Hydrogel Spacer Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Pivotal Trial: Dosimetric and Clinical Effects of Perirectal Spacer Application in Men Undergoing Prostate Image Guided Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

Configuration analysis of the injection position and shape of the gel spacer in gynecologic brachytherapy

PURPOSE

In this single-institution retrospective study, configuration analysis was performed to determine the optimal location and volume of hyaluronic acid gel spacer injection into the rectovaginal or vesicovaginal septum for effective dose reduction (DR) to the organs at risk (OARs), the rectum and bladder.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

70 and 50 intracavitary brachytherapy treatment plans used only vaginal cylinders with gel spacers for the rectal and bladder sides, respectively, whereas 28 did not use spacers. Correlation analysis was performed between the geometrical parameters and injection position of the gel spacers and the 2-cm³ covering doses of the OARs for each treatment.

RESULTS

A higher DR was predicted for hyaluronic acid gel spacer injection within ±5 mm and ±2.5 mm in the lateral-medial direction from the midpoint on the rectal and bladder sides, and ±10 mm in the cranial-caudal direction from the midpoint on the rectal side. There were correlations between 2-cm³ covering doses and the gel spacer parameters: the volume on the rectal (p = 0.02) and bladder (p = 0.04) sides; the craniocaudal length on the rectal side (p << 0.05); and ventrodorsad thickness on each OAR (p << 0.05) sides. There was no significant difference in the DR between a volume of ∼10 cm³ and that of a higher volume (p >> 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A gel spacer volume of ∼10 cm³ provides sufficient OAR DR if its gravity point is on the midpoint between the cylinder applicator and OAR, and its craniocaudal length covers the active length of the cylinder applicator.

Effect of a hydrogel spacer on the intrafractional prostate motion during CyberKnife treatment for prostate cancer

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a hydrogel spacer on intrafractional prostate motion during CyberKnife treatment. The retrospective study enrolled 24 patients (with the hydrogel spacer = 12, without the hydrogel spacer = 12) with two fiducial markers. Regarding intrafractional prostate motion, the offset values (mm) of three axes (X-axis; superior [+] to inferior [-], Y-axis; right [+] to left [-], Z-axis; posterior [+] to anterior [-]) obtained from fiducial markers position between a digitally reconstructed radiographs images and live images in the Target Locating System were used, and extracted from generated log files. The mean values of the offset and each standard deviation were calculated for each patient, and both the groups were compared. For all the patients, a total of 2204 offset values and timestamps (without the hydrogel spacer group: 1065, with the hydrogel spacer group: 1139) were recorded for the X-, Y-, and Z-axes, respectively. The offset values (mean ± standard deviation) for the X-, Y-, and Z-axes were -0.04 ± 0.92 mm, -0.03 ± 0.97 mm (P = 0.66), 0.02 ± 0.51, -0.02 ± 0.49 mm (P = 0.50), and 0.56 ± 0.97 mm, 0.34 ± 1.07 mm (P = 0.14), in patients inserted without or with the hydrogel spacer, respectively. There was no effect of a hydrogel spacer on the intrafractional prostate motion in the three axes during CyberKnife treatment for prostate cancer.

Impact of hydrogel peri-rectal spacer insertion on prostate gland intra-fraction motion during 1.5 T MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy

Background

The assessment of organ motion is a crucial feature for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Rectal spacer may represent a helpful device in order to outdistance rectal wall from clinical target, but its impact on organ motion is still a matter of debate. MRI-Linac is a new frontier in radiation oncology as it allows a superior visualization of the real-time anatomy of the patient and the current highest level of adaptive radiotherapy.

Methods

We present data regarding a total of 100 fractions in 20 patients who underwent MRI-guided prostate SBRT for low-to-intermediate risk prostate cancer with or without spacer. Translational and rotational shifts were computed on the pre- and post-treatment MRI acquisitions referring to the delivery position for antero-posterior, latero-lateral and cranio-caudal direction, and assessed using the Mann-Whitney U-Test.

Results

All patients were treated with a five sessions schedule (35 Gy/5fx) using MRI-Linac for a median fraction treatment time of 50 min (range, 46–65). In the entire study sample, median rotational displacement was 0.1° in cranio-caudal, − 0.002° in latero-lateral and 0.01° in antero-posterior direction; median translational shift was 0.11 mm in cranio-caudal, − 0.24 mm in latero-lateral and − 0.22 mm in antero-posterior. A significant difference between spacer and no-spacer patients in terms of rotational shifts in the antero-posterior direction (p = 0.033) was observed; also for translational shifts a positive trend was detected in antero-posterior direction (p = 0.07), although with no statistical significance. We observed statistically significant differences in the pre-treatment planning phase in favor of the spacer cohort for several rectum dose constraints: rectum V32Gy < 5% (p = 0.001), V28 Gy < 10% (p = 0.001) and V18Gy < 35% (p = 0.039). Also for bladder V35 Gy < 1 cc, the use of spacer provided a dosimetric advantage compared to the no-spacer subpopulation (p = 0.04). Furthermore, PTV V33.2Gy > 95% was higher in the spacer cohort compared to the no-spacer one (p = 0.036).

Conclusion

In our experience, the application of rectal hydrogel spacer for prostate SBRT resulted in a significant impact on rotational antero-posterior shifts contributing to limit prostate intra-fraction motion. Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to confirm this ideally favorable effect and to assess any potential impact on clinical outcomes.

Current topics in radiotherapy for genitourinary cancers: Consensus statements of the Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada

INTRODUCTION

The biennial meeting of the Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada (GUROC) took place November 22-23, 2019. A consensus-building session was held during the meeting addressing topics of emerging interest or controversy in the management of genitourinary malignancies.

METHODS

Draft statements were debated among all meeting attendees in an open forum with anonymous live voting. Statements for which there was at least 75% agreement among attendees were adopted as GUROC consensus.

RESULTS

Four evidence-based consensus statements were developed. First, the use of prostate radiotherapy is recommended in the setting of de novo low-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer to improve overall survival. Second, the support of ongoing randomized trials evaluating metastasis-directed ablative local therapy in oligometastatic prostate cancer is recommended; where such trials are available, off-trial use of oligometastasis-directed ablative radiotherapy at this time is strongly discouraged. Third, routine use of prostate-rectal hydrogel spacer devices in patients with localized prostate cancer planned to receive external beam radiotherapy is not recommended; instead, selective use in patients at highest risk of rectal toxicity may be considered. Finally, multidisciplinary consultation is recommended for all patients with newly diagnosed localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The GUROC consensus statements provide practical guidance to clinicians in areas of current controversy in the management of prostate and bladder cancer, and it is hoped that their implementation will contribute to improved outcomes in real-world practice and greater support of clinical trials.

Overview of patient preparation strategies to manage internal organ motion during radiotherapy in the pelvis

Introduction:

Pelvic internal organs change in volume and position during radiotherapy. This may compromise the efficacy of treatment or worsen its toxicity. There may be limitations to fully correcting these changes using online image guidance; therefore, effective and consistent patient preparation and positioning remain important. This review aims to provide an overview of the extent of pelvic organ motion and strategies to manage this motion.

Methods and Materials:

Given the breadth of this topic, a systematic review was not undertaken. Instead, existing systematic reviews and individual high-quality studies addressing strategies to manage pelvic organ motion have been discussed. Suggested levels of evidence and grades of recommendation for each strategy have been applied.

Results:

Various strategies to manage rectal changes have been investigated including diet and laxatives, enemas and rectal emptying tubes and rectal displacement with endorectal balloons (ERBs) and rectal spacers. Bladder-filling protocols and bladder ultrasound have been used to try to standardise bladder volume. Positioning the patient supine, using a full bladder and positioning prone with or without a belly board, has been examined in an attempt to reduce the volume of irradiated small bowel. Some randomised trials have been performed, with evidence to support the use of ERBs, rectal spacers, bladder-filling protocols and the supine over prone position in prostate radiotherapy. However, there was a lack of consistent high-quality evidence that would be applicable to different disease sites within the pelvis. Many studies included small numbers of patients were non-randomised, used less conformal radiotherapy techniques or did not report clinical outcomes such as toxicity.

Conclusions:

There is uncertainty as to the clinical benefit of many of the commonly adopted interventions to minimise pelvic organ motion. Given this and the limitations in online image guidance compensation, further investigation of adaptive radiotherapy strategies is required.

Association of the Placement of a Perirectal Hydrogel Spacer With the Clinical Outcomes of Men Receiving Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Perirectal spacers are intended to lower the risk of rectal toxic effects associated with prostate radiotherapy. A quantitative synthesis of typical clinical results with specific perirectal spacers is limited.

Objective

To evaluate the association between perirectal hydrogel spacer placement and clinical outcomes of men receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Data Sources

A systematic search was performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for articles published through September 2019.

Study Selection

Studies comparing men who received a hydrogel spacer vs men who did not receive a spacer (controls) prior to prostate radiotherapy.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Via random-effects meta-analysis, group comparisons were reported using the weighted mean difference for continuous measures and the risk ratio for binary measures.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Procedural results, the percentage volume of rectum receiving at least 70 Gy radiation (v70), early (≤3 months) and late (>3 months) rectal toxic effects, and early and late changes in bowel-related quality of life on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (minimal clinically important difference, 4 points).

Results

The review included 7 studies (1 randomized clinical trial and 6 cohort studies) involving 1011 men (486 who received a hydrogel spacer and 525 controls), with a median duration of patient follow-up of 26 months (range, 3-63 months). The success rate of hydrogel spacer placement was 97.0% (95% CI, 94.4%-98.8% [5 studies]), and the weighted mean perirectal separation distance was 11.2 mm (95% CI, 10.1-12.3 mm [5 studies]). Procedural complications were mild and transient, occurring in 0% to 10% of patients within the studies. The hydrogel spacer group received 66% less v70 rectal irradiation compared with controls (3.5% vs 10.4%; mean difference, -6.5%; 95% CI, -10.5% to -2.5%; P = .001 [6 studies]). The risk of grade 2 or higher rectal toxic effects was comparable between groups in early follow-up (4.5% in hydrogel spacer group vs 4.1% in control group; risk ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52-1.28; P = .38 [6 studies]) but was 77% lower in the hydrogel spacer group in late follow-up (1.5% vs 5.7%; risk ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.99; P = .05 [4 studies]). Changes in bowel-related quality of life were comparable between groups in early follow-up (mean difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -3.1 to 3.4; P = .92 [2 studies]) but were greater in the hydrogel spacer group in late follow-up (mean difference, 5.4; 95% CI, 2.8-8.0; P < .001 [2 studies]).

Conclusions and Relevance

For men receiving prostate radiotherapy, injection of a hydrogel spacer was safe, provided prostate-rectum separation sufficient to reduce v70 rectal irradiation, and was associated with fewer rectal toxic effects and higher bowel-related quality of life in late follow-up.

Heterogenous Dose-escalated Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for All Risk Prostate Cancer: Quality of Life and Clinical Outcomes of an Institutional Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Previous prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy studies delivered uniform doses of 35 to 40 Gy/5 fx. Attempts at uniform dose escalation to 50 Gy caused high rates of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. We hypothesize that heterogeneous dose escalation to regions nonadjacent to sensitive structures (urethra, rectum, and bladder) is safe and efficacious.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were enrolled on a prospective pilot study. The primary endpoint was treatment-related GI and genitourinary (GU) toxicity. The secondary endpoints included quality of life (QOL) assessed by the EPIC-26 questionnaire and biochemical control. The target volume received 36.25 Gy/5 fx. The target >3 mm from sensitive was dose escalated to 50 Gy/5 fx.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were enrolled. Three patients had low, 14 intermediate, and 18 high-risk disease. The mean initial prostate specific antigen was 15.1 ng/mL. Androgen deprivation therapy was given to 19 patients. Median follow-up was 46 months. Urinary irritation/obstructive and urinary bother scores declined by minimal clinically important difference threshold from baseline at 6 weeks, but subsequently recovered by 4 months. No differences in QOL scores were observed for urinary incontinence, bowel domain, bloody stools, or sexual domain. One patient developed acute grade 4 GU toxicity and acute grade 4 GI toxicity. The incidence of late high grade toxicity was 1/35 for GU toxicity and 2/35 for GI toxicity. Freedom from biochemical failure at 3 years was 88.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneous dose-escalated prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy is feasible with low rates of acute and late toxicities and favorable QOL outcomes in patients with predominantly intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer.

SpaceOAR© hydrogel rectal dose reduction prediction model: a decision support tool

Prostate cancer external beam radiation therapy can result in toxicity due to organ at risk (OAR) dose, potentially impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol-based spacer, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted between prostate gland and rectum may significantly reduce dose received by the rectum and hence risk of rectal toxicity. SOH implant is not equally effective in all patients. Determining patients in which the implant will offer most benefit, in terms of rectal dose reduction, allows for effective management of SOH resources. Several factors have been shown to be correlated with reduction in rectal dose including distance between rectum and planning treatment volume (PTV), volume of rectum in the PTV, and change in rectum volume pre- to post-SOH. Several of these factors along with other pre-SOH CT metrics were able to predict reduction in rectal dose associated with SOH implant. Rectal V55Gy metric, was selected as the dose level of interest in the context of 60 Gy in 20 fraction treatment plans. Models were produced to predict change in RV55Gy and pre-SOH hydrogel RV55Gy. These models offered R-squared between 0.81 and 0.88 with statistical significance in each model. Applying an ω 1  = 3% lower limit of pre-SOH RV55 Gy and an ω 2  = 3.5% lower limit on change in RV55 Gy, retained 60% of patients experiencing the largest rectal dose reduction from the hydrogel. This may offer a clinically useful tool in deciding which patients should receive SOH implant given limited resources. Predictive models, nomograms, and a workflow diagram were produced for clinical management of SOH implant.

Rectal wall saline displacement for improved margin during MRI-guided cryoablation of primary and recurrent prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To describe safety, efficacy, and added oncologic margin of saline displacement of the rectal wall during MRI-guided cryoablation of primary and recurrent prostate cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted for patients who underwent MRI-guided cryoablation with saline displacement of the rectal wall for treatment of primary and recurrent prostate cancer over a 2-year period. Saline displacement was used when the distance from the edge of the ablation area to the rectal wall was insufficient to provide at least a 5-mm treatment margin. Pre- and post-ablation rectal wall displacement distances as well as ablative zone margins were assessed with MRI. Saline displacement distance was measured from the rectal wall to the edge of the lesion for focal lesion ablation and from the edge of the prostate for hemi-gland ablation. Immediate and intermediate-term complications were assessed.

RESULTS

Saline displacement was used in 25 patients undergoing MRI-guided cryoablation. Twenty-one patients underwent salvage cryoablation, while four patients had it as primary treatment for prostate cancer. Median pre- and post- saline displacement rectal wall displacement distances were 6.0 and 11.2 mm, respectively (P < 0.0001). Median-added oncologic margin achieved by saline displacement was 4.6 mm (range 0.6-26.5). Median follow-up was 14 months (range 5-29). There were no intra-procedural complications and 3 patients experienced minor (Clavien-Dindo grade I) complications. One rectal complication occurred in a patient undergoing salvage cryotherapy with a history of extensive pelvic surgery and radiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Saline infusion at the time of MRI- guided cryoablation for prostate cancer resulted in increased distances between the target lesion and rectum. This is a useful technique in providing an added oncologic margin when treating lesions close to the rectal wall.

Prostatic irradiation-induced sexual dysfunction: a review and multidisciplinary guide to management in the radical radiotherapy era (Part I defining the organ at risk for sexual toxicities)

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men. Radiotherapy is a curative option that is administered via external beam radiation, brachytherapy, or in combination. Erectile, ejaculatory and orgasm dysfunction(s) is/are known potential and common toxicities associated with prostate radiotherapy. Our multidisciplinary team of physicians and/or scientists have written a three (3) part comprehensive review of the pathogenesis and management radiation-induced sexual dysfunction. Part I reviews pertinent anatomy associated with normal sexual function and then considers the pathogenesis of prostate radiation-induced sexual toxicities. Next, our team considers the associated radiobiological (including the effects of time, dose and fractionation) and physical (treatment planning and defining a novel Organ at Risk (OAR)) components that should be minded in the context of safe radiation treatment planning. The authors identify an OAR (i.e., the prostatic plexus) and provide suggestions on how to minimize injury to said OAR during the radiation treatment planning process.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

What is the quality of hydrogel spacer insertions? and which patients will benefit? A literature review

Aim:

To evaluate the quality of rectal hydrogel spacer (HS) insertions from literature in patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer. The secondary aim is to assess the benefit of HSs in patients with risk factors more likely to have rectal complications, such as non-conventional radiotherapy dose fractionations and high-risk disease.

Method and materials:

A literature search of peer-reviewed electronic articles was carried out using Boolean connectors and Medical Subject Headings in the databases. Databases searched included ScienceDirect, Medline and Cinahl. The articles were assessed using relevant critical appraisal skills programme tools.

Results:

From the 26 studies used, HS showed a clinically significant relative reduction in rectal planning dose volumes for both high- and low-risk prostate cancer patients in a range of radiotherapy treatment modalities including volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Spacer placements were successfully inserted in 99% of patients. However, rectal wall infiltration occurrence was 6% and ≥2 cm unsymmetrical placements in 2%.

Findings:

A spacer scoring system based on the HS symmetry has provided evidence of the quality of the position inserted, which was visually aided by T2-wieghted MRIs. Despite optimal HS placements ranging from 62 to 72%, HS had a clinically significant reduction of ≥25% in planned rectal V70 dose in 97% of patients.

Efficacy of a hydrogel spacer in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Objectives

We aimed to compare the dose constraints fulfillment rate of the three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy treatment plan before and after a hydrogel spacer insertion.

Methods

The planning computed tomography scans of 39 patients who received stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer were used. All patients inserted a hydrogel spacer and underwent computed tomography scans before and after spacer insertion. The three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans according to NCCN classification, low-, intermediate- and high-risk, were made for each patient. Clinical target volume included prostate and seminal vesicle 2 cm for high risk, prostate and seminal vesicle 1 cm for intermediate risk and prostate only for low risk. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy including a seven-field conformal technique with 76 Gy in 38 fractions. Dose constraints for rectum and bladder were V70 Gy ≤ 15%, V65 Gy ≤ 30% and V40 Gy ≤ 60%.

Results

Among 39 patients, 35 (90%), 19 (49%) and 13 (33%) and 38 (97%), 38 (97%) and 34 (87%) patients before and after the spacer insertion fulfilled rectum dose constraints for low-, intermediate- and high-risk plans, respectively. A hydrogel spacer significantly reduced rectum dose and improved the rectum dose constraints fulfillment rate in intermediate (P &lt; 0.01) and high (P &lt; 0.01), but no difference was found in low-risk plan (P = 0.25). On multivariate analysis, spacer use was associated with the higher rectum dose constraints fulfillment rate.

Conclusions

A hydrogel spacer reduced rectum dose and improved the dose constraints fulfillment rate in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plan. Although IMRT is the standard treatment, 3D-CRT using a hydrogel spacer may be a treatment option.

Hyaluronic acid gel injection in rectovaginal septum reduced incidence of rectal bleeding in brachytherapy for gynecological malignancies

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to report our initial clinical results of hyaluronic acid gel injection (HGI) in the rectovaginal septum (RVS) to reduce the incidence of rectal bleeding in vaginal brachytherapy for gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Since 2008, CT based image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) was initiated, and since 2015, HGI in the RVS was introduced in our institution. Vaginal cylinder with or without tandem or additional interstitial needles were applied for patients with gynecologic malignancies. Rectum dosimetric parameters and incidence of late rectum bleeding were compared between patients with and without HGI in the RVS.

RESULTS

Between May 2008 and October 2017, 83 patients with gynecologic malignancies were treated with IGABT involving vaginal cylinder. Eleven patients who were treated for palliative intention were excluded, and 72 patients were subjected to the analysis. Of the total 72 patients 46 were with uterine cervical cancer, 19 uterine corpus cancer, five vaginal cancer, one vulvar cancer, and one ovarian cancer. Fifteen and 57 patients were irradiated with and without HGI in the RVS, respectively. With a median follow-up period of 57.7 (4.7-123.1) months, 30 (41.7%) patients suffered from radiation-related rectal bleeding. Patients with HGI in the RVS had a statistically significant lower incidence of rectal bleeding compared with those without it (13.3% vs. 49.1%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HGI in the RVS reduced the incidence of late rectal bleeding for patients with gynecologic malignancies treated by vaginal cylinder and was not associated with HGI-procedure-related adverse events.

Prostate brachytherapy procedural training: incorporation of related procedures in resident training and competency assessment

Purpose

Inadequate procedural training is of increasing concern in resident training, especially in prostate brachytherapy (PB). Transperineal rectal spacer placement (TRSP) requires many of the same proficiencies as PB. This work describes the assessment of teaching techniques focusing on developing critical competencies for PB using related clinical procedures (TRSP).

Material and methods

For PB and TRSP, key competencies were identified: 9 for PB and 7 for TRSP; 4 are shared between PB and TRSP. "Comfort level" with these procedures was assessed prior to and following participation in TRSP.

Results

8 of 12 trainees at our institution participated in TRSP procedures. 2 of these trainees had prior experience with PB or related procedures and were excluded. Trainees self-reported "comfort levels" between 0 and 3 for four competency domains. Initial median comfort (MC) level for competency domains relevant to PB included: patient positioning (median 1, range 0-2), transrectal ultrasound imaging (median 1, range 0-1), fiducial placement (median 1, range 0-1), and hydrodissection (median 0, range 0-1). Median number of TRSP procedures performed by assessed trainees during the analysis period was 4 (range 1-6). Following TRSP procedure training, MC level increased: 2 points for patient positioning (median 3, range 1-3; p < 0.01), 1.5 points for transrectal ultrasound imaging (median 2.5, range 1.3, p < 0.001); 1 point for fiducial placement (median score 2, range 1-3; p < 0.001); and 1.5 points for hydrodissection (median score 2, range 1-3; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Increasing trainee involvement in related procedures to develop core competencies may help facilitate increased comfort with common skills critical to the independent performance of PB.

In silico comparison of the dosimetric impacts of a greater omentum spacer for abdominal and pelvic tumors in carbon-ion, proton and photon radiotherapy

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare carbon-ion (C-ion), proton and photon radiotherapy (RT) plans with regard to dose reduction of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract by using a greater omentum spacer (GO spacer).

Methods

We retrospectively retrieved data for ten patients who received the GO spacer as surgical spacer placement for abdominal and pelvic tumors. Simulation plans were created on pre-spacer Computed Tomography (CT) and post-spacer CT for C-ion RT, proton RT and photon RT to compare the dose of the GI tract. The plans were normalized so that at least 95% of the planning target volume (PTV) received 70 Gy (relative biological effectiveness equivalent) delivered in 35 fractions. All plans were created with the lowest possible dose to the GI tract under conditions that meet the dose constraints for the PTV and spinal cord (maximum dose < 45 Gy). The part of the GI tract to be evaluated was defined as that most adjacent to the PTV. C-ion RT plans and proton RT plans were calculated by a spot scanning technique, and photon RT plans were calculated employing by fixed-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Results

D2 cc and V10–70 of the GI tract were significantly lower on post-spacer plans than on pre-spacer plans for all three RT modalities. Regarding post-spacer plans, D2 cc of the GI tract was significantly lower on C-ion RT plans and proton RT plans than on photon RT plans (C-ion vs photon p = 0.001, proton vs photon p = 0.002). However, there was no significant difference between C-ion RT plans and proton RT plans for D2 cc of the GI tract (C-ion vs proton p = 0.992). In the photon RT plan for one patient, D2 cc of the GI tract did not meet < 50 Gy.

Conclusions

The GO spacer shows a significant dose reduction effect on the GI tract.

Case series illustrating the synergistic use of hydrogel spacer and MR-guidance to increase the radiotherapeutic index for localized prostate cancer

•

Polyethylene glycol hydrogel spacer allows radiotherapy in challenging scenarios.

•

Polyethylene glycol hydrogel material properties may limit broader applicability.

•

MRI-guided brachytherapy unique scenario to use PEG without compromising prostate resolution.

Background

The risk of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity may limit the use of curative-intent radical radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PCa) in circumstances where morbidity of treatment may exceed an acceptable threshold. Rectal spacers are used to expand the distance between the anterior rectal wall and the prostate, consequently sparing the rectum from the high-dose region.

Case presentations

We report three clinical scenarios of PCa patients treated at our institution, where risk of RT-associated rectal toxicity may be increased: inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), salvage brachytherapy (BT) after previous external beam RT (EBRT), and tailored dose-escalation with focal BT to the gross tumor volume followed by stereotactic body RT. Prior to RT, a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel spacer was successfully placed in all cases. Treatment comprised magnetic resonance (MR) guided high dose-rate BT ± EBRT. All patients completed treatment uneventfully, without any significant GI toxicity at last follow-up.

Conclusions

These cases illustrate the utility of PEG hydrogel spacer, where concerns of radiation induced toxicity may have previously limited the application of radiotherapy. The synergistic use of these novel devices together with MR-guided BT may expand the indications and therapeutic index of curative-intent RT-based treatments, while minimizing the risks of GI toxicity.

Placement of SpaceOAR hydrogel spacer for prostate cancer patients treated with iodine-125 low-dose-rate brachytherapy

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to report on our early experience with hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR) placement in combination with iodine-125 low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

METHODS

From April 2018, SpaceOAR hydrogel spacer was placed in 100 consecutive patients undergoing iodine-125 low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Complications and the status of the placement were evaluated. Deformation of the prostate by the spacer was examined measuring prostate diameters and evaluating the change from preoperative status. The position of the prostate was similarly examined by evaluating the change in distance between the pubic symphysis and the prostate. Post-plan dosimetric data were compared with 200 patients treated without a spacer.

RESULTS

No complications were found during either the intraoperative or perioperative periods. The mean displacement distance of 11.64 mm was created, the mean value before spacer placement was 0.28 mm (P < 0.0001). The change of the prostate diameters showed a positive increase in all directions, with no significant negative change in any one direction. Regarding the change in distance between pubic symphysis and the prostate, no significant shortening trend was observed between the two groups (P = 0.14). Whereas the dosimetric parameters showed means of 0.001 and 0.026 cc for RV150 and RV100 in the spacer group, they were 0.025 and 0.318 cc, respectively, in the non-spacer group, showing a significant decrease in both parameters (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate deformation secondary to hydrogel placement might adversely affect dosimetric parameters in patients undergoing low-dose-rate brachytherapy. However, a significant reduction in the rectal dose can be adopted without adversely affecting the other parameters related to treatment outcome.

Major Complications and Adverse Events Related to the Injection of the SpaceOAR Hydrogel System Before Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Review of the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database

Purpose: SpaceOAR^® is a Food and Drug Administration-approved hydrogel injection used to create space between the prostate and rectum during prostate radiotherapy. It has shown to significantly reduce the rectal radiation dose with lower rates of rectal toxicity. Despite a high safety performance in initial trials, SpaceOAR remains in early clinical use. Thus, we examined emerging safety reports as the system becomes more widely utilized. Methods: We reviewed the SpaceOAR manufacturer website for the safety profile and complications associated with the SpaceOAR hydrogel. We then compared this with reports submitted to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. Results: The manufacturer website reported risks including pain, needle penetration, and/or gel injection into a nearby organ or blood vessel, local inflammation, infection, urinary retention, and local rectal injury or symptoms. There were 22 unique reports discussing 25 patient cases in the MAUDE database from January 2015 to March 2019, with an increasing number of reports each year up through 2018. Unique major complications including acute pulmonary embolism, severe anaphylaxis, prostatic abscess and sepsis, purulent perineal drainage, rectal wall erosion, and rectourethral fistula were reported. Conclusion: Despite well-documented clinical benefits of the SpaceOAR System, there are a number of severe and debilitating complications recently reported in proximity to gel injection. This highlights the need for further study of device complications in light of its increasing clinical use.

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: A 15-year experience in Japan

The history of prostate brachytherapy has passed one century. In 1983, modern low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy using a transrectal ultrasound-guided procedure was introduced. In the early 1990s, low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced and rapidly spread across the USA due to its excellent oncological control, cost-effectiveness and technically easy procedure. Since low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced in Japan (2003), over 15 years have passed. More than 43 000 patients have undergone low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Japanese urologists and radiation oncologists are on course with leading brachytherapists in the USA. A nationwide prospective cohort study, J-POPS, was initiated in 2005. The J-POPS group also provides educational programs including an annual novel training course in low-dose-rate brachytherapy to familiarize urologists, radiation oncologists and pathologists with the procedure. Important information on Japanese patients has accumulated, especially by the J-POPS study group. The Japanese investigators reported excellent oncological outcomes of low-dose-rate brachytherapy, showing equivalent or superior efficacy to surgery in low- to intermediate-risk patients, and superior efficacy in high-risk patients using the surgery biochemical recurrence definition (prostate-specific antigen cut-off value of 0.2 ng/mL). Two randomized controlled studies (SHIP study: intermediate risk, and TRIP study: high risk) carried out by the J-POPS group are ongoing, and an additional follow-up study (J-POPS 2 study) has been started to evaluate survival outcomes over longer follow-up periods. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy is expected to provide a survival benefit, which must be confirmed by further studies with longer follow-up periods in the future.

Optimization of prostate brachytherapy techniques with polyethylene glycol-based hydrogel spacers: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The objective of this overview was to critically evaluate the effect of polyethylene glycol (PEG)-based hydrogel spacers during prostate brachytherapy with regard to dosimetric and clinical benefits, as well as procedure-related toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic search in the PubMed database was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies, involving 615 patients with PEG hydrogel injection, were included. Overall, patients well tolerated the implantation of PEG hydrogel spacers with an excellent safety profile. However, although there were some procedure-related complications, rates of these complications were very rare. Toxicities related to the spacer were limited to Grade 1 rectal discomfort and pain (9/615 patients), Grade 2 rectal ulceration (1 in 615 patients), perineal abscess (1 in 615 patients), and bacterial prostatitis (2/615 patients) according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 grading scheme. The application of PEG hydrogel spacers significantly reduced radiation doses to the rectum during prostate brachytherapy in the different setting. Although there was no prospective randomized clinical trial, retrospective studies showed that reducing rectal doses by the implantation of PEG hydrogel may result in an improvement in rectal toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

The insertion of hydrogel spacers is safe, resulting in a significant decrease in rectal doses. This may lead to a reduction in rectal or gastrointestinal toxicity. Prospective randomized clinical trials are warranted to confirm the clinical impact of rectal dosimetric improvements.

Late toxicities of prostate cancer radiotherapy with and without hydrogel SpaceAOR insertion

INTRODUCTION

To investigate whether the implantation of a hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR) reduces long-term rectal toxicity for prostate cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS

Patients with localised prostate cancer treated with 81 Gy in 45 fx of IMRT over 9 weeks were retrospectively compared: 65 patients with SpaceOAR and 56 patients without SpaceOAR. Planning aims restricted rectal doses to V40 Gy < 35%, V65 Gy < 17%, V75 Gy < 10%. Toxicities were evaluated between 3 months and 3 years after the completion of radiotherapy and were based on the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) assessment tool for diarrhoea, haemorrhoids, faecal incontinence and proctitis.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of low-grade diarrhoea (G1) was significantly higher in the non-SpaceOAR group (21.4% vs 6.2%; P = 0.016). The cumulative incidence of proctitis (grades G1 and G2) was also higher in the non-SpaceOAR group (26.7% vs 9.2%; P = 0.015); the cumulative incidence of G2 proctitis was higher in the latter group (P = 0.043). There were no differences between the treatment groups for cumulative incidences of faecal incontinence and/or haemorrhoids. Three years after IMRT, diarrhoea and proctitis were higher in the non-SpaceOAR group, without reaching statistical significance. This finding was unchanged after correcting for baseline symptoms.

CONCLUSION

SpaceOAR is of benefit in reducing the cumulative incidence of low-grade diarrhoea and proctitis for up to 3 years after intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Assessment of Polyethylene Glycol Hydrogel Spacer and Its Effect on Rectal Radiation Dose in Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Proton Beam Radiation Therapy

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of placing a polyethylene glycol (PEG) spacing hydrogel in patients undergoing proton beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer. This study also aims to assess the effect on rectal radiation dose of prostate-rectum separation in various anatomic planes.

Methods and Materials

Seventy-two consecutive prostate cancer patients undergoing conventionally fractionated pencil beam scanning proton radiation therapy with and without hydrogel placement were compared. Magnetic resonance images taken after hydrogel placement measured prostate-rectum separation and were correlated to rectal dosing and rectal toxicity. Univariate analysis of clinical variables and radiation dosing was conducted using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test with continuity correction between groups (hydrogel spacer vs controls). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient assessed relationships between the various anatomic dimensions of perirectal space and rectal radiation dosing.

Results

Fifty-one patients had hydrogel placement before therapy and 21 did not. There was a 42.2% reduction in rectal dosing (mL³ rectum) in hydrogel patients (P < .001). Increasing midline sagittal lift resulted in a greater mitigation of total rectal dose (P = .031). The degree of prostate surface area coverage on coronal plane did not correlate with further reductions in rectal radiation dose (P = .673). Patients who had PEG hydrogels placed reported more rectal side effects during treatment compared with those patients who did not (35.3% vs 9.5%, P = .061). At median 9.5-month follow-up, there was no difference in reporting of grade ≤2 rectal toxicity between the 2 groups (7.7% vs 7.1%, P = .145).

Conclusions

Polyethylene glycol hydrogel placement before pencil proton beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer reduced rectal radiation dose. The most important factor reducing total rectal dose was the degree of sagittal midline separation created by the PEG hydrogel. This is the largest study with the longest follow-up to investigate hydrogel placement in the proton beam radiation setting.

A Prospective Single-Arm Phase 2 Study of Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Early Toxicity Results

PURPOSE

Use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasing in patients with localized prostate cancer, but concerns about early and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity exist after moderately or extremely hypofractionated radiation therapy schemes. Magnetic resonance guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) was clinically introduced in 2014. MrgRT allows for SBRT delivery with smaller uncertainty margins and permits daily adaptive planning. A phase 2 study in patients with localized prostate cancer was performed to study early GI and GU toxicity after SBRT using MRgRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred one patients with clinical stage T1-3bN0M0 prostate cancer were enrolled in this prospective phase 2 study. All but 4 patients had intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer, and 82.2% received adjuvant hormonal treatment. MRgRT was delivered in 5 fractions of 7.25 Gy to the target volume using daily plan adaptation with simultaneous relative sparing of the urethra to a dose of 6.5 Gy per fraction. Early toxicity was studied using both clinician- (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group) and patient-reported outcome measurements (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30, Quality of Life Questionnaire PR25, and International Prostate Symptom Scoring).

RESULTS

The maximum cumulative grade ≥2 early GU and GI toxicity measured by any symptom at any study time point was 23.8% and 5.0%, respectively. No early grade 3 GI toxicity was observed. Early grade 3 GU toxicity was 0% and 5.9% according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and scoring systems, respectively, as a result of different grading of radiation cystitis. The low incidence of early GI toxicity was confirmed by patient-reported outcome data. GU grade ≥2 toxicity peaked to 19.8% at the end of MRgRT, followed by a return to the baseline average score at 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study of MRgRT in patients with localized prostate cancer observed a low incidence of early GI and GU toxicity, both in clinician- and patient-reported outcome measurements.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy with periprostatic hydrogel spacer for localized prostate cancer: toxicity profile and early oncologic outcomes

Background

Multiple phase I-II clinical trials have reported on the efficacy and safety of prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. However, few have reported outcomes for prostate SBRT using periprostatic hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR; Augmenix). Herein, we report safety and efficacy outcomes from our institutional prostate SBRT experience with SpaceOAR placement.

Methods

Fifty men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated at a single institution with linear accelerator-based SBRT to 3625 cGy in 5 fractions, with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were included. All patients underwent SpaceOAR and fiducial marker placement followed by pre-treatment MRI. Toxicity assessments were conducted at least weekly while on treatment, 1 month after treatment, and every follow-up visit thereafter. Post-treatment PSA measurements were obtained 4 months after SBRT, followed by every 3–6 months thereafter. Acute toxicity was documented per RTOG criteria.

Results

Median follow up time was 20 (range 4–44) months. Median PSA at time of diagnosis was 7.4 (2.7–19.5) ng/ml. Eighteen men received 6 months of ADT for unfavorable intermediate risk disease. No PSA failures were recorded. Median PSA was 0.9 ng/mL at 20 months; 0.08 and 1.32 ng/mL in men who did and did not receive ADT, respectively. Mean prostate-rectum separation achieved with SpaceOAR was 9.6 ± 4 mm at the prostate midgland.

No grade ≥ 3 GU or GI toxicity was recorded. During treatment, 30% of men developed new grade 2 GU toxicity (urgency or dysuria). These symptoms were present in 30% of men at 1 month and in 12% of men at 1 year post-treatment. During treatment, GI toxicity was limited to grade 1 symptoms (16%), although 4% of men developed grade 2 symptoms during the first 4 weeks after SBRT. All GI symptoms were resolving by the 1 month post-treatment assessment and no acute or late rectal toxicity was reported > 1 month after treatment.

Conclusions

Periprostatic hydrogel placement followed by prostate SBRT resulted in minimal GI toxicity, and favorable early oncologic outcomes. These results indicate that SBRT with periprostatic spacer is a well-tolerated, safe, and convenient treatment option for localized prostate cancer.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-019-1346-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Hyaluronate gel injection for rectum dose reduction in gynecologic high-dose-rate brachytherapy: initial Japanese experience

Perirectal hyaluronate gel injection (HGI) appears to be a promising technique for healthy tissue dose sparing in pelvic radiotherapy. In this analysis, we report our initial experience of HGI in gynecologic brachytherapy, focusing on its safety and effectiveness for dose reduction to the rectum. Between July 2013 and May 2014, 36 patients received HGI for primary/salvage gynecologic brachytherapy. Dosimetric effect analysis was based on pre- and post-HGI computed tomography dataset registration with corresponding dose-volume histogram evaluation. The maximum dose to the most exposed 0.1 cm3 (D0.1cm3) and 2.0 cm3 (D2.0cm3) were used as index values for rectum and bladder dose evaluation. The dose indexes for target volume (TV) coverage were TV D90/V100. In all cases, HGI was well tolerated, with no acute or late adverse events documented at a median follow-up of 220 days (range, 18-1046 days). Rectum D2.0cm3 and D0.1cm3 were significantly decreased by HGI (P < 0.001 and P = 0.003, respectively), with no significant impact on dosimetric parameters of bladder and TV coverage. Factors correlating negatively with the dosimetric effect of HGI were an increasing number of interstitial catheters (P = 0.003) as well as Lcranial100% (P = 0.014) and Lcranial80% (P = 0.001) [i.e. the length from the anal verge to the most cranial point at which the 100% and 80% isodose lines, respectively, crossed the rectum]. The concept of HGI for gynecologic brachytherapy is plausible, and our initial experience indicates it to be an effective technique for rectal dose reduction in radiotherapy of intrapelvic tumours.

Risk-adapted moderate hypofractionation of prostate cancer : A prospective analysis of acute toxicity, QOL and outcome in 221 patients

Purpose

Prostate cancer (PCA) is highly heterogeneous in terms of its oncologic outcome. We therefore aimed to tailor radiation treatment to the risk status by using three different hypofractionated radiation regimen differing in applied dose, use of rectum spacer, inclusion of pelvic lymph nodes (pLN) and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Here we report on acute toxicity, quality of life (QOL) and oncologic outcome at a median follow-up of 12 months.

Methods

A total of 221 consecutive PCA patients received hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Low-risk (LR) patients were planned to receive 60 Gy in 20 fractions (EQD2^α/β1.5 = 77.1 Gy), intermediate-risk (IR) patients 63 Gy in 21 fractions (EQD2^α/β1.5 = 81 Gy), and high-risk (HR) patients 67.5 Gy in 25 fractions (EQD2^α/β1.5 = 81 Gy) to the prostate and 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the pLN. Acute rectal toxicity was assessed by endoscopy. In addition, toxicity was scored using CTC-AE 4.0 and IPSS score, while QOL was assessed using QLQ-PR25 questionnaires.

Results

Acute CTC reactions were slightly higher in the HR regimen but reverted to baseline at 3 months. GI G2 toxicity was 4%, 0% and 12% for the LR, IR and HR regimen. Compared to IR patients, the increase in toxicity in HR patients was statistically significant (p = 0.002) and mainly caused by a higher incidence of diarrhea presumably due to pelvic EBRT. QOL scores of all domains were worse for the HR regimen (not significant).

Conclusion

Risk-adapted moderate hypofractionation is associated with low GI/GU toxicity. Given the higher rate of pelvic metastases in HR patients, slightly higher transient acute reactions should be outweighed by possible oncological benefits.

Intra-rectal use of epinephrine in radiotherapy of prostate cancer

Purpose: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and toxicity of intra-rectal epinephrine during prostatic radiotherapy.

Materials and methods: A total of 34 patients with prostate cancer were randomized to receive daily intra-rectal epinephrine (4 mg in 40 mL, n=16) or placebo (40 mL normal saline, n=18) 5 min before daily radiotherapy. Physical examination including systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate (HR) was performed before, 5 min after, and 20 min after intra-rectal use. Toxicities were graded using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group standard. A two-sided Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportions between groups. A mixed-effects model was used to analyze multiple measurements of SBP and HR. Survival curves were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared between groups using the log-rank test.

Results: All patients completed the protocol treatment and reported no cardiovascular symptoms after intra-rectal administration. There were no differences in SBP and HR between these two groups at any time point (before, 5 min after, and 20 min after epinephrine). At 5 weeks after the start of radiotherapy, the incidence of rectal toxicity≥grade 2 was 27.8% (5/18) for the control group versus 12.5% (2/16) for the epinephrine group, but was not statistically significant (p=0.4). There was no rectal toxicity≥grade 2 in these two groups beyond 2-year follow-up. The 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival was 75.0% and 72.2% for the epinephrine and control group, respectively.

Conclusion: Results of this pilot randomized trial have demonstrated that intra-rectal administration of epinephrine is feasible and safe in prostatic radiotherapy. Its radio-protective effect warrants further investigation.

A Phase II Study to Prevent Radiation-induced Rectal Injury With Lovastatin

PURPOSE

Physician reported symptomatic late rectal injury occurs in about 5% to 25% of patients treated with radiation therapy for prostate cancer, depending on the treatment technique. Patients, however, report clinically meaningful declines in bowel/rectal function regardless of the technique used. Lovastatin has been shown to protect mice from late radiation injury. This study was designed to determine if lovastatin might reduce the incidence of late rectal injury in patients receiving radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate receiving radiotherapy with curative intent were eligible. A portion of the rectum had to receive at least 60 Gy. Gastrointestinal functioning was assessed using both physician-reported and patient-reported instruments at baseline and at prescribed intervals during and after treatment. Lovastatin (20 to 80 mg/d) was started on day 1 of radiation and continued for 12 months. Patients were followed for an additional 12 months. The primary endpoint was physician-reported rectal toxicity ≥grade 2 during the first 2 years after treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 20/53 (38%) patients developed grade 2 or higher toxicity during the 2-year follow-up period. Seventeen patients had 1 or more unresolved gastrointestinal symptom at the end of 2 years, 3 (6%) of which were grade 2 and none were of higher grade.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary endpoint of the study was not met. Lovastatin, as administered in this trial, did not reduce the incidence of grade 2 or higher rectal toxicity compared with historical controls.

Hydrogel Spacer Reduces Rectal Dose during Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Analysis

Purpose

Proton therapy for prostate cancer may reduce bowel dose and risk of bowel symptoms relative to photon-based methods. Here, we determined the effect of using a biodegradable, injectable hydrogel spacer on rectal dose on plans for treating prostate cancer with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) or passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT).

Materials and Methods

Pairs of IMPT and PSPT plans for 9 patients were created from fused computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging scans obtained before and after spacer injection. Calculated values of rectal V40, V60, V70, V80, and maximum dose (Dmax) were compared with Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Displacements at the base (BP), midgland (MP), and apex (AP) of the prostate relative to the anterior rectal wall with the spacer in place were averaged for each patient and correlated with V70 by using linear regression models.

Results

The presence of a spacer reduced all dosimetric parameters for both PSPT and IMPT, with the greatest difference in V70, which was 81.1% lower for PSPT-with-spacer than for IMPT-without-spacer. Median displacements at BP, MP, and AP were 12 mm (range 7-19), 2 mm (range 0-4), and 1 mm (range 0-5) without the spacer and 19 mm (range 12-23), 10 mm (range 8-16), and 7 mm (range 2-12) with the spacer. Modest linear trends were noted between rectal V70 and displacement for IMPT-with-spacer and PSPT-with-spacer. When displacement was ≥8 mm, V70 was ≤5.1% for IMPT-with-spacer and PSPT-with-spacer.

Conclusion

Use of biodegradable hydrogel spacers for prostate cancer treatment provides a significant reduction of radiation dose to the rectum with proton therapy. Significant reductions in rectal dose occurred in both PSPT and IMPT plans, with the greatest reduction for IMPT-with-spacer relative to PSPT alone. Prospective studies are ongoing to assess the clinical impact of reducing rectal dose with hydrogel spacers.

Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study

External beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer can result in urinary, sexual, and rectal side effects, often impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol‐based product, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted into the connective tissue between the prostate gland and rectum can significantly reduce the dose received by the rectum and hence risk of rectal toxicity. The optimal way to manage the hydrogel and rectal structures for plan optimization is therefore of interest. In 13 patients, computerized tomography (CT) scans were taken pre‐ and post‐SpaceOAR© implant. A prescription of 60 Gy in 20 fractions was planned on both scans. Six treatment plans were produced per anonymized dataset using either a structure of rectum plus the hydrogel, termed composite rectum wall (CRW), or rectal wall (RW) as an inverse optimization structure and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a treatment technique. Dose‐volume histogram metrics were compared between plans to determine which optimization structure and treatment technique offered the maximum rectal dose sparing. RW structures offered a statistically significant decrease in rectal dose over CRW structures, whereas the treatment technique (IMRT vs VMAT) did not significantly affect the rectal dose. There was improvement seen in bladder and penile bulb dose when VMAT was used as a treatment technique. Overall, treatment plans using the RW optimization structure offered the lowest rectal dose while VMAT treatment technique offered the lowest bladder and penile bulb dose.

Rectum-spacer related acute toxicity - endoscopy results of 403 prostate cancer patients after implantation of gel or balloon spacers

Background

Rectal spacers are used to limit dose to the anterior rectal wall in high dose external beam radiation therapy of the prostate and have been shown to reduce radiation induced toxicity. Here we report the complication rate and toxicity of the implantation procedure in a large cohort of patients who have either received a gel- or balloon-type spacer.

Methods

In total, 403 patients received rectal spacing, 264 with balloon, 139 with gel. Allocation was non-randomized. Two hundred seventy-six patients were treated with normofractionated regimen, the remaining 125 patients in moderate hypofractionation. Spacer related acute and late rectal toxicity was prospectively assessed by endoscopy using a mucosa scoring system (Vienna Rectoscopy Score) as well as CTCAE V.4. For the balloon subgroup, position and rotation of balloon spacers were additionally correlated to incidence and grade of rectal reactions in a post-hoc analysis of post-implant planning MRIs.

Results

Overall rectal toxicity was very low with average VRS scores of 0.06 at the day after implantation, 0.10 at the end of RT, 0.31 at 6 months and 0.42 at 12 months follow up. Acute Grade 3 toxicity (rectum perforation and urethral damage) directly related to the implantation procedure occurred in 1.49% (n = 6) and was seen exclusively in patients who had received the spacer balloon. Analysis of post implant MR imaging did not identify abnormal or mal-rotated positions of this spacer to be a predictive factors for the occurrence of spacer related G3 toxicities.

Conclusions

Spacer technology is an effective means to minimize dose to the anterior rectal wall. However, the benefits in terms of dose sparing need to be weighed against the low, but possible risks of complications such as rectum perforation.

Evolution of definitive external beam radiation therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Although the clinical significance of a diagnosis of prostate cancer for some men is debated, for many men it leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Radical treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer has been shown to improve survival in men with intermediate or high-risk disease. There is no high level evidence to support the superiority of radical prostatectomy, with or without adjuvant or salvage external beam radiotherapy in comparison to definitive radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation, and the choice should be individualized. External beam radiation therapy practices are in constant evolution, and numerous strategies have been investigated to improve either efficacy or reduce toxicity, or both.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials investigating strategies to improve efficacy, reduce toxicity, or both of external beam radiotherapy have been reviewed in men with prostate cancer without nodal or distant metastases. These strategies include the use of neo-adjuvant and adjuvant androgen deprivation, dose-escalation, hypofractionation, whole pelvic radiation therapy, incorporation of improved imaging, image- guided radiation therapy, and adjuvant systemic therapy. The evidence to date for these strategies is discussed, noting limitations in applying the results of reported trials to men treated in contemporary settings.

RESULTS

A number of strategies have shown improvements in biochemical control using external beam radiotherapy. To date, only with the use of androgen deprivation therapy has this translated into improvements in disease specific and overall survival. This may reflect the long natural history of prostate cancer and high incidence of competing risks. Technological advances have enabled dose escalation with reduced toxicity, of paramount importance given the long natural history.

RESULTS

The use of external beam radiation therapy in prostate cancer is evolving with numerous strategies incorporated to improve outcomes. The optimum dose and fractionation and use of androgen deprivation or systemic adjuvants for each man is unclear based on current evidence and prognostic and predictive parameters. Patient preferences play an important role in chosen therapy. It is hoped that future studies better capture all prostate cancer- and treatment- related morbidity to clarify the optimal therapy choices for each man with prostate cancer.

Rectal retractor application during image-guided dose-escalated prostate radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To investigate efficacy of a rectal retractor (RR) on rectal dose during image-guided dose-escalated prostate three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 21 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with a RR for 3DCRT in 40 × 2 Gy. Patient underwent two scans for radiotherapy planning, without and with RR. RR was used for the first half of the treatment sessions. Two plans were created for each patient to compare the effect of RR on rectal doses. PTW-31014 Pinpoint chamber embedded within RR was used for in vivo dosimetry in 6 of 21 patients. The patient tolerance and acute rectal toxicity were surveyed during radiotherapy using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v.4.0.

RESULTS

Patients tolerated the RR well during 20 fractions with mild degree of anal irritation. Using a RR significantly reduced the rectal wall (RW), anterior RW and posterior RW dose-volume parameters. The average RW D_mean was 29.4 and 43.0 Gy for plans with and without RR, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the measured dose and planned dose was -3.8% (±4.9%). Grade 1 diarrhea, rectal urgency and proctitis occurred in 4, 2 and 3 cases, respectively. There were no grade ≥2 acute rectal toxicities during the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Rectal retraction resulted in a significant reduction of rectal doses with a safe toxicity profile, which may reduce rectal toxicity. Dosimeter inserted into the RR providing a practical method for in vivo dosimetric verification. Further prospective clinical studies will be necessary to demonstrate the clinical advantage of RR.

Improving rectal dosimetry for patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer undergoing combined high-dose-rate brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy with hydrogel space

Purpose

To report on rectal dosimetric and toxicity outcomes of intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing combined high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with or without hydrogel spacer (HS) insertion.

Material and methods

A total of 97 patients were analyzed in this study, with 32 patients (33%) who had HS insertion compared with a preceding group of 65 patients (67%) without HS. HS safety, the dosimetric effects on organs at risk (rectal, urethral, penile bulb, and bladder) as well as gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicity were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

Results

The median prostate-rectal separation achieved with HS was 10 mm (range, 5-14 mm). There were no post-operative complications following HS insertion. Patients with HS had significantly lower radiation dose to the rectum across all rectal dose volumes from rV₃₀ to rV₈₀, whether in absolute volume (cc) or as percentage of contoured OAR (p < 0.001). There was also significantly less acute > grade 1 GI toxicity (12.5% vs. 30.8%, p = 0.05) and a trend towards less late grade 1 GI toxicity (0% vs. 7.7%; p = 0.11) in the HS group compared to the non-HS group.

Conclusions

Insertion of HS in prostate cancer patients receiving combined HDR and EBRT is safe and has resulted in a significant radiation dose reduction to the rectum, resulting in significantly less acute GI toxicity and a trend towards less late GI toxicity.