Faisabilité et toxicité d’une séance unique de curiethérapie de haut débit de dose suivie d’une irradiation externe dans le cancer localisé de la prostate : étude rétrospective de la polyclinique de Courlancy

High-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for prostate cancer: comparison of two different fractionation schemes

PURPOSE

This is a retrospective study comparing our experience with high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost for prostate cancer, using two different fractionation schemes, 600 cGy × 3 fractions (patient group 1) and 950 cGy × 2 fractions (patient group 2).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 165 patients were treated for prostate cancer using external beam radiation therapy up to a dose of 45 Gy, followed by an HDR brachytherapy prostate radiation boost. Between July 1997 and Nov 1999, 64 patients were treated with an HDR boost of 600 cGy × 3 fractions; and between June 2000 and Nov 2005, 101 patients were treated with an HDR boost of 950 cGy × 2 fractions. All but 9 patients had at least one of the following risk features: pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level >10, a Gleason score ≥7, and/or clinical stage T3 disease.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 105 months for group 1 and 43 months for group 2. Patients in group 2 had a greater number of high-risk features than group 1 (p = 0.02). Adjusted for comparable follow-up, there was no difference in biochemical no-evidence-of-disease (bNED) rate between the two fractionation scheme approaches, with 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of 93.5% in group 1 and 87.3% in group 2 (p = 0.19). The 5-year estimates of progression-free survival were 86% for group 1 and 83% for group 2 (p = 0.53). Among high-risk patients, there were no differences in bNED or PFS rate due to fractionation.

CONCLUSIONS

Results were excellent for both groups. Adjusted for comparable follow-up, no differences were found between groups.

[Which modality for prostate brachytherapy?]

Brachytherapy techniques by permanent implant of radioactive sources or by temporary high-dose-rate (HDR) fractions are nowadays extensively used for the treatment of prostatic carcinoma. Long-term results (at 20 years) concerning large amount of patients have been published by major centers confirming both in terms of efficacy and toxicities that permanent implant of radioactive iodine-125 seeds yields at least the same good results of surgery and of external beam irradiation when proposed to patients affected by low-risk disease. For intermediate to high-risk tumors, HDR temporary implants are proposed as a boost for dose escalation. For both techniques, several topics still need to be clarified dealing with a recent enlargement of indications (HDR alone for low-risk, iodine-125 seeds boost for intermediate-high-risk cancers), or with technical aspects (loose seeds versus linked ones, number of fractions and dose for HDR protocols), while dosimetric issues have only recently been addressed by cooperatives groups. Last but not least, there is a real need to address and clearly characterize the correct definition of biochemical disease control both for iodine permanent implant and for HDR implant. New challenges are facing the prostate-brachytherapy community in the near future: local relapse after external beam radiotherapy are currently managed by several salvage treatments (prostatectomy, cryo, high intensity focused ultrasounds [HIFU]) but the role of reirradiation by brachytherapy is also actively investigated. Focal therapy has gained considerable interest in the last 5 years aiming at treating only the area of cancer foci inside the prostate and preserving nearby healthy tissues. Encouraging results have been obtained with the so-called "minimally invasive" approaches and both permanent seed implantation and HDR brachytherapy techniques may be worthwhile testing in this setting because of their capability of exactly sculpting the dose inside the prostatic gland.