High dose rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for localised prostate cancer: a hypofractionated two-implant approach in 351 consecutive patients

Radiobiological Meta-Analysis of the Response of Prostate Cancer to High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy: Investigation of the Reduction in Control for Extreme Hypofractionation

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Clinical studies have shown a marked reduction in tumor control in prostate cancer treated with radically hypofractionated high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). The purpose of this study was to analyze the dose-response of prostate cancer treated with HDR-BT, specifically aiming at investigating the potential failure of the linear-quadratic (LQ) model to describe the response at large doses-per-fraction.

METHODS

We collated a dataset of dose-response to HDR-BT (3239 patients). The analysis was conducted separately for low and intermediate risk, resulting in 21 schedules (1633 patients) and 23 schedules (1606 patients), respectively. Data were fitted to tumor control probability models based on the LQ model, the linear-quadratic-linear (LQL), and a modification of the LQ model to include the effect of reoxygenation during treatment.

RESULTS

The LQ cannot fit the data unless the α/β is allowed to be high (∼[20, >100] Gy, 95% confidence interval). If the α/β is constrained to be low (≤8 Gy), the LQ model cannot reproduce the clinical results, and the LQL model, which includes a moderation of radiation damage with increasing dose, significantly improves the fitting. On the other hand, the reoxygenation model does not match the results obtained with the LQL. The clinically observed reduction in tumor control in prostate cancer treated with radical HDR-BT is better described by the LQL model. Using the best-fitting parameters, the BED for a 20 Gy × 1 treatment (128 Gyα/β) is far less than that of a conventional 2 Gy × 37 fractionation (196 Gyα/β).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis showed that the substantial loss of tumor control observed in extremely hypofractionated HDR-BT trials can only be explained by the LQ model if the α/β is very large (≥100 Gy), in clear disagreement with the limits set in the analysis of external radiotherapy data. It seems more reasonable that there is a moderation of the LQ-predicted effect with increasing dose per fraction. These results may assist in the design of radical HDR-BT treatments.

High-dose-rate Brachytherapy Monotherapy in Patients With Localised Prostate Cancer: Dose Modelling and Optimisation Using Computer Algorithms

AIMS

Interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is an effective therapy modality for patients with localized prostate carcinoma. The objectives of the study were to optimise the therapy regime variables using two models: response surface methodology (RSM) and artificial neural network (ANN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-one studies with 5651 patients were included (2078 patients presented as low-risk, 3077 patients with intermediate-risk, and 496 patients with high-risk). A comparison of these therapy schedules was carried out using an effective biologically effective dose (BEDef) that was calculated assuming the number of treatment days and dose (D) per day. The modelling and optimization of therapy parameters (BEDef and risk level) in order to obtain the maximum biochemical free survival (BFS) were carried out by the RSM and ANN models.

RESULTS

An optimal treatment schedule (BFS = 97%) for patients presented with low-risk biochemical recurrence would be D = 26 Gy applied in one application, 2 fractions at least 6 h apart, within an overall treatment time of 1 day (BEDef = 251 Gy) by the RSM and ANN model. For patients presented with intermediate- or high-risk an optimal treatment regime (BFS = 94% and 90%, respectively) would be D = 38 Gy applied in one application, 4 fractions at least 6 h apart, with an overall treatment time of 2 days (BEDef = 279 Gy) by the RSM and ANN models.

CONCLUSIONS

The RSM and ANN models determine almost the same optimal values for the set of predicted therapy parameters that make a feasible selection of an optimal treatment regime.

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.

Brachytherapy focal dose escalation using ultrasound based tissue characterization by patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer: Five-year results from single-center phase 2 trial

PURPOSE

This prospective trial investigates side effects and efficacy of focal dose escalation with brachytherapy for patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In the Phase II, monocentric prospective trial 101 patients with low-/intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled between 2011 and 2013. Patients received either PDR-/HDR-brachytherapy alone with 86-90 Gy (EQD2, α/β = 3 Gy) or PDR-/HDR-brachytherapy as boost after external beam radiation therapy up to a total dose of 91-96 Gy (EQD2, α/β = 3 Gy). Taking place brachytherapy all patients received the simultaneous integrated focal boost to the intra-prostatic tumor lesions visible in computer-aided ultrasonography (HistoScanning™) - up to a total dose of 108-119 Gy (EQD2, α/β = 3 Gy). The primary endpoint was toxicity. Secondary endpoints were cumulative freedom from local recurrence, PSA-free survival, distant metastases-free survival, and overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01409876.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 65 months. Late toxicity was generally low with only four patients scoring urinary grade 3 toxicity (4/101, 4%). Occurrence of any grade of late rectal toxicities was very low. We did not register any grade ≥2 of late rectal toxicities. The cumulative 5 years local recurrence rate (LRR) for all patients was 1%. Five years- biochemical disease-free survival estimates according Kaplan-Meier were 98,1% and 81,3% for low-/intermediate-risk and high-risk patients, respectively. Five years metastases-free survival estimates according Kaplan-Meier were 98,0% and 83,3% for all patients, low-/intermediate-risk and high-risk patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The 5 years-results from this Phase II Trial show that focal dose escalation with computer-aided ultrasonography and brachytherapy for patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer is safe and effective.

Ultrahypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: How Far Can We Go?

Following adoption of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy as a standard for localised prostate cancer, ultrahypofractioned radiotherapy delivered in five to seven fractions is rapidly being embraced by clinical practice and international guidelines. However, the question remains: how low can we go? Can radiotherapy for prostate cancer be delivered in fewer than five fractions? The current review summarises the evidence that radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer can be safely and effectively delivered in fewer than five fractions using high dose rate brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy. We also discuss important lessons learned from the single-fraction high dose rate brachytherapy experience.

Assessment of HDR brachytherapy-replicating prostate radiotherapy planning for tomotherapy, cyberknife and VMAT

A dosimetric study was undertaken to assess the ability of Cyberknife (CK), Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), and TomoTherapy (Tomo) to generate treatment plans that mimic the dosimetry of high dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR BT) for prostate cancer. The project aimed to assess the potential of using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for boost treatment of high-risk prostate cancer patients where HDR BT in combination with conformal external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is the standard of care. The datasets of 6 prostate patients previously treated with HDR BT were collated. VMAT, CK, and TomoTherapy treatment plans were generated for each dataset using the target and organ-at-risk structures as defined by the Radiation Oncologist during the HDR BT treatment process. The HDR BT plan isodoses were also converted into planning structures to assist the other modalities to achieve a HDR BT-like dose distribution. CK plans were created using both the iris collimator (IC) and a multileaf collimator (MLC). Comparison of the techniques was made based on dose-volume indices. Each plan was created at centres experienced using the respective treatment planning systems (TPS). Planning target volume (PTV V100%), i.e., the volume of the planning target volume (PTV) receiving 100% of the relative dose, in VMAT and TomoTherapy SBRT plans was higher than HDR BT plans. PTV V150% and V200%, i.e., volume of the PTV receiving 150% and 200% of the relative dose, were approached on all the CK MLC and TomoTherapy SBRT plans. However, it is not presently achievable for "virtual brachytherapy" SBRT to replicate the same high intraprostatic doses as HDR BT while meeting the constraints on the organs-at-risk (OARs). Half of the CK IC plans achieved PTV V150% but this was at the expense of high rectal dose. TomoTherapy and CK MLC plans achieved PTV V150% and V200% but the bladder dose was higher compared to CK IC plans. VMAT exhibited excellent PTV coverage based on V100 and OAR sparing, but without any ability to achieve the high intra-prostatic doses of HDR (V150% and V200%). SBRT techniques can be used to deliver hypofractionated radiotherapy to the PTV V100%. Based on the comparison of "physical" dose distributions, SBRT cannot presently achieve the same high intraprostatic doses as HDR BT while respecting the OAR constraints. SBRT still remains an attractive treatment option for delivering hypofractionated treatments for prostate cancer compared to HDR BT, in particular as it is less invasive and less resource intensive. Long-term outcomes of clinical trials comparing HDR BT and SBRT "prostate boosts" may show whether the high intraprostatic doses are clinically significant and correlate with outcomes.

High-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Rationale, current applications, and clinical outcome

Background

High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy (HDR BRT) has been enjoying rapid acceptance as a treatment modality offered to selected prostate cancer patients devoid of risk group, employed either in monotherapy setting or combined with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and is currently one of the most active clinical research areas.

Recent findings

This review encompasses all the current evidence to support the use of HDR BRT in various clinical scenario and shines light to the HDR BRT rationale, as an ultimately conformal dose delivery method enabling safe dose escalation to the prostate.

Conclusion

Valid long‐term data, both in regard to the oncologic outcomes and toxicity profile, support the current clinical indication spectrum of HDR BRT. At the same time, this serves as solid, rigid ground for emerging therapeutic applications, allowing the technique to remain in the spotlight alongside stereotactic radiosurgery.

Complications and side effects of high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To describe technical challenges and complications encountered during and after high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) and review management of these complications.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The authors performed a systematic review of the literature on toxicities encountered after prostate HDR-BT +/- external beam radiotherapy. A total of 397 studies were identified, of which 64 were included. A focused review of literature regarding the management of acute and late toxicities also performed.

RESULTS

Most acute toxicities include grade 0-2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Overall, Grade 3+ Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity after HDR-BT was low [genitourinary: 0-1%; gastrointestinal 0-3%]. Rates of fistula formation were <1%, and radiation cystitis/proctitis were <14% and more commonly reported in cohorts treated with HDR-BT boost and external beam radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR-BT both as monotherapy or combined with external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer is well tolerated. Serious complications are rare.

A radiobiological study of the schemes with a low number of fractions in high-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer

Purpose

Schemes with high doses per fraction and small number of fractions are commonly used in high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) for prostate cancer. Our aim was to analyze the differences between published clinical results and the predictions of radiobiological models for absorbed dose required in a single fraction monotherapy HDR-BT.

Material and methods

Published HDR-BT clinical results for low- and intermediate-risk patients with prostate cancer were revised. For 13 clinical studies with 16 fractionation schedules between 1 and 9 fractions, a dose-response relation in terms of the biochemical control probability (BC) was established using Monte Carlo-based statistical methods.

Results

We obtained a value of α/β = 22.8 Gy (15.1-60.2 Gy) (95% CI) much larger than the values in the range 1.5-3.0 Gy that are usually considered to compare the results of different fractionation schemes in prostate cancer radiotherapy using doses per fraction below 6 Gy. The doses in a single fraction producing BC = 90% and 95% were 22.3 Gy (21.5-24.2 Gy) and 24.3 Gy (23.0-27.9 Gy), respectively.

Conclusions

The α/β obtained in our analysis of 22.8 Gy for a range of dose per fraction between 6 and 20.5 Gy was much greater than the one currently estimated for prostate cancer using low doses per fraction. This high value of α/β explains reasonably well the data available in the region of high doses per fraction considered.

Interventional therapy in malignant conditions of the prostate

Interventional therapies are emerging modalities for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Their aim is to reduce the morbidity associated with radical therapies (rT) by minimizing damage to non-cancerous tissue, with priority given to sparing key structures such as the neurovascular bundles, external sphincter, bladder neck, and rectum, while maintaining local cancer control. Interventional ablative technologies deliver energy in different ways to destroy cancer cells. The most widely investigated techniques are brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, cryotherapy, and high-intensity focused ultrasound. Although functional outcomes of focal therapies have been encouraging, with generally low rates of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction, robust medium- and long-term oncological outcomes are not available for all techniques. To date, major controversies in focal therapy concern appropriate patient selection, efficacy of focal therapies, as well as treatment paradigms based on the dominant index lesion hypothesis. This review articles discusses the current status of interventional therapies and the oncological and functional outcomes.

A contemporary, nationwide analysis of surgery and radiotherapy treatment for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To characterize national clinical practice trends in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) in Australia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Population-level data were extracted from existing Medicare Benefits Schedule data for radical prostatectomy (RP) and brachytherapy (2002-2016), as well as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT; 2012-2016). Treatment rates were calculated relative to whole and PCa populations among privately treated patients. Overall age-related and geographical trends were analysed.

RESULTS

The use of RP and low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy increased between 2002 and 2009, but subsequently decreased to 124 and 6.9 per 100 000 men, respectively, in 2016. More dramatic decreases were observed for men aged <65 years. From 2012, rates of RP (15% drop) and LDR brachytherapy (58% drop) decreased, while the use of EBRT remained steady, falling by 5% to 42 per 100 000 men in 2016. Overall treatment increased in the age group 75-84 years, with the rate of RP increasing by 108%.

CONCLUSION

National claims data indicate there has been a reduction in PCa treatment since 2009, which is mostly attributable to a reduction in the treatment of younger patients and reduced use of brachytherapy. RP is most commonly used and its use is rising in men aged >65 years.

Pre-implant magnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound imaging in high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy: comparison of prostate volumes, craniocaudal extents, and contours

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the prostate contours drawn by two radiation oncologists and one radiologist on magnetic resonance (MR) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images. TRUS intra- and inter-fraction variability as well as TRUS vs. MR inter-modality and inter-operator variability were studied.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty patients affected by localized prostate cancer and treated with interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy at the National Cancer Institute in Milan were included in this study. Twenty-five patients received an exclusive two-fraction (14 Gy/fraction) treatment, while the other 5 received a single 14 Gy fraction as a boost after external beam radiotherapy. The prostate was contoured on TRUS images acquired before (virtual US) and after (real US) needle implant by two radiation oncologists, whereas on MR prostate was independently contoured by the same radiation oncologists (MR1, MR2) and by a dedicated radiologist (MR3). Absolute differences of prostate volumes (│ΔV│) and craniocaudal extents (│Δdz│) were evaluated. The Dice's coefficient (DC) was calculated to quantify spatial overlap between MR contours.

RESULTS

Significant difference was found between Vvirtual and Vlive (p < 0.001) for the first treatment fractions and between VMR1 and VMR2 (p = 0.043). Significant difference between cranio-caudal extents was found between dzvirtual and dzlive (p < 0.033) for the first treatment fractions, between dzvirtual of the first treatment fractions and dzMR1 (p < 0.001) and between dzMR1 and dzMR3 (p < 0.01). Oedema might be responsible for some of the changes in US volumes. Average DC values resulting from the comparison MR1 vs. MR2, MR1 vs. MR3 and MR2 vs. MR3 were 0.95 ± 0.04 (range, 0.82-0.99), 0.87 ± 0.04 (range, 0.73-0.91) and 0.87 ± 0.04 (range, 0.72-0.91), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate the importance of a multiprofessional approach to TRUS-guided HDR prostate brachytherapy. Specific training in MR and US prostate imaging is recommended for centers that are unfamiliar with HDR prostate brachytherapy.

Health-related-quality-of-life and toxicity after single fraction 19 Gy high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy: Phase II trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, tolerance and impact on health-related-quality-of-life (HRQoL) of the high-dose-rate brachytherapy of 19 Gy (BRT-HDR-19 Gy) single fraction in prostate cancer.

METHODS

From January 2014 to July 2016, 43 patients with low/intermediate risk were treated with BRT-HDR-19 Gy. The patients were monitored prospectively for toxicity and HRQoL.

RESULTS

The median age, initial PSA and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were 71 years (55-78), 7.0 ng/mL (4.2-17.8) and 5 (0-14) respectively. 44% were low-risk and 56% intermediate-risk. Median CTV-V100 (where Vn is the fractional volume of the organ that receives n% of the prescribed dose) was 96.5%, Urethral-Dmax 106% and rectum-2 cc (the dose to 2 cc of rectal wall) 53%. After a median follow-up of 20 months (4-26), acute grade-2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurred in 4 patients (9%) and none presented acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Similarly, four patients (9%) presented late GU grade-2 toxicity. No grade-3 toxicity occurred. In terms of HRQoL, there was a statistically significant decline in Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) urinary urgency/obstructive domain at month 3 (p = 0.047), and returned to baseline by month 6. Mean EPIC urinary incontinence, bowel, sexual and hormonal domains did not present significant post BRT-HDR-19 Gy changes. Patients rated their satisfaction at 6 months as "very-satisfied" (23%) or "extremely-satisfied" (77%).

CONCLUSIONS

BRT-HDR-19 Gy demonstrates excellent results in terms of toxicity, tolerance, safety, patient satisfaction and HRQoL.

High-dose rate brachytherapy as monotherapy in prostate cancer: A systematic review of its safety and efficacy

CONTEXT

High-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is an increasingly popular treatment for patients with localised prostate cancer (PC).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of HDR-BT as monotherapy in PC.

ACQUISITION OF EVIDENCE

A systematic literature review was conducted through searches on MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, CDR, ClinicalTrials and EuroScan. We assessed safety and efficacy indicators.

SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE

We selected 2 reviews and 12 uncontrolled studies, included in these 2 reviews. In terms of efficacy, local control in 6 studies was 97-100%. The biochemical progression-free survival varied as follows: 85-100% for low risk and 79-92% for high risk. Survival free of metastases was >95% at 8 years, except in one study where the survival rate was 87% at 5 years. The overall survival was ≥95% in 8 studies. In terms of safety, most of the studies recorded acute and long-term genitourinary and gastrointestinal complications, especially grade ≥2. Only 3 studies found grade 4 complications. All studies, except for one without complications, observed genitourinary complications that were more frequent and severe than the gastrointestinal complications. Two studies assessed the quality of life and showed an initial reduction in various domains and subsequent partial or total recovery, except in the sexual domain.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR-BT is effective as monotherapy, especially in cases of low to intermediate risk. There is insufficient information on high-risk patients. The short to medium-term toxicity was acceptable. Further research needs to be funded to provide more information on the long-term safety and efficacy of this treatment.

American Brachytherapy Society Task Group Report: Use of androgen deprivation therapy with prostate brachytherapy-A systematic literature review

PURPOSE

Prostate brachytherapy (PB) has well-documented excellent long-term outcomes in all risk groups. There are significant uncertainties regarding the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with brachytherapy. The purpose of this report was to review systemically the published literature and summarize present knowledge regarding the impact of ADT on biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A literature search was conducted in Medline and Embase covering the years 1996-2016. Selected were articles with >100 patients, minimum followup 3 years, defined risk stratification, and directly examining the role and impact of ADT on bPFS, CSS, and OS. The studies were grouped to reflect disease risk stratification. We also reviewed the impact of ADT on OS, cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, and on-going brachytherapy randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Fifty-two selected studies (43,303 patients) were included in this review; 7 high-dose rate and 45 low-dose rate; 25 studies were multi-institutional and 27 single institution (retrospective review or prospective data collection) and 2 were RCTs. The studies were heterogeneous in patient population, risk categories, risk factors, followup time, and treatment administered, including ADT administration and duration (median, 3-12 months);71% of the studies reported a lack of benefit, whereas 28% showed improvement in bPFS with addition of ADT to PB. The lack of benefit was seen in low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk (IR) disease and most high-dose rate studies. A bPFS benefit of up to 15% was seen with ADT use in patients with suboptimal dosimetry, those with multiple adverse risk factors (unfavorable IR [uIR]), and most high-risk (HR) studies. Four studies reported very small benefit to CSS (2%). None of the studies showed OS advantage; however, three studies reported an absolute 5-20% OS detriment with ADT. Literature suggests that OS detriment is more likely in older patients or those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Four RCTs with an adequate number of patients and well-defined risk stratification are in progress. One RCT will answer the question regarding the role of ADT with PB in favorable IR patients and the other three RCTs will focus on optimal duration of ADT in the uIR and favorable HR population.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with brachytherapy have excellent long-term disease outcomes. Existing evidence shows no benefit of adding ADT to PB in low-risk and favorable IR patients. UIR and HR patients and those with suboptimal dosimetry may have up to 15% improvement in bPFS with addition of 3-12 months of ADT, with uncertain impact on CSS and a potential detriment on OS. To minimize morbidity, one should exercise caution in prescribing ADT together with PB, in particular to older men and those with existing cardiovascular disease. Due to the retrospective nature of this evidence, significant selection, and treatment bias, no definitive conclusions are possible. RCT is urgently needed to define the potential role and optimal duration of ADT in uIR and favorable HR disease.

Trends in targeted prostate brachytherapy: from multiparametric MRI to nanomolecular radiosensitizers

The treatment of localized prostate cancer is expected to become a significant problem in the next decade as an increasingly aging population becomes prone to developing the disease. Recent research into the biological nature of prostate cancer has shown that large localized doses of radiation to the cancer offer excellent long-term disease control. Brachytherapy, a form of localized radiation therapy, has been shown to be one of the most effective methods for delivering high radiation doses to the cancer; however, recent evidence suggests that increasing the localized radiation dose without bound may cause unacceptable increases in long-term side effects. This review focuses on methods that have been proposed, or are already in clinical use, to safely escalate the dose of radiation within the prostate. The advent of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to better identify and localize intraprostatic tumors, and nanomolecular radiosensitizers such as gold nanoparticles (GNPs), may be used synergistically to increase doses to cancerous tissue without the requisite hazard of increased side effects.

Modelling second malignancy risks from low dose rate and high dose rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for localised prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To estimate the risks of radiation-induced rectal and bladder cancers following low dose rate (LDR) and high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy as monotherapy for localised prostate cancer and compare to external beam radiotherapy techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LDR and HDR brachytherapy monotherapy plans were generated for three prostate CT datasets. Second cancer risks were assessed using Schneider's concept of organ equivalent dose. LDR risks were assessed according to a mechanistic model and a bell-shaped model. HDR risks were assessed according to a bell-shaped model. Relative risks and excess absolute risks were estimated and compared to external beam techniques.

RESULTS

Excess absolute risks of second rectal or bladder cancer were low for both LDR (irrespective of the model used for calculation) and HDR techniques. Average excess absolute risks of rectal cancer for LDR brachytherapy according to the mechanistic model were 0.71 per 10,000 person-years (PY) and 0.84 per 10,000 PY respectively, and according to the bell-shaped model, were 0.47 and 0.78 per 10,000 PY respectively. For HDR, the average excess absolute risks for second rectal and bladder cancers were 0.74 and 1.62 per 10,000 PY respectively. The absolute differences between techniques were very low and clinically irrelevant. Compared to external beam prostate radiotherapy techniques, LDR and HDR brachytherapy resulted in the lowest risks of second rectal and bladder cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows both LDR and HDR brachytherapy monotherapy result in low estimated risks of radiation-induced rectal and bladder cancer. LDR resulted in lower bladder cancer risks than HDR, and lower or similar risks of rectal cancer. In absolute terms these differences between techniques were very small. Compared to external beam techniques, second rectal and bladder cancer risks were lowest for brachytherapy.

Portfolio of prospective clinical trials including brachytherapy: an analysis of the ClinicalTrials.gov database

Background

To evaluate the current status of prospective interventional clinical trials that includes brachytherapy (BT) procedures.

Methods

The records of 175,538 (100 %) clinical trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were downloaded on September 2014 and a database was established. Trials using BT as an intervention were identified for further analyses. The selected trials were manually categorized according to indication(s), BT source, applied dose rate, primary sponsor type, location, protocol initiator and funding source. We analyzed trials across 8 available trial protocol elements registered within the database.

Results

In total 245 clinical trials were identified, 147 with BT as primary investigated treatment modality and 98 that included BT as an optional treatment component or as part of the standard treatment. Academic centers were the most frequent protocol initiators in trials where BT was the primary investigational treatment modality (p < 0.01). High dose rate (HDR) BT was the most frequently investigated type of BT dose rate (46.3 %) followed by low dose rate (LDR) (42.0 %). Prostate was the most frequently investigated tumor entity in trials with BT as the primary treatment modality (40.1 %) followed by breast cancer (17.0 %). BT was rarely the primary investigated treatment modality for cervical cancer (6.8 %).

Conclusion

Most clinical trials using BT are predominantly in early phases, investigator-initiated and with low accrual numbers. Current investigational activities that include BT mainly focus on prostate and breast cancers. Important questions concerning the optimal usage of BT will not be answered in the near future.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-016-0624-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Propensity score matched comparison of SBRT versus IMRT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Objective

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an attractive option for prostate cancer due to its short treatment duration and cost. In this report, we compare the efficacy and toxicity outcomes of prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT to those who received intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

Methods

Two hundred sixty-three patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma were included, ranging from clinically very low- to high-risk groups. We retrospectively compare consecutive patients treated with SBRT with consecutive patients treated with conventionally fractionated IMRT. For most patients, SBRT was delivered to a total dose of 36.25 Gy in five fractions and IMRT to 75.6 Gy in 42 fractions. To minimize selection bias, we perform propensity score analyses.

Results

The treatment groups became similar after propensity matching with absolute standard bias reduced to ≤0.19. For the first analysis, 5-year actuarial survival was 90.8 and 88.1 % in SBRT and IMRT groups, respectively (p = 0.7260), while FFBF was 88.7 and 95.5 %, respectively (p = 0.1720). For the second analysis (accounting for risk group), actuarial 5-year survival was 96.7 and 87.1 % in the SBRT and IMRT groups, respectively (p = 0.3025), while FFBF was 89.7 and 90.3 %, respectively (p = 0.6446). Toxicity did not exceed grade 3 in any of the studied patients. The highest recorded genitourinary toxicity at the time of latest follow-up was grade 2.

Conclusion

Our data support the hypothesis that SBRT has non-inferior efficacy and toxicity rates as IMRT. Given the lower cost and convenience for patients, SBRT may be considered as an alternative treatment for localized prostate cancer.

Clinical evaluation of an endorectal immobilization system for use in prostate hypofractionated Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR)

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate a novel prostate endorectal immobilization system (EIS) for improving the delivery of hypofractionated Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) for prostate cancer.

Methods

Twenty patients (n = 20) with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer (T1-T2b, Gleason Score < 7, PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL), were treated with an EIS in place using Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), to a prescription dose of 26 Gy delivered in 2 fractions once per week; the intent of the institutional clinical trial was an attempt to replicate brachytherapy-like dosimetry using SABR. EBT3 radiochromic film embedded within the EIS was used as a quality assurance measure of the delivered dose; additionally, prostate intrafraction motion captured using pre- and post-treatment conebeam computed tomography (CBCT) scans was evaluated. Treatment plans were generated for patients with- and without the EIS to evaluate its effects on target and rectal dosimetry.

Results

None of the observed 3-dimensional prostate displacements were ≥ 3 mm over the elapsed treatment time. A Gamma passing rate of 95.64 ± 4.28 % was observed between planned and delivered dose profiles on EBT3 film analysis in the low-dose region. No statistically significant differences between treatment plans with- and without-EIS were observed for rectal, bladder, clinical target volume (CTV), and PTV contours (p = 0.477, 0.484, 0.487, and 0.487, respectively). A mean rectal V80% of 1.07 cc was achieved for plans using the EIS.

Conclusions

The EIS enables the safe delivery of brachytherapy-like SABR plans to the prostate while having minimal impact on treatment planning and rectal dosimetry. Consistent and reproducible immobilization of the prostate is possible throughout the duration of these treatments using such a device.

A sector-based dosimetric analysis of dose heterogeneity in high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

High-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy delivers a heterogeneous dose distribution throughout the prostate gland. There is however limited information regarding the spatial distribution of this dose heterogeneity. To this end, we analyzed the magnitude and location of intraprostatic dose heterogeneity in HDR prostate brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Five consecutive prostate cancer patients treated with HDR were analyzed. Based on CT-simulation images, each prostate was divided into three sections (apex, base, and mid-gland). These were further subdivided into eight symmetrical sections to give a total of 24 sections. Dose-volume histograms were analyzed from V100-V200% for these 24 sections comparing the means of individual regions, left vs right, apex vs base vs mid-gland, lateral vs medial, and anterior vs posterior. A separate analysis on dose as a function of individual region volume was also performed.

RESULTS

Analyses comparing the 24 regions showed a maximum 62% difference (range, 21.9-83.9%) at V130% and 19.9% (1.9-20.8%) at V200%. Seven regions were significantly decreased and one significantly elevated from V130-V180% when compared with the mean. The means for lateral sections were 1.57-fold higher than medial sections from V110-V200% (p < 0.0001). The dose at the base was significantly higher than the rest of the gland from V120-V200 (V150, 35.6 ± 16.2% vs 20.9 ± 13.1%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant intra-prostatic dose heterogeneity in prostate HDR brachytherapy. This is most notable in the increased dose to base and lateral portions of the gland. Further studies are needed to determine the impact of heterogeneity on clinical outcomes.