1
|
Nuver TT, Hilgers GC, Kattevilder RA, Westendorp H. Local seed displacement from Day 0 to Day 30 in I-125 permanent prostate brachytherapy: A detailed, computed tomography-based analysis. Brachytherapy 2022; 21:208-215. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.12.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2021] [Revised: 11/04/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
|
2
|
Helou J, Charas T. Acute and late side-effects after low dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer; incidence, management and technical considerations. Brachytherapy 2021; 20:956-965. [PMID: 33972182 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.03.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Revised: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/21/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To review common reported side effects and complications after primary LDR-BT (monotherapy) and discuss some of the technical aspects that could impact the treatment outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS A literature search was undertaken using medical subject headings (MeSH) complemented by the authors' personal and institutional expertise. RESULTS The reported incidence of acute and late grade 2 or above urinary, bowel and sexual side effects is very variable across the literature. The learning curve and the implant quality have a clear impact on the toxicity outcomes. Being aware of some of the technical challenges encountered during the procedure and ways to mitigate them could decrease the incidence of side effects. Careful planning of seed placement and seed deposition allow sparing of the organs at risk and a lower incidence of urinary and gastro-intestinal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS Low dose-rate brachytherapy remains a standard monotherapy treatment in the setting of favorable-risk prostate cancer. High disease control and low long-term toxicities are achievable in expert hands with a good technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joelle Helou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Tomer Charas
- Radiotherapy Unit, Oncology Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yan C, Huq MS, Heron DE, Beriwal S, Wynn RB. Correlation between real-time intraoperative and postoperative dosimetry and its implications on intraoperative planning. Brachytherapy 2019; 18:338-347. [PMID: 30655047 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2018.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2018] [Revised: 12/10/2018] [Accepted: 12/12/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to study the correlation between intraoperative and postimplant dosimetry. We investigated the correlation between prostate (V150) and urethra (D30, D5) dose limits, and whether it is possible to increase prostate D90 and V100 in intraoperative planning without violating postimplant urethra and rectum dose limits. METHODS AND MATERIALS Seventy-nine patients who underwent real-time ultrasound-guided prostate implants using intraoperative planning from 2013 to 2017 were analyzed. Forty-one of the 79 implants were 125I as monotherapy and the remainder was 103Pd as boost to external beam radiation therapy or external beam radiation therapy plus androgen deprivation therapy. Prescriptions followed the guidelines of AAPM TG-137. The urethra was catheterized during intraoperative implantation and postimplant imaging to facilitate the urethra identification. T2-cubed MRI and CT were acquired on the same day and about 1 month after the low-dose-rate procedure, and MRI was later fused with the CT scan for accurate delineation of the prostate and postimplant dosimetry evaluation. An institutionally based peer-review process and document procedure were established based on national recommendations. Correlation of dose parameters: D90, V150, V100 of prostate, D30, D5 of urethra, and V100 of rectum between intraoperative and postimplant plans were evaluated. RESULTS D90 and V100 declined for all implants between intraoperative and postimplant dosimetry. On average, D90 declined by 17.5% and 21.7% for 125I and 103Pb implants, respectively. V100 declined for all implants between intraoperative and postimplant dosimetry but less pronounced. Prostate V150 and urethra D30 and D5 also showed different tendency of decline. Of the 79 implants, 60 did not meet the postimplant dosimetry target for prostate (V150 ≤ 50%), and 46 of the 60 implants met the optimal dosimetry targets for both D30 (<125%) and D5 (<150%), and the other 14 of the 60 implants failed to meet either the D30 or the D5 limits. All the implants met the postimplant target dose for rectum: V100≤ 1.3 cc. CONCLUSION Intraoperative implant dosimetry could not accurately predict postimplant dosimetry; however, to avoid underdosage of prostate, intraoperative D90 should be close to 120% of prescribed dose and V100 needs to be close to 100% of prescribed dose. Prostate V150> 50% does not necessarily indicate the violation of urethra D30 and D5 dose limits. For most of the implants, target intraoperative D90 and V100 could be raised without violating urethra D30 and D5 limits recommended by American Brachytherapy Society in postimplant evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chenyu Yan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
| | - M Saiful Huq
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Dwight E Heron
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Sushil Beriwal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Raymond B Wynn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zaorsky NG, Davis BJ, Nguyen PL, Showalter TN, Hoskin PJ, Yoshioka Y, Morton GC, Horwitz EM. The evolution of brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 2017; 14:415-439. [PMID: 28664931 PMCID: PMC7542347 DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2017.76] [Citation(s) in RCA: 100] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Brachytherapy (BT), using low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent seed implantation or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary source implantation, is an acceptable treatment option for select patients with prostate cancer of any risk group. The benefits of HDR-BT over LDR-BT include the ability to use the same source for other cancers, lower operator dependence, and - typically - fewer acute irritative symptoms. By contrast, the benefits of LDR-BT include more favourable scheduling logistics, lower initial capital equipment costs, no need for a shielded room, completion in a single implant, and more robust data from clinical trials. Prospective reports comparing HDR-BT and LDR-BT to each other or to other treatment options (such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or surgery) suggest similar outcomes. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure rates for patients with low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease are >85%, 69-97%, and 63-80%, respectively. Brachytherapy with EBRT (versus brachytherapy alone) is an appropriate approach in select patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease. The 10-year rates of overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer-specific mortality are >85%, <10%, and <5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated with HDR-BT and LDR-BT are rare, at <4% in most series, and quality of life is improved in patients who receive brachytherapy compared with those who undergo surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas G Zaorsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19111-2497, USA
| | - Brian J Davis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Charlton Bldg/Desk R - SL, Rochester, Minnesota 5590, USA
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St BWH. Radiation Oncology, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA
| | - Timothy N Showalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, 1240 Lee St, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908, USA
| | - Peter J Hoskin
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Road, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, UK
| | - Yasuo Yoshioka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo 135-8550, Japan
| | - Gerard C Morton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, Ontario M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Eric M Horwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, 333 Cottman Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19111-2497, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Westendorp H, Hoekstra CJ, Immerzeel JJ, van de Pol SMG, Niël CGHJ, Kattevilder RAJ, Nuver TT, Minken AW, Moerland MA. Cone-beam CT-based adaptive planning improves permanent prostate brachytherapy dosimetry: An analysis of 1266 patients. Med Phys 2017; 44:1257-1267. [PMID: 28192614 DOI: 10.1002/mp.12156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2016] [Revised: 01/12/2017] [Accepted: 02/08/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate adaptive planning for permanent prostate brachytherapy and to identify the prostate regions that needed adaptation. METHODS AND MATERIALS After the implantation of stranded seeds, using real-time intraoperative planning, a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-scan was obtained and contoured. The positions of seeds were determined on a C-arm cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-scan. The CBCT-scan was registered to the TRUS-scan using fiducial gold markers. If dose coverage on the combined image-dataset was inadequate, an intraoperative adaptation was performed by placing remedial seeds. CBCT-based intraoperative dosimetry was analyzed for the prostate (D90, V100, and V150) and the urethra (D30). The effects of the adaptive dosimetry procedure for Day 30 were separately assessed. RESULTS We analyzed 1266 patients. In 17.4% of the procedures, an adaptation was performed. Without the dose contribution of the adaptation Day 30 V100 would be < 95% for half of this group. On Day 0, the increase due to the adaptation was 11.8 ± 7.2% (1SD) for D90 and 9.0 ± 6.4% for V100. On Day 30, we observed an increase in D90 of 12.3 ± 6.0% and in V100 of 4.2 ± 4.3%. For the total group, a D90 of 119.6 ± 9.1% and V100 of 97.7 ± 2.5% was achieved. Most remedial seeds were placed anteriorly near the base of the prostate. CONCLUSION CBCT-based adaptive planning enables identification of implants needing adaptation and improves prostate dose coverage. Adaptations were predominantly performed near the anterior base of the prostate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hendrik Westendorp
- Department of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Carel J Hoekstra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Jos J Immerzeel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Sandrine M G van de Pol
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Charles G H J Niël
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Robert A J Kattevilder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Tonnis T Nuver
- Department of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - André W Minken
- Department of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiotherapiegroep behandellocatie Deventer, Nico Bolkesteinlaan 85, 7416 SE, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus A Moerland
- Department of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Westendorp H, Nuver TT, Hoekstra CJ, Moerland MA, Minken AW. Edema and Seed Displacements Affect Intraoperative Permanent Prostate Brachytherapy Dosimetry. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 96:197-205. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.04.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2015] [Revised: 03/10/2016] [Accepted: 04/11/2016] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
7
|
Zaorsky NG, Shaikh T, Murphy CT, Hallman MA, Hayes SB, Sobczak ML, Horwitz EM. Comparison of outcomes and toxicities among radiation therapy treatment options for prostate cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 2016; 48:50-60. [PMID: 27347670 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2016.06.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2016] [Revised: 06/07/2016] [Accepted: 06/08/2016] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas G Zaorsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Talha Shaikh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Colin T Murphy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Mark A Hallman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Shelly B Hayes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Mark L Sobczak
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Eric M Horwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zaorsky NG, Horwitz EM. Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer: An Overview. Prostate Cancer 2016. [DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-800077-9.00044-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
|