PSA outcomes and late toxicity of single-fraction HDR brachytherapy and LDR brachytherapy as monotherapy in localized prostate cancer: A phase 2 randomized pilot study

Population-based patient-reported quality of life outcomes following low-dose-rate versus high-dose-rate brachytherapy monotherapy for low-intermediate risk prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate patient reported quality of life outcomes (QoL) following low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) monotherapy for prostate cancer at a population-based setting.

METHODS

The study comprised men with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry Victoria (PCOR-Vic), who were treated with LDR-BT or HDR-BT monotherapy between 2015 and 2020 and completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) questionnaire 12-month post-treatment. Men who had ADT were excluded (n = 12). Differences in substantial symptoms (i.e. 'moderate' or 'big' problem on a 5-point Likert scale) between LDR-BT and HDR-BT arms were evaluated using Pearson's chi-squared test. Multivariable linear regressions were used to estimate differences in EPIC-26 urinary, bowel and sexual functional domain scores between LDR-BT and HDR-BT arms.

RESULTS

Overall, 198 men were included in this study, of which 167 (84%) had LDR-BT and 31 (16%) had HDR-BT. 9 (4.6%), 10 (5.1%) and 56 (28%) reported substantial symptoms for overall urinary, bowel and sexual function at 12-month post-treatment, with no significant difference between LDR-BT and HDR-BT arms. The adjusted mean differences in urinary incontinence, urinary obstructive, bowel and sexual function domain scores between LDR-BT and HDT-BT were: -3.53 (-8.21 to 1.14), -1.27 (-6.88 to 4.35), -0.01 (-5.63 to 5.63) and -8.68 (-21.44 to 4.07) respectively - these were not statistically significant and did not meet the minimal clinically important difference.

CONCLUSION

This is the first Australian population-based study comparing QoL in men who had LDR-BT and HDR-BT, with no statistically or clinically significant differences in QoL observed at 12-month post-treatment.

Global research status and hotspots of radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a bibliometric analysis based on Web of Science from 2010-2022

Background

Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the important treatments for various cancer types and its application to prostate cancer (PCa) has also gradually gained increasing attention. However, there is a lack of comprehensive and objective studies on the overall status of research on RT for PCa. This article aims to summarize and quantify the dynamic trends of RT in PCa by using bibliometrics.

Methods

Studies on RT for PCa were screened from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database between 1 January 2010 and 21 November 2022 to collate and quantify information characteristics by analyzing parameters including annual publications, countries/regions, institutions and authors with the aid of the bibliometric software CiteSpace and VOSviewer. In addition, research trends and hotspots were explored by analyzing keywords and co-cited references.

Results

A total of 21338 documents were retrieved. The United States of America (USA) ranked first and maintained the leading position among all countries in the number of publications (8489) and total citations (266342). The University of Toronto was the most active institution in total publications (n=587). Paul L Nguyen enjoyed the most publications (n=179), and Michael J Zelefsky enjoyed the most co-citations (n=3376). INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS published the most papers (n=1026), and was the most frequently co-cited journal (n=78550). The largest and closest cluster in the reference cluster analysis was "oligorecurrent prostate cancer". The timeline view of keywords reveals that cluster "biochemical recurrence(BCR)" is ongoing. Moreover, keywords burstness analysis showed that "radiation dosimetry", "dose rate brachytherapy(BT)", "salvage radiotherapy", "stereotactic body radiotherapy(SBRT)", "guideline", and "multicenter" were the terms with great bursts in the past a few years.

Conclusion

The application of RT targeting oligometastatic prostate cancer(OMPC) has garnered considerable attention among researchers. SBRT and BT have become hot topics in the field. Additionally, the BCR of PCa has long been a critical issue requiring extensive research and resolution, and salvage radiotherapy has currently emerged as a closely related research focus. Related large-scale multicenter studies have been conducted over the past few years, providing valuable insights. More high-quality research is expected to be employed to guide clinical decision-making.

Comparison of outcomes in high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with low-/high-dose-rate brachytherapy plus external beam radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Although brachytherapy is a standard treatment option for patients with high-risk prostate cancer, only a few studies have compared low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). We applied propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) to compare oncological outcomes for LDR-BT and HDR-BT.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed prognosis in 392 patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer who had undergone brachytherapy plus external beam radiation. IPTW was applied to adjust the Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, with the goal of minimizing bias from patient background.

RESULTS

The IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival analyses showed no statistically significant differences for time to biochemical recurrence, clinical progression, castration-resistant prostate cancer, or death from any cause. The IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analyses also showed that the modality of brachytherapy was not an independent factor in these oncological outcomes. Notably, the two groups differed regarding complications; LDR-BT was associated with a higher rate of acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity, and late grade 3 toxicity was noted only in HDR-BT.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis of long-term outcomes in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer shows no significant differences in oncological outcomes between LDR-BT and HDR-BT, but some differences in toxicity, and offers patients and clinicians useful information in deciding management strategies for high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Safety and efficacy associated with single-fraction high-dose-rate brachytherapy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although single-fraction high-dose-rate brachytherapy (SFHDR) for localized prostate cancer has been tried in clinical trials, relevant medical evidence is currently lacking. It is necessary to systematically analyze the safety and efficacy of SFHDR.

METHODS

Comprehensive and systematic searches for eligible studies were performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. The primary endpoints included safety and efficacy, represented by toxic effects and biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), respectively. The proportion rates were used as the effect measure for each study and were presented with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) and related 95% prediction interval (PI). Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator (REML) and the Hartung-Knapp method were used in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis, including 1440 patients. The median age of patients was 66.9 years old (62-73 years old) and the median follow-up was 47.5 months (12-75 months). The estimates of cumulative occurrence for severe gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxic effects were 0.1% (95% CI 0-0.2%) and 0.4% (95% CI 0-1.2%), and for grade 2 toxic effects were 1.6% (95% CI 0.1-4.7%) and 17.1% (95% CI 5.4-33.5%), respectively. The estimate of 3‑year bRFS was 87.5% (95% CI 84.4-90.3%) and 71.0% (95% CI 63.0-78.3%) for 5‑year bRFS. The pooled bRFS rates for low-risk patients were 99.0% (95% CI 85.2-100.0%) at 3 years and 80.9% (95% CI 75.4-85.9%) at 5 years, and the risk group was found to be statistically correlated with bRFS (3-year bRFS, P < 0.01; 5‑year bRFS, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

SFHDR is associated with favorable tolerability and suboptimal clinical benefit in patients with localized prostate cancer. Ongoing and planned high-quality prospective studies are necessary to verify its safety and efficacy.

Dose Distribution of High Dose-Rate and Low Dose-Rate Prostate Brachytherapy at Different Intervals-Impact of a Hydrogel Spacer and Prostate Volume

The study aimed to compare the dose distribution in permanent low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT), specifically focusing on the impact of a spacer and prostate volume. The relative dose distribution of 102 LDR-BT patients (prescription dose 145 Gy) at different intervals was compared with the dose distribution of 105 HDR-BT patients (232 HDR-BT fractions with prescription doses of 9 Gy, n = 151, or 11.5 Gy, n = 81). A hydrogel spacer (10 mL) was only injected before HDR-BT. For the analysis of dose coverage outside the prostate, a 5 mm margin was added to the prostate volume (PV+). Prostate V100 and D90 of HDR-BT and LDR-BT at different intervals were comparable. HDR-BT was characterized by a considerably more homogenous dose distribution and lower doses to the urethra. The minimum dose in 90% of PV+ was higher for larger prostates. As a consequence of the hydrogel spacer in HDR-BT patients, the intraoperative dose at the rectum was considerably lower, especially in smaller prostates. However, prostate volume dose coverage was not improved. The dosimetric results well explain clinical differences between these techniques reported in the literature review, specifically comparable tumor control, higher acute urinary toxicity rates in LDR-BT in comparison to HDR-BT, decreased rectal toxicity after spacer placement, and improved tumor control after HDR-BT in larger prostate volumes.