advanced, high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy treatment planning parameters (planning target volume (PTV) size (cm ³), V110(%) _{bladder base}, D2cc _10mm, number of HDR catheters, number of source dwell positions, and total source dwell time within 10 mm of the prostatic urethra) were analyzed to determine potential risk factors for urethral stricture.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were treated, 22 of whom developed a urethral stricture. Univariate logistic regression performed on the planning parameters identified increased PTV size and D2cc _10 mm, with decreased V110(%) _{bladder base} as risk factors for stricture formation.

CONCLUSIONS

It is suggested that PTV size, V110(%) _{bladder base}, and D2cc _10mm are predictive of urethral stricture formation following EBRT and brachytherapy to the prostate. This study demonstrates the importance of minimizing high dwell times and hot spots close to organs at risk and also the correction of any craniocaudal movement of catheters to avoid potential hot spots in the bulbomembranous urethra where there may be increased dose sensitivity.

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.

Building a High-Dose-Rate Prostate Brachytherapy Program With Real-Time Ultrasound-Based Planning: Initial Safety, Quality, and Outcome Results

Purpose

Growing evidence supports the efficacy and safety of high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy as a boost or monotherapy in prostate cancer treatment. We initiated a new HDR prostate brachytherapy practice in April 2014. Here, we report the learning experiences, short-term safety, quality, and outcome.

Methods and Materials

From April 2014 to December 2017, 164 men were treated with HDR brachytherapy with curative intent. Twenty-eight men (17.1%) underwent HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy, receiving 25 to 27 Gy in 2 fractions. Men treated with HDR brachytherapy as a boost received 19 to 21 Gy in 2 fractions. Fifty-two men (31.7%) had high-risk disease. HDR procedure times, dosimetry, and response were recorded and analyzed. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were recorded according to the toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.

Results

Mean HDR procedure times decreased yearly from 179 minutes in 2014 to 115 minutes in 2017. Median follow-up was 18.6 months (range, 3-55 months). At last review, 79% of patients reported returning to baseline GU status, and 100% of patients noted no change in GI status from their baseline. Four patients experienced acute urinary retention. Treatment planning target volume (PTV) was defined as prostate with margins. Dosimetrically, 97.5% of all HDR implants had PTV D90 ≥100%, 81.5% had PTV V100 ≥95%, 73.6% had maximal urethral doses ≤120%, and 77.5% had rectal 1 mL dose ≤70% (all but one ≤10.8 Gy). The estimated 3-year overall survival was 98.7% (95% confidence interval, 91.4%-99.8%), and disease-free survival was 96.2% (95% confidence interval, 89.5%-98.7%).

Conclusions

The low incidence of GU and GI complications in our cohort demonstrates that a HDR brachytherapy program can be successfully developed as a treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer.

High Dose Rate Brachytherapy in High-Risk Localised Disease - Why Do Anything Else?

The management of high-risk prostate cancer is challenging, as patients have a high risk of both local and distant relapse. Although adjuvant systemic treatment remains an important component of management, for those receiving radiotherapy, optimal local treatment should include a brachytherapy boost. This may be given by low dose rate (LDR) or high dose rate (HDR) techniques, but HDR has several advantages over LDR by virtue of more consistent dose optimisation, ability to treat outside the prostate and lower toxicity. A significant body of evidence now supports the use of HDR brachytherapy in addition to supplementary pelvic external beam radiotherapy for men with high-risk disease. Consistent evidence has emerged from randomised clinical trials, meta-analyses, and from institutional and multicentre cohort studies. It has been shown to improve local disease control and possibly reduce metastases and improve cancer-specific survival compared with external beam radiotherapy alone. It should be considered as standard treatment.

Results of 15 Gy HDR-BT boost plus EBRT in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: Analysis of over 500 patients

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

To report biochemical control associated with single fraction 15 Gy high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost followed by external beam radiation (EBRT) in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all patients with intermediate-risk disease treated with a real-time ultrasound-based 15 Gy HDR-BT boost followed by EBRT between 2009 and 2016 at a single quaternary cancer center was performed. Freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), cumulative incidence of androgen deprivation therapy use for biochemical or clinical failure post-treatment (CI of ADT) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) outcomes were measured.

RESULTS

518 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. Median age at HDR-BT was 67 years (IQR 61-72). 506 (98%) had complete pathologic information available. Of these, 146 (28%) had favorable (FIR) and 360 (69%) had unfavorable (UIR) intermediate-risk disease. 83 (16%) received short course hormones with EBRT + HDR. Median overall follow-up was 5.2 years. FFBF was 91 (88-94)% at 5 years. Five-year FFBF was 94 (89-99)% and 89 (85-94)% in FIR and UIR patients, respectively (p = 0.045). CI of ADT was 4 (2-6)% at 5 years. Five-year CI of ADT was 1 (0-3)% and 5 (2-8)% in FIR and UIR patients, respectively (p = 0.085). MFS was 97 (95-98)% at 5 years. Five-year MFS was 100 (N/A-100)% and 95 (92-98)% in FIR and UIR patients, respectively (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients, 15 Gy HDR-BT boost plus EBRT results in durable biochemical control and low rates of ADT use for biochemical failure.

High dose-rate brachytherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer

High dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy involves delivery of a high dose of radiation to the cancer with great sparing of surrounding organs at risk. Prostate cancer is thought to be particularly sensitive to radiation delivered at high dose-rate or at high dose per fraction. The rapid delivery and high conformality of dose results in lower toxicity than that seen with low dose-rate (LDR) implants. HDR combined with external beam radiotherapy results in higher cancer control rate than external beam only, and should be offered to eligible high and intermediate risk patients. While a variety of dose and fractionations have been used, a single 15 Gy HDR combined with 40-50 Gy external beam radiotherapy results in a disease-free survival of over 90% for intermediate risk and 80% for high risk. HDR monotherapy in two or more fractions (e.g., 27 Gy in 2 fractions or 34.5 Gy in 3) is emerging as a viable alternative to LDR brachytherapy for low and low-intermediate risk patients, and has less toxicity. The role of single fraction monotherapy to a dose of 19-20 Gy is evolving, with some conflicting data to date. HDR should also be considered as a salvage approach for recurrent disease following previous external beam radiotherapy. A particular advantage of HDR in this setting is the ease of delivering focal treatments, which combined with modern imaging allows focal dose escalation with minimal toxicity. Trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) based planning is replacing CT-based planning as the technique of choice as it minimizes or eliminates the need to move the patient between insertion, planning and treatment delivery, thus ensuring high accuracy and reproducibility of treatment.

Hypofractionation for prostate cancer: an update

Recent advances in image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) has prompted much interest in the use of high-dose-per-fraction regimens for prostate cancer. Furthermore, from a radiobiological standpoint, there is increasing evidence that prostate tumors have a relatively low ɑ/β ratio therefore, the use of hypofractionation may potentially offer acceptable tumor control while minimizing late toxicity to critical structures. Areas covered: This expert review explores the current evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. A particular emphasis was placed on large, randomized phase III trials as these are most likely to influence clinical practice. The authors discuss the use of both moderate and extreme hypofractionation. Expert commentary: The recent publication of 5-year outcomes from large prospective trials of moderate hypofractionation enhances our confidence that these techniques are both safe and effective. We recommend the fractionation scheme of 60 Gy in 20 fractions as this regimen was not associated with any notable increase in late toxicity. With respect to extreme hypofractionation, mature phase III trials are needed to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of these techniques. For now, the use of radiosurgery should be limited to participation in prospective clinical trials.