1
|
Long Depaquit T, Campagna J, Bastide C, Baboudjian M, Corral R, Uleri A, Toledano H. Salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (S-HIFU) for recurrence after primary radiotherapy of prostate cancer. THE FRENCH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY 2024; 34:102633. [PMID: 38547931 DOI: 10.1016/j.fjurol.2024.102633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2023] [Revised: 03/04/2024] [Accepted: 03/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/13/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate functional and oncological outcomes of salvage high-intensity focal ultrasound (S-HIFU) after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) failure in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS This single-center study included patients who underwent S-HIFU for local recurrence after EBRT between 2006 and 2023. Cancer-specific survival, metastasis-free survival and progression-free survival were illustrated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Disease progression was defined by one of the following criteria: increase of 2ng/mL or more above the PSA nadir, positive post-S-HIFU biopsy or initiation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of disease progression after S-HIFU. RESULTS A total of 52 S-HIFU sessions for 48 patients were performed. Median time between EBRT and S-HIFU was 6.5 years. Median PSA before S-HIFU was 3.2ng/mL and median PSA nadir after S-HIFU was 0.58ng/mL. A total of 39 (81.3%) complications was recorded, including 3 (6.3%) high grade complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. After a median follow-up period of 6 years, 14 (29.2%) patients developed metastatic disease. Eighteen (37.5%) patients had no recurrence, whereas 30 (62.5%) patients received ADT for disease progression. The estimated 5-yr cancer-specific survival (CSS), metastasis-free survival (MFS) and progression-free survival rates (PFSR) were 100%, 79.9% (95% CI 67-92) and 41.2% (95% CI 74-96), respectively. The estimated 10-yr CSS, MFS and PFSR were 80% (95% CI 45-100), 50.7% (95% CI 19.4-82.1) and 14% (95% CI 10.8-45), respectively. The hazard of progression increased with the intermediate (HR 3.8; 95% CI 0.99 to 15; p=0.049) and high pre-EBRT d'Amico-s risk group (HR 4.1; 95% CI 0.98 to 16.2; p=0.050). Also, the time between EBRT and S-HIFU was significantly associated with risk of progression (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.86; p=0.004). No significant difference linked to the disease progression (DP) risk was found between focal vs whole-gland treatment (p=0.70). CONCLUSION Physicians should consider HIFU as a local salvage treatment after failed EBRT, thus avoiding or delaying palliative androgen deprivation therapy. Further studies are needed to improve patient selection for this therapy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thibaut Long Depaquit
- Department of Urology, HIA Sainte-Anne, Toulon, France; Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France.
| | | | - Cyrille Bastide
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France
| | | | - Renaud Corral
- Department of Urology, HIA Sainte-Anne, Toulon, France; Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France; Department of Urology, Martigues Hospital, Martigues, France
| | | | - Harry Toledano
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France; Department of Urology, Martigues Hospital, Martigues, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Nakamoto T, Yoshida T, Shiga T, Taguchi M, Mishima T, Kawakita S, Murota T, Kinoshita H. Re-salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy for local recurrence of prostate cancer after salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy. IJU Case Rep 2024; 7:68-72. [PMID: 38173462 PMCID: PMC10758911 DOI: 10.1002/iju5.12670] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 11/01/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Salvage brachytherapy represents an effective treatment for local recurrence of prostate cancer after prior external beam radiotherapy. However, the optimal therapeutic strategies for local recurrence after salvage brachytherapy have not yet been determined. Case presentation We describe the case of a 77-year-old man who underwent re-salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy for local recurrence after carbon ion radiotherapy and salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy. We performed re-salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy for the recurrence with a different type of seed, which resulted in a significant reduction in the prostate-specific antigen level. During the 35-month follow-up after re-salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy, no recurrence of prostate cancer and no severe radiation-related toxicities were observed. Conclusion Our patient was successfully treated with re-salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy for local recurrence after salvage focal low-dose rate brachytherapy. This treatment strategy might be effective for such patients and is not associated with sexual dysfunction or severe adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takahiro Nakamoto
- Department of Urology and AndrologyKansai Medical UniversityOsakaJapan
| | - Takashi Yoshida
- Department of Urology and AndrologyKansai Medical UniversityOsakaJapan
| | - Toshiko Shiga
- Department of RadiologyKansai Medical University, Medical CenterOsakaJapan
| | - Makoto Taguchi
- Department of Urology and AndrologyKansai Medical University, Medical CenterOsakaJapan
| | - Takao Mishima
- Department of Urology and AndrologyKansai Medical University, Medical CenterOsakaJapan
| | - Shigenari Kawakita
- Department of Urology and AndrologyKansai Medical University, Medical CenterOsakaJapan
| | - Takashi Murota
- Department of Urology and AndrologyKansai Medical University, Medical CenterOsakaJapan
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Komori T, Kosaka T, Tanaka T, Watanabe K, Yasumizu Y, Mikami S, Oya M. Locally recurrent prostate cancer with RB1/TP53 alterations successfully treated by salvage focal brachytherapy: a case report. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL UROLOGY 2023; 11:339-343. [PMID: 37645609 PMCID: PMC10461036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2023] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 08/31/2023]
Abstract
Retinoblastoma transcriptional corepressor 1 (RB1) and tumor protein p53 (TP53) are well-known tumor suppressor genes; their alterations are associated with poor prognosis in human malignancies and quite rare in locally recurrent cases. The patient was a 58-year-old man who was diagnosed with cT1cN0M0 prostate cancer with Gleason score of 3+3=6 and underwent brachytherapy as the initial treatment. Local recurrence was detected in the left lobe of the prostate 154 months later and whole-exome sequencing that was performed at the request of the patient revealed RB1 loss-of-heterozygosity and TP53 p.I162Rfs*27 mutations. He underwent salvage focal brachytherapy with 125I seeds and serum prostate-specific antigen levels has been stabilized without any genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takahiro Komori
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of MedicineTokyo, Japan
| | - Takeo Kosaka
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of MedicineTokyo, Japan
| | - Tomoki Tanaka
- Department of Radiology, Keio University School of MedicineTokyo, Japan
| | - Keitaro Watanabe
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of MedicineTokyo, Japan
| | - Yota Yasumizu
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of MedicineTokyo, Japan
| | - Shuji Mikami
- Department of Pathology, National Hospital Organization Saitama HospitalTokyo, Japan
| | - Mototsugu Oya
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of MedicineTokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bray G, Bahadori A, Rama D. Salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer following primary radiation therapy, are benefits worth toxicity risks?: A systematic review. Prostate 2023; 83:489-497. [PMID: 36717113 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24491] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 01/06/2023] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer recurrence following radiation therapy remains controversial. We performed a systematic review to assess the efficacy and side effect profile of salvage SBRT for locally recurrent prostate cancer to define the role of salvage SBRT in clinical practice. METHODS A systematic review was carried out using Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Scopus databases. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were satisfied if studies reported on patients with prior radiation therapy for prostate cancer who had subsequently had a local recurrence. Those studies included were quality assessed using the ROBINS-I checklist. RESULTS Five studies in total met criteria for inclusion and included all reportable outcomes. A total of 265 participants are reported on in total. Median doses for SBRT ranged from 30 to 36 Gy delivered over 5-6 fractions. Recurrence free survival ranged from 40% to 76% at 2 years. Genitourinary toxicity was more prevalent than gastrointestinal toxicities. Grade 2 and 3 genitourinary complication rates ranged from 5% to 22% and 0% to 9%, respectively. Gastrointestinal grade 2 complication rates ranged from 0% to 11% and no grade 3 complications were recorded. DISCUSSION Salvage SBRT appears to be comparable and potentially superior in some aspects to other salvage therapies, taking into account the limitations in cross-study comparisons. This systematic review serves as one of the first to characterize SBRT as a salvage option for locally recurrent prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gerard Bray
- Urology department, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast, Australia
| | - Arya Bahadori
- Urology department, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast, Australia
| | - Darren Rama
- Urology department, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lee JJB, Lee E, Choi WH, Kim J, Chang KH, Kim DW, Shin HB, Kim TH, Byun HK, Cho J. Dosimetric outcomes of preoperative treatment planning with intraoperative optimization using stranded seeds in prostate brachytherapy. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0265143. [PMID: 35353847 PMCID: PMC8967021 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2021] [Accepted: 02/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the quality of low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (BT) based on treatment-related dosimetric outcomes. Data of 100 patients treated using LDR BT with stranded seeds from November 2012 to November 2017 were collected. The prescription dose for the prostate was 145 Gy. The dose constraints for the preoperative plan were: V100% ≥ 95%, V150% ≤ 60%, V200% ≤ 20% for the prostate; V100% for rectum, ≤ 1 cc; and V200 Gy for urethra, 0.0 cc. Intraoperative real-time dose calculation and postoperative dose distribution analysis on days 0 and 30 were performed. Median dosimetric outcomes on days 0 and 30 respective were: V100% 92.28% and 92.23%, V200% 18.63% and 25.02%, and D90% 150.88 Gy and 151.46 Gy for the prostate; V100% for the rectum, 0.11 cc and 0.22 cc; and V200 Gy for the urethra, 0.00 cc and 0.00 cc, respectively. Twenty patients underwent additional seed implantation to compensate for insufficient dose coverage of the prostate. No loss or substantial migration of seeds or severe toxicity was reported. With stranded seed implantation and intraoperative optimization, appropriate dose delivery to the prostate without excessive dose to the organs at risk could be achieved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jason Joon Bock Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Eungman Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | | | - Jihun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Kyung Hwan Chang
- Department of Digital Health Solution, Douzone Bizon, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Dong Wook Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Han Back Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Tae Hyung Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Nowon Eulji Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Hwa Kyung Byun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jaeho Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Henry A, Pieters BR, André Siebert F, Hoskin P. GEC-ESTRO ACROP prostate brachytherapy guidelines. Radiother Oncol 2022; 167:244-251. [PMID: 34999134 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.12.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/31/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
This is an evidence-based guideline for prostate brachytherapy. Throughout levels of evidence quoted are those from the Oxford Centre for Evidence based Medicine (https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/oxford-centre-for-evidence-based-medicine-levels-of-evidence-march-2009). Prostate interstitial brachytherapy using either permanent or temporary implantation is an established and evolving treatment technique for non-metastatic prostate cancer. Permanent brachytherapy uses Low Dose Rate (LDR) sources, most commonly I-125, emitting photon radiation over months. Temporary brachytherapy involves first placing catheters within the prostate and, on confirmation of accurate positioning, temporarily introducing the radioactive source, generally High Dose Rate (HDR) radioactive sources of Ir-192 or less commonly Co-60. Pulsed dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy has also been used for prostate cancer [1] but few centres have adopted this approach. Previous GEC ESTRO recommendations have considered LDR and HDR separately [2-4] but as there is considerable overlap, this paper provides updated guidance for both treatment techniques. Prostate brachytherapy allows safe radiation dose escalation beyond that achieved using external beam radiotherapy alone as it has greater conformity around the prostate, sparing surrounding rectum, bladder, and penile bulb. In addition there are fewer issues with changes in prostate position during treatment delivery. Systematic review and randomised trials using both techniques as boost treatments demonstrate improved PSA control when compared to external beam radiotherapy alone [5-7].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ann Henry
- St James University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Bradley R Pieters
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frank André Siebert
- University of Kiel/University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein Campus Kiel, Germany
| | - Peter Hoskin
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK; University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Focal low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2021; 12:554-561. [PMID: 33437303 PMCID: PMC7787206 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2020.101688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To prospectively investigate the efficacy and feasibility of focal low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Material and methods Between October 2014 and May 2019, nineteen low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients who presented with abnormality on both diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) underwent focal LDR brachytherapy at our institution. Focal gross tumor volume (F-GTV) was delineated on transrectal ultrasound, based on abnormality seen on fused T2-weighted MRI. F-GTV was expanded by 5 mm, as a safety margin, to create focal clinical target volume (F-CTV). Prescribed dose to F-CTV was 145 Gy. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was determined using Phoenix criterion (prostate specific antigen nadir + 2 ng/ml). Pre- and post-implant dosimetry data were compared using non-parametric Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated using common terminology criteria for adverse events. Results Mean F-CTV D90% was significantly lower in the post-implant evaluation than in intraoperative planning (p = 0.004). On post-implant dosimetry, the mean D90% for F-GTV and mean V100% for the entire prostate were 222 Gy and 35%, respectively. Median follow-up time for all patients was 31 months. BCR occurred in one patient after 23 months. Kaplan-Meier 2-year BCR-free rate was 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.4-100%). No patients had grade 1 or greater gastrointestinal toxicity. Three patients who were taking α-blockers to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (present before brachytherapy), experienced no treatment-related genitourinary toxicities. Two patients suffered from temporary grade 2 urinary frequency. None of the remaining patients experienced grade 2 or higher genitourinary toxicity. Conclusions Focal LDR prostate brachytherapy appears acceptable for MRI-based index tumors, with a low cumulative incidence of BCR. Such brachytherapy might offer a feasible minimally invasive therapeutic option for localized prostate cancer.
Collapse
|
8
|
Salvage low dose rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer recurrence following definitive external beam radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol 2020; 155:42-47. [PMID: 33075391 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.10.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2020] [Revised: 09/25/2020] [Accepted: 10/12/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to describe the safety and efficacy of salvage low dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy for local prostate cancer recurrence following definitive RT. MATERIALS AND METHODS We included patients from two prospectively maintained institutional databases who underwent salvage LDR brachytherapy for biopsy confirmed intra-prostatic recurrence following primary RT. All patients were without evidence of metastatic disease. Freedom from biochemical failure (FFbF), prostate cancer specific survival (PCaSS), and overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier estimates. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify factors predictive of FFbF. Toxicity was graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0. RESULTS 108 patients were included. Median follow-up was 6.3 years. The 5- and 10-year actuarial survival outcomes were as follows: FFbF, 63.1% and 52.0%; PCaSS, 90.5% and 77.8%; OS, 80.9% and 56.7%. On multivariate modeling, increasing grade group (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.02-1.95, p = 0.036) and initial PSA at diagnosis (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.004-1.05, p = 0.022) were associated with worse FFbF. Grade 3 toxicity occurred in 16.7% of patients; including genitourinary events in 15.7% and gastrointestinal events in 2.8% of patients. IPSS scores increased following implant, peaking at 2 months (median IPSS 20, p = 0.002) and thereafter remaining elevated throughout follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Salvage LDR brachytherapy is safe and efficacious, with acceptable grade 3+ toxicity and good biochemical control on long-term follow-up. Patients with higher grade group and higher PSA at initial diagnosis may be at increased risk for biochemical failure.
Collapse
|
9
|
Pons-Llanas O, Burgos-Burgos J, Roldan-Ortega S, Conde-Moreno A, Celada-Alvarez F, Ruiz-Martinez JC, Lliso-Valverde F, Tormo-Micó A, Perez-Calatayud J, López-Torrecilla J. Salvage I-125 brachytherapy for locally-recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2020; 25:754-759. [PMID: 32684865 DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2020.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2020] [Revised: 05/15/2020] [Accepted: 06/23/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Retrospective, single-institution analysis of clinical outcomes and treatment-related toxicity in patients treated with salvage I-125 low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy (BT) for locally-recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy. Materials and methods Between 2008 and 2018, 30 patients with biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer recurrence underwent salvage treatment with I-125 LDR-BT. Of these 30 patients, 14 were previously treated with primary external beam radiotherapy (EBRT; median dose, 73 Gy) and 16 with primary I-125 LDR-BT (145 Gy and 160 Gy in 14 and 2 cases, respectively). At seed implantation, the mean age was 75.8 years, with a median Gleason score of 7 and pre-salvage PSA of <10 ng/mL. Six patients received androgen deprivation therapy for six months after relapse diagnosis. The prescribed salvage I-125 BT dose to the gland was 120-130 Gy, with dose restrictions of Dmax <135% (urethra) and <100% (rectum). Toxicity was evaluated according to the CTCAE scale (v4.0). Results At a median follow-up of 45 months, the biochemical recurrence-free survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86.7%, 56.7% and 53.3%, respectively. Overall survival at 5 years was 87%. On the multivariate analysis, two variables were significant predictors of recurrence: PSA at relapse and nadir PSA post-salvage. Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity was observed in 5 patients (radiation-induced cystitis in 3 cases and urethral stenosis in 2) and G3 gastrointestinal toxicity in 3 patients (rectal bleeding). Conclusion Salvage therapy with I-125 brachytherapy is a safe and effective treatment option for locally-recurrent prostate cancer in previously-irradiated patients. High pre-salvage PSA and post-salvage nadir PSA values were significantly associated with a worse disease control after salvage I-125 LDR-BT. In well-selected patients, I-125 LDR-BT is comparable to other salvage therapies in terms of disease control and toxicity. However, more research is needed to determine the optimal management of locally-recurrent prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- O Pons-Llanas
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - J Burgos-Burgos
- Radiotherapy Department, Hospital, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
| | - S Roldan-Ortega
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - A Conde-Moreno
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - F Celada-Alvarez
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - J C Ruiz-Martinez
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - F Lliso-Valverde
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - A Tormo-Micó
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | - J Perez-Calatayud
- Radiotherapy Department, La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Bergamin S, Eade T, Kneebone A, Booth J, Hsiao E, Schembri GP, Szymura K, Le A, Kwong C, Brown C, Hunter J, Hruby G. Interim Results of a Prospective Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Directed Focal Stereotactic Reirradiation Trial for Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 108:1172-1178. [PMID: 32659332 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.07.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2020] [Revised: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report the feasibility, toxicity, and preliminary outcomes (metabolic and biochemical) of 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT)-directed focal prostate reirradiation using linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic body radiation treatment (SBRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS From March 2016 to March 2019, 25 patients were enrolled in a prospective single institution trial (ACTRN12617000035325). Eligibility criteria included patients with biopsy proven isolated prostate recurrence after definitive irradiation, with concordant multiparametric MRI and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT findings, and a prostate-specific antigen of less than 15 ng/mL at the time of recurrence. The study included a sequential dose escalation component with the first 18 patients receiving 36 Gy in 6 fractions on alternate days with subsequent patients receiving 38 Gy in 6 fractions assuming acceptable toxicity. RESULTS Median age was 72 years (range, 62-83) with a median time between first radiation treatment and salvage SBRT of 8.3 years (range, 4.5- 13.6). Median prostate-specific antigen at reirradiation was 4.1 (range, 1.1-16.6). The median follow-up was 25 months (range, 13-46). Acute grade 1 and 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurred in 6 (24%) and 1 (4%) men, respectively. Acute grade 1 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity occurred in 8% with one acute grade 3 GI toxicity (4%) due to a rectal ulcer overlying the hydrogel. Late grade 1 and 2 GU toxicity occurred in 28% and 4%. Late grade 1 GI toxicity occurred in 8% with no grade 2 or greater toxicity. Twenty-four patients have undergone per-protocol 12-month 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT, of which 23 (92%) demonstrated a complete metabolic response. Biochemical freedom from failure was 80% at 2 years with 3 out of 4 of the biochemical failures exhibiting recurrent local disease. CONCLUSIONS PSMA-directed salvage focal reirradiation to the prostate using linear accelerator-based SBRT is feasible and safe. Toxicity was low, with very favorable short term local and biochemical control in a carefully selected cohort of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Bergamin
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Northern Sydney Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Thomas Eade
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Northern Sydney Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Andrew Kneebone
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Northern Sydney Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jeremy Booth
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Edward Hsiao
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET, Royal North Shore Hospital, Australia
| | - Geoffrey P Schembri
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET, Royal North Shore Hospital, Australia
| | - Kathryn Szymura
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Andrew Le
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Carol Kwong
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Chris Brown
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; National Health and Medical Research Council, Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Julia Hunter
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - George Hruby
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Northern Sydney Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Khoo CC, Miah S, Connor MJ, Tam J, Winkler M, Ahmed HU, Shah TT. A systematic review of salvage focal therapies for localised non-metastatic radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol 2020; 9:1535-1545. [PMID: 32676441 PMCID: PMC7354313 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.08.21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Although radiotherapy to the prostate for cancer is effective, recurrence occurs in 10–15% within 5 years. Traditional salvage treatments for men with radiorecurrent prostate cancer comprise of watchful waiting (WW) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) or radical prostatectomy (RP). Neither strategy provides ideal therapeutic ratios. Salvage focal ablation is an emerging option. We performed a systematic review of the Medline and Embase databases for studies reporting outcomes of focal salvage brachytherapy (sBT), cryotherapy (sCT) or high-intensity focused ultrasound (sHIFU) for radiorecurrent prostate cancer (conception to April 2019). Results were screened for inclusion against predetermined eligibility criteria. Certain data were extracted, including rates of biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), metastasis, conversion to second-line therapies and adverse events. Of a total 134 articles returned from the search, 15 studies (14 case series and 1 comparative study) reported outcomes after focal sBT [5], sCT [7] and sHIFU [3]. Cohort size varied depending on intervention, with eligible studies of sBT being small case series. Median follow-up ranged from 10 to 56 months. Although pre-salvage demographics were similar [median age range, 61–75 years; prostate-specific antigen (PSA) range, 2.8–5.5 ng/mL], there was heterogeneity in patient selection, individual treatment protocols and outcome reporting. At 3 years, BDFS ranged from 61% to 71.4% after sBT, 48.1–72.4% after sCT and 48% after sHIFU. Only studies of sCT reported 5-year BDFS, which ranged from 46.5% to 54.4%. Rates of metastasis were low after all salvage modalities, as were conversion to second-line therapies (although this was poorly reported). Grade 3 adverse events were rare. This systematic review indicates that salvage focal ablation of radiorecurrent prostate cancer provides acceptable oncological outcomes and is well tolerated. Unfortunately, there is heterogeneity in the study design of existing evidence. Level 1 research comparing salvage focal therapies to existing whole-gland strategies is needed to further establish the role of these promising treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher C Khoo
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Saiful Miah
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.,Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK
| | - Martin J Connor
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Joseph Tam
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Mathias Winkler
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Hashim U Ahmed
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Taimur T Shah
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.,Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Current status of prostate brachytherapy in Japan. Jpn J Radiol 2020; 38:934-941. [DOI: 10.1007/s11604-020-00993-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2020] [Accepted: 05/18/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
13
|
Brachytherapy for the urologist: A multidisciplinary team update for 2019. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL UROLOGY 2019. [DOI: 10.1177/2051415819841703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Brachytherapy is a well-established treatment for localised prostate cancer. Urologists are often tasked with discussing all available treatment options with the newly diagnosed patient. Unlike radical prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy, knowledge of brachytherapy may be limited. The aim of this article is to provide an up-to-date guide on patient selection, modern brachytherapy techniques and the management of side effects, such that the core urologist can be more confident in both discussing initial treatment options and the long-term management of brachytherapy patients. Level of Evidence: Level 5 - review article
Collapse
|
14
|
A Review of Permanent Prostate Brachytherapy as Practiced in Japan. Brachytherapy 2019. [DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-0490-3_12] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|
15
|
Focal Salvage Treatment of Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review of Current Strategies and Future Perspectives. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10:cancers10120480. [PMID: 30513915 PMCID: PMC6316339 DOI: 10.3390/cancers10120480] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2018] [Revised: 11/25/2018] [Accepted: 11/28/2018] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the last decades, primary prostate cancer radiotherapy saw improving developments, such as more conformal dose administration and hypofractionated treatment regimens. Still, prostate cancer recurrences after whole-gland radiotherapy remain common, especially in patients with intermediate- to high-risk disease. The vast majority of these patients are treated palliatively with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), which exposes them to harmful side-effects and is only effective for a limited amount of time. For patients with a localized recurrent tumor and no signs of metastatic disease, local treatment with curative intent seems more rational. However, whole-gland salvage treatments such as salvage radiotherapy or salvage prostatectomy are associated with significant toxicity and are, therefore, uncommonly performed. Treatments that are solely aimed at the recurrent tumor itself, thereby better sparing the surrounding organs at risk, potentially provide a safer salvage treatment option in terms of toxicity. To achieve such tumor-targeted treatment, imaging developments have made it possible to better exclude metastatic disease and accurately discriminate the tumor. Currently, focal salvage treatment is being performed with different modalities, including brachytherapy, cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Oncologic outcomes seem comparable to whole-gland salvage series, but with much lower toxicity rates. In terms of oncologic control, these results will improve further with better understanding of patient selection. Other developments, such as high-field diagnostic MRI and live adaptive MRI-guided radiotherapy, will further improve precision of the treatment.
Collapse
|
16
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW With the increasing incidence of low-to-intermediate risk of prostate cancer (PCa) by the introduction of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, focal therapy has become one of the promising treatment options in the world. In Asia, same movement are occurring using several technologies including cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound, brachytherapy and irreversible electroporation. However, these are still not common strategies to treat organ-confined PCa. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most updated experience and future direction of focal therapy in Asian countries. RECENT FINDINGS The prevalence and diagnosis of PCa are increasing in Asian countries. This increase is related to various factors including the widespread implementation of PSA testing and lifestyle changes to more Westernized diets. With the increasing detection rate of early stage PCa, overdetection and overtreatment are recognized even in Asia. In this setting, accumulating data on multiparametric MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy as well as MRI-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy suggest the potential in improving the detection of clinically significant PCa in Asia. Furthermore, targeted focal therapy has emerged as a promising treatment strategy aiming for both providing oncological outcome and maintaining functional preservation in many Asian countries. SUMMARY At present, focal therapy is not a current standard choice for the treatment of localized PCa in Asian countries. However, with the increase of localized PCa and patient's preference for less invasive treatment with preservation of organ-function, focal therapy should become a definite treatment option for localized PCa in Asia.
Collapse
|
17
|
Valle LF, Greer MD, Shih JH, Barrett T, Law YM, Rosenkrantz AB, Shebel H, Muthigi A, Su D, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Krauze AV, Kaushal A, Choyke PL, Türkbey B, Citrin DE. Multiparametric MRI for the detection of local recurrence of prostate cancer in the setting of biochemical recurrence after low dose rate brachytherapy. Diagn Interv Radiol 2018; 24:46-53. [PMID: 29317377 PMCID: PMC5765929 DOI: 10.5152/dir.2018.17285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2017] [Revised: 10/20/2017] [Accepted: 11/13/2017] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has utility in detecting post-radiotherapy local recurrence. We conducted a multireader study to evaluate the diagnostic performance of mpMRI for local recurrence after low dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy. METHODS A total of 19 patients with biochemical recurrence after LDR brachytherapy underwent 3T endorectal coil mpMRI with T2-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with pathologic confirmation. Prospective reads by an experienced prostate radiologist were compared with reads from 4 radiologists of varying experience. Readers identified suspicious lesions and rated each MRI detection parameter. MRI-detected lesions were considered true-positive with ipsilateral pathologic confirmation. Inferences for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), kappa, and index of specific agreement were made with the use of bootstrap resampling. RESULTS Pathologically confirmed recurrence was found in 15 of 19 patients. True positive recurrences identified by mpMRI were frequently located in the transition zone (46.7%) and seminal vesicles (30%). On patient-based analysis, average sensitivity of mpMRI was 88% (standard error [SE], 3.5%). For highly suspicious lesions, specificity of mpMRI was 75% (SE, 16.5%). On lesion-based analysis, the average PPV was 62% (SE, 6.7%) for all lesions and 78.7% (SE, 10.3%) for highly suspicious lesions. The average PPV for lesions invading the seminal vesicles was 88.8% (n=13). The average PPV was 66.6% (SE, 5.8%) for lesions identified with T2-weighted imaging, 64.9% (SE, 7.3%) for DCE, and 70% (SE, 7.3%) for DWI. CONCLUSION This series provides evidence that mpMRI after LDR brachytherapy is feasible with a high patient-based cancer detection rate. Radiologists of varying experience demonstrated moderate agreement in detecting recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca F. Valle
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Matthew D. Greer
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Joanna H. Shih
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Tristan Barrett
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Yan Mee Law
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Andrew B. Rosenkrantz
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Haytham Shebel
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Akhil Muthigi
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Daniel Su
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Maria J. Merino
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Bradford J. Wood
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Peter A. Pinto
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Andra V. Krauze
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Aradhana Kaushal
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Barış Türkbey
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| | - Deborah E. Citrin
- From Radiation Oncology Branch (L.F.V., A.V.K., A.K., D.E.C. ), Molecular Imaging Program (M.D.G., P.L.C., B.T.), Biometric Research Program (J.H.S.), Urologic Oncology Branch (A.M., P.A.P.), Laboratory of Pathology (M.J.M.), Center for Interventional Oncology (B.J.W.), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Maryland, USA; Department of Radiology (T.B.), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic Radiology (Y.M.L.), Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology (A.B.R.), Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA; Department of Radiology (H.S.), Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura City, Egypt; Orange Country Urology Associates (D.S.), Laguna Hills, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Oncological outcome, complications, lower urinary tract symptoms, and health-related quality of life after low-dose-rate salvage brachytherapy for recurrent prostate cancer following primary radiotherapy: a report of 8 cases. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2017; 9:364-372. [PMID: 28951757 PMCID: PMC5611453 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2017.69235] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2017] [Accepted: 07/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose We evaluated our experience with low-dose-rate salvage brachytherapy for local recurrence after primary prostate radiotherapy, and described the changes in lower urinary tract symptoms and health-related quality of life. Material and methods Between 2011 and 2016, eight men with local recurrence after primary prostate radiotherapy underwent iodine-125 salvage brachytherapy with a prescribed dose of 110 or 145 Gy. Recurrence-free survival was evaluated with a post-treatment prostate-specific antigen profile. The toxicity and changes in lower urinary tract symptoms and health-related quality of life during the follow-up were evaluated on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0, International Prostate Symptom Score, Short Form-8, and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, respectively. Results The median follow-up was 12.2 months (range, 8.3-71.9) after salvage brachytherapy. Of all eight patients, two (25%) experienced treatment failure, one of whom developed left seminal vesicle recurrence 36 months after salvage brachytherapy for the right seminal vesicle recurrence, while the other developed bone metastases after 6 months. The International Prostate Symptom Scores peaked at 3 months, and returned to baseline by 6 months. The scores of all domains of health-related quality of life remained unchanged during the 12-month follow-up after salvage brachytherapy. Early grade ≤ 2 genitourinary toxicity was observed in five patients (63%), and late grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity in one patient (13%) having persistent diarrhea. No patient required intermittent catheterization and no grade 3 or greater toxicity occurred during follow-up. Conclusions The present study is our experiment of eight patients undergoing salvage brachytherapy, suggesting that this modality is noninvasive, safe, and an effective salvage local treatment in selected patients. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate lower urinary tract symptoms and health-related quality of life in the post-treatment period in prostate cancer patients.
Collapse
|
19
|
Focal therapy for prostate cancer: the technical challenges. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2017; 9:383-389. [PMID: 28951759 PMCID: PMC5611463 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2017.69809] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2017] [Accepted: 08/24/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
20
|
Kollmeier MA, Zelefsky M, McBride S. Magnetic resonance imaging-based salvage brachytherapy: Moving toward a focal paradigm. Brachytherapy 2017; 16:770-777. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2017.02.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2016] [Revised: 02/22/2017] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
21
|
Focal application of low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: a pilot study. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2017; 9:197-208. [PMID: 28725242 PMCID: PMC5509985 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2017.68424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2017] [Accepted: 05/12/2017] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the feasibility and to report the early outcomes of focal treatment of prostate cancer using low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-PB). Material and methods Seventeen patients were screened with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), 14 of whom proceeded to receive trans-perineal template mapping biopsy (TTMB). Focal LDR-PB was performed on five eligible patients using dual air kerma strength treatment plans based on planning target volumes derived from cancer locations and determined by TTMB. Patient follow-up includes prostate specific antigen (PSA) measurements, urinary and sexual function questionnaires, repeated imaging and TTMB at specific intervals post-treatment. Results Feasibility of focal LDR-PB was shown and short-term outcomes are promising. While the detection rate of tumors, a majority of which were low grade GS 3 + 3, was found to be low on mpMRI (sensitivity of 37.5%), our results suggest the potential of mpMRI in detecting the presence of higher grade (GS ≥ 3 + 4), and bilateral disease indicating its usefulness as a screening tool for focal LDR-PB. Conclusions Low-dose-rate brachytherapy is a favorable ablation option for focal treatment of prostate cancer, requiring minimal modification to the standard (whole gland) LDR-PB treatment, and appears to have a more favorable side effect profile. Further investigation, in the form of a larger study, is needed to assess the methods used and the long-term outcomes of focal LDR-PB.
Collapse
|
22
|
Salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy for histologically confirmed macroscopic local relapsed prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2016; 8:477-483. [PMID: 28115952 PMCID: PMC5241376 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2016.64441] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2016] [Accepted: 11/14/2016] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the feasibility of the use of real-time magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) +/– external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in patients with histologically-proven local relapse after radical prostatectomy. Material and methods We retrospectively reviewed 13 patients treated with real-time MRI-TRUS fusion HDR-BT for a local relapse of prostate cancer after radical surgery. All patients underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to confirm the presence of macroscopic lesions in prostate bed, and choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) to rule out nodal or distant metastases. Local failure was confirmed by transrectal biopsy. Patients without previous EBRT received 1 fraction of 15 Gy with HDR-BT plus hypofractionated EBRT (37.5 Gy in 15 fractions). Two patients received 2 fractions of 12 Gy with HDR-BT without EBRT. Follow-up visits were at 1, 3, 6 months, and every 6 months thereafter. Results After a median follow-up of 7 months, all patients showed an appropriate biochemical response. Median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels before treatment, 1 month, and 6 months after HDR-BT were 2.62 ng/ml (range: 1.55-9.61), 0.97 ng/ml (range: 0.12-3.14), 0.23 ng/ml (range: 0.1-0.74), respectively. Five patients (42%) experienced acute grade 1 GU toxicity and 1 patient (8%) suffered from grade 2 GU toxicity. Regarding gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, 5 patients referred grade 1 acute toxicity and 1 grade 2 (proctitis). No late toxicity has been observed so far. Conclusions MRI-TRUS fusion guided salvage HDR-BT +/– EBRT is a feasible procedure for patients with local macroscopic relapse in tumor bed after radical prostatectomy. Exquisite selection of patients through mpMRI and choline PET/CT is crucial to avoid overtreatment. A larger number of patients and longer follow-up are required in order to draw more solid conclusions regarding the effectiveness of this strategy.
Collapse
|
23
|
Peters M, Piena MA, Steuten LM, van der Voort van Zyp JR, Moerland MA, van Vulpen M. Comparative cost-effectiveness of focal and total salvage 125I brachytherapy for recurrent prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2016; 8:484-491. [PMID: 28115953 PMCID: PMC5241382 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2016.64808] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2016] [Accepted: 12/06/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Focal salvage (FS) iodine 125 (125I) brachytherapy could be an effective treatment for locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa). Toxicity is often reduced compared to total salvage (TS) while cancer control can be maintained, which could increase cost-effectiveness. The current study estimates the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of FS compared to TS. MATERIAL AND METHODS A decision analytic Markov model was developed, which compares costs and QALYs associated with FS and TS. A 3-year time horizon was adopted with six month cycles, with a hospital perspective on costs. Probabilities for genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity and their impact on health-related quality of life (SF-36) were derived from clinical studies in the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis, using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, was performed to quantify the joint decision uncertainty up to the recommended maximum willingness-to-pay threshold of €80,000/QALY. RESULTS Focal salvage dominates TS as it results in less severe toxicity and lower treatment costs. Decision uncertainty is small, with a 97-100% probability for FS to be cost-effective compared to TS (€0-€80,000/QALY). Half of the difference in costs between FS and TS was explained by higher treatment costs of TS, the other half by higher incidence of severe toxicity. One-way sensitivity analyses show that model outcomes are most sensitive to utilities and probabilities for severe toxicity. CONCLUSIONS Focal salvage 125I brachytherapy dominates TS, as it has lower treatment costs and leads to less toxicity in our center. Larger comparative studies with longer follow-up are necessary to assess the exact influence on (biochemical disease free) survival and toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Max Peters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Both authors contributed equally to this research
| | - Marjanne A. Piena
- University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
- Both authors contributed equally to this research
| | | | | | - Marinus A. Moerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marco van Vulpen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|