A multi-institutional clinical trial of rectal dose reduction via injected polyethylene-glycol hydrogel during intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: analysis of dosimetric outcomes

Progress in the Application of Hydrogels in Intervertebral Disc Repair: A Comprehensive Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intervertebral disc degeneration (IVDD) is a common orthopaedic disease and an important cause of lower back pain, which seriously affects the work and life of patients and causes a large economic burden to society. The traditional treatment of IVDD mainly involves early pain relief and late surgical intervention, but it cannot reverse the pathological course of IVDD. Current studies suggest that IVDD is related to the imbalance between the anabolic and catabolic functions of the extracellular matrix (ECM). Anti-inflammatory drugs, bioactive substances, and stem cells have all been shown to improve ECM, but traditional injection methods face short half-life and leakage problems.

RECENT FINDINGS

The good biocompatibility and slow-release function of polymer hydrogels are being noticed and explored to combine with drugs or bioactive substances to treat IVDD. This paper introduces the pathophysiological mechanism of IVDD, and discusses the advantages, disadvantages and development prospects of hydrogels for the treatment of IVDD, so as to provide guidance for future breakthroughs in the treatment of IVDD.

Symmetry, separation, and stability: Physical properties for effective dosimetric space with a stabilized hyaluronic acid spacer

BACKGROUND

The proximity of the rectum to the prostate in radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer presents a significant dosimetric challenge, leading to high rectal doses and resulting in detrimental side effects. Perirectal tissue spacing reduces rectal dose and gastrointestinal toxicities by mechanically separating these organs. A variety of materials have been explored for use as rectal spacers, most recently, a stabilized hyaluronic acid (HA) gel, which can be formed into deliberate a shape, and retains the definition of that shape, while remaining flexible, unlike polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogels.

PURPOSE

This study evaluates the dosimetric impact of the spacer, including shape symmetry, the degree of separation at different locations, and the temporal stability of the space. Our goal is to provide physics-informed guidance on the optimal use of this sculptable spacer.

METHODS

A secondary analysis was performed on data from a 13-center prospective randomized trial (NCT04189913), involving 136 patients with centrally-reviewed treatment plans conducted on CT/MR simulation scans before and after receiving HA spacer implants. Patients were treated with 60 Gy in 20 fractions to the prostate. For this study, python software was utilized for automated processing of DICOM RTstruct and RTdose files, facilitating detailed analysis of the spacer's impact on anatomical displacement and dosimetric outcomes. Complete dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were reconstructed, and combined into composite population DVHs before and after implant, verified against trial-reported dose points. Patients were divided into similar groups of separation and symmetry, and differences in their composite DVHs were tested for significance. Stability of the spacer was studied by comparing serial MRI images and by computing the distance between contours at four axial planes, at simulation and 3-month follow-up, post RT.

RESULTS

The introduction of the HA spacer significantly enhanced rectal sparing, as evidenced by a reduction in the mean rectal integral dose by over 6 Gy. High rates of implant symmetry (>95%) were observed, indicating nearly optimal lateral spacer placement. In superior-inferior coverage, this study like many others, saw the spacing largest at the superior extent but becoming more variable inferiorly at the level of the prostate apex. This allowed study of the apex as a specific area for dosimetric concern. Stability assessments confirmed that the spacer maintained its position and dimensions between the simulation and the 3-month post-RT, implying stable geometry during treatment, with only minimal separation changes observed. Statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant correlations of larger separations at the inferior and apical planes with improved dosimetric outcomes, including rV30Gy.

CONCLUSION

The use of a stabilized HA spacer in prostate RT effectively enhances prostate-rectum separation, leading to significant rectal sparing without undesirable dose compromises. This study underscores the role of strategic placement and shape, specifically including > 1 cm separation from the base down to the prostate apex. When combined with the treatment planning techniques used in the trial to create a steep dosimetric gradient across the spacer, these findings elucidate the dosimetric outcomes that can be expected in the clinical implementation of HA spacer. This is particularly relevant in the evolution of hypofractionated treatment regimens for prostate cancer therapy.

EUS-guided hydrogel injection to separate pancreatic head carcinoma from duodenum for enhanced radiotherapy: Multi-site feasibility study

Background and study aims The proximity of a pancreas head tumor to the duodenum often limits delivery of an ablative dose of radiation therapy. This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of using an injectable polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel between the head of the pancreas and duodenum. Patients and methods In a multi-site feasibility cohort study of patients with localized pancreatic cancer, PEG hydrogel was injected under endoscopic ultrasound guidance to temporarily position the duodenum away from the pancreas. Procedure characteristics were recorded, including hydrogel volume and space created. Patients were monitored for adverse events (AEs) and radiotherapy toxicity. Results In all six intent-to-treat patients (four with borderline resectable, two with locally advanced disease), the ability to place and visualize PEG hydrogel and create space between the duodenum and the head of the pancreas was successful. There were no procedure-related AEs resulting in radiotherapy delay. There were no device-related AEs and no reports of pancreatitis. Conclusions PEG hydrogel was successfully placed, created space between the duodenum and the head of the pancreas, and was not associated with major toxicity. Enhancing radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer by using PEG hydrogel to create peri-duodenal space could have beneficial implications for treatment and warrants more exploration.

A Multi-Institutional Safety and Feasibility Study Exploring the Use of Hydrogel to Create Spatial Separation between the Pancreas and Duodenum in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE

The administration of dose-escalated radiation for pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains challenging because of the proximity of dose-limiting stomach and bowel, particularly the duodenum for pancreatic head tumors. We explore whether endoscopic injection of a temporary, absorbable hydrogel into the pancreatico-duodenal (PD) groove is safe and feasible for the purpose of increasing spatial separation between pancreatic head tumors and the duodenum.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Six patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma underwent endoscopic injection of hydrogel into the PD groove. Safety was assessed based on the incidence of procedure-related adverse events resulting in a delay of radiation therapy initiation. Feasibility was defined as the ability to create spatial separation between the pancreas and duodenum, as assessed on simulation CT.

RESULTS

All 6 patients were able to undergo endoscopic injection of hydrogel into the PD groove. No device-related events were experienced at any point in follow-up. Presence of hydrogel in the PD groove was apparent on simulation CT in all 6 patients. Mean space created by the hydrogel was 7.7 mm +/- 2.4 mm. In 3 patients who underwent Whipple resection, presence of hydrogel in the PD groove was pathologically confirmed with no evidence of damage to the duodenum.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic injection of hydrogel into the PD groove is safe and feasible. Characterization of the dosimetric benefit that this technique may offer in the setting of dose-escalated radiation should also be pursued, as should the ability of such dosimetric benefit to translate into clinically improved tumor control.

Validation of a Quality Metric Score to Assess the Placement of Hydrogel Rectal Spacer in Patients Treated With Prostate Stereotactic Radiation Therapy

Purpose

To evaluate the quality of the interspace between the prostate and rectum and assess the effect on the dose to the rectum by measuring the spacer quality score (SQS) before and after implanting a hydrogel rectal spacer.

Methods and Materials

Thirty patients with prostate cancer were treated with stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy as part of the SPORT clinical trial. Each patient had a 10 mL polyethylene glycol hydrogel spacer inserted transperineally. Computed tomography scans were acquired before and after spacer insertion, 10MV flattening filter free (FFF) stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy (SABR) treatment plans were generated using each image set. To calculate the SQS, the prostate-rectal interspace (PRI) was measured in the anterior-posterior orientation, parallel to the anatomic midline at the prostate base, apex, and midgland on the prespacer and postspacer computed tomography. Measurements were taken in 3 transverse positions between the prostate and the rectum, and PRI scores of 0, 1, and 2 were assigned if the interspace between prostate and rectum was <0.3, 0.3 to 0.9, or ≥1 cm, respectively. The overall SQS was the lowest of the PRI scores. Differences between prespacer and postspacer PRIs and SQS were investigated by performing Fisher's exact test and differences between doses to the rectum were investigated by performing the paired samples Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Student t test.

Results

Statistically significant differences between prespacer versus postspacer patients were found when grouping patients according to their overall SQS. The PRI summary score did not reach statistical significance between prespacer and postspacer at the base but was significantly higher for the prostate midline and apex. Statistically significant differences in some rectum dose-volume metrics were found when grouping patients according to their PRIs and SQS.

Conclusions

SQS before and after the spacer insertion was evaluated and was found to be correlated with pre- and postspacer rectal dosimetry. Sources of improvement of the SQS scoring metric and limitations are discussed.

Application of a Radiopaque Viscous Hydrogel Spacer for Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy: A Prospective Phase 2 Study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the application of a radiopaque viscous spacer (RVS) for prostate cancer radiation therapy (RT), including injection procedure, toxicity, treatment planning, image guidance, and imaging results up to 12 months after RT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

RVS (median, 10 mL) was injected between prostate and rectal wall in 30 patients. Cone beam computed tomography (CT) was performed during the course of RT, a magnetic resonance imaging 3 and 12 months after RT. Injection and treatment tolerability were analyzed. The resulting distribution was compared with a control group of 30 patients with an initially fluid spacer.

RESULTS

Procedure- or device-related adverse events were not observed. Signs of hydrogel migration were not found in any case. The volume decreased by 25% at 3 months after RT, and small residues were detected at 12 months after RT in 3 cases (10%). The median rectal volume percentage within the 90% isodose was 3.0% (interquartile range, 1.5%-4.5%). Acute and late gastrointestinal toxicities were found in 17% and 3%, respectively (all grade 1). The median distance between prostate and rectum at the base/midplane/apex was greater for RVS in comparison to initially fluid spacer (14/12/11 mm vs 12/10/10 mm, respectively), the gel symmetry (right vs left from midline) was comparable. The application was assessed to be easier to control by the users, and visibility in cone beam CT as good.

CONCLUSIONS

The injection of a radiopaque viscous hydrogel spacer resulted in a prostate-rectum distance of >10 mm in most cases. The resulting rectum volume within the high-dose region and RT toxicity were very low. Advantages in comparison to the conventional hydrogel spacer are predominantly an improved placement control during the injection process and good visibility on CT.

Increasing rectum-prostate distance using a hydrogel spacer to reduce radiation exposure during proton beam therapy for prostate cancer

SpaceOAR, a polyethylene-glycol hydrogel, reduces rectal radiation exposure during radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Previously, our group reported the modified technique of hydrogel insertion, which achieves greater separated distance at prostate-apex. This study aimed to investigate the impact of separated distance at prostate-apex and our modifier technique, on radiation exposure reduction during proton beam therapy (PBT). We included 330 patients undergoing PBT with the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 63 Gray (Gy) for localized prostate cancer, and categorized them into groups 0 (no spacer, n = 141), 1 (separated distance of spacer at the prostate-apex level < 7.5 mm, n = 81), and 2 (distance ≥ 7.5 mm, n = 108). The rectal volumes to receive 30-60 Gy (RBE), was estimated and described as Rectal V30-60 (ml) in 10 Gy increments. The Rectal V30-60 (ml) was significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1, and in group 1 than in group 0. After propensity score matching, the multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the most significant factor to reduce radiation exposure was our modified technique of hydrogel insertion. Therefore, using a hydrogel spacer to expand the prostate-rectum distance not only at prostate-mid to prostate-base level but also at the prostate-apex level can reduce the radiation exposure in PBT for prostate cancer.

Multicenter, dual fractionation scheme, single core lab comparison of rectal volume dose reduction following injection of two biodegradable perirectal spacers

PURPOSE

A multicenter, double-arm, central core lab, retrospective study was performed to compare the rectal dosimetry of patients implanted with two injectable, biodegradable perirectal spacers, in conventional fractionation (CF), as well as ultrahypofractionation (UH) treatment plans.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-nine patients were enrolled into the study in five centers: two centers in Europe, which implanted a biodegradable balloon spacer in a total of 24 subjects and three centers in the US, which implanted the SpaceOAR in 35 subjects. Anonymized CTs (pre and post-implantation) were reviewed by the central core lab. For VMAT CF plans rectal V50, V60, V70, and V80 were calculated. For UH plans, a corresponding rectal V22.6, V27.1, V31.37, and V36.25 were established representing 62.5%, 75%, 87.5%, and 100% of the 36.25 Gy prescribed dose.

RESULTS

For CF VMAT, a comparison between the balloon spacer and the SpaceOAR revealed a significant difference of 33.4% decrease in mean rectal V50 (71.9% vs. 38.5%, p < 0.001), 27.7% in mean rectal V60 (79.6% vs. 51.9%, p < 0.001), 17.1% difference in mean rectal V70 (84.1% vs. 67.0%, p = 0.001), and a significant difference of 3.0% (p = 0.019) in mean rectal V80 (87.2% vs. 84.2%). With UH analysis, the mean rectal dose reduction for the balloon spacer compared to the SpaceOAR was 79.2% and 53.3% for V27.1 (p < 0.001), 84.1% and 68.1% for V31.71 (p = 0.001), and 89.7% and 84.8% for V36.25 (p = 0.012), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Rectal dosimetry is more favorable for treatment with the balloon spacer compared with SpaceOAR. Further research, particularly in the context of a prospective randomized clinical trial design, is needed to assess the acute and late toxicity experience as well as physician satisfaction with achieving symmetrical implantation, and ease of use in light of increasing clinical use.

Comprehensive review of the use of hydrogel spacers prior to radiation therapy for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive narrative review of the published data on the impact of hydrogel spacers on rectal dosimetry and toxicity and to outline the practicalities of inserting hydrogel spacers.

RESULTS

A growing body of evidence suggests that the administration of hydrogel spacers is safe and is associated with limited peri-operative morbidity. The impact on rectal dosimetry has been clearly established and use of hydrogel spacers is associated with reduced rectal morbidity. These results have been corroborated by several Phase II and III clinical trials and subsequent meta-analysis. There are several areas for future research, including the role of hydrogel spacers in prostate stereotactic beam radiotherapy and post-radiotherapy local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrogel spacers provide a low-morbidity method to potential reduce rectal toxicity after radiation therapy in men with prostate cancer. Data outlining sexual function and oncological outcomes are limited to date. Future studies, currently being conducted, may provide further clarification of the role of hydrogel spacers in prostate cancer management.

Safety of hydrogel spacers for rectal wall protection in patients with prostate cancer: A retrospective analysis of 200 consecutive cases

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and complications of hydrogel spacer implantation.

METHODS

This single-center historical cohort study retrospectively analyzed cases of hydrogel spacer implantation between October 2018 and March 2022. The survey items were the rates of possible hydrogel injection implementation, the success rate of hydrogel implantation including asymmetry, higher position, rectal wall infiltration, subcapsular injection, and other adverse events, and width created by the spacer. To investigate the learning curve, 1, 2, and 3 points were assigned to adverse event grades G1, G2, and G3, respectively. Spacer effectiveness obstruction, such as asymmetry was assigned 3 points. A Mann-Whitney U test was performed to assess statistically significant differences.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 200 patients with a median (range) age of 70 (44-85) years. In 10 (5%) patients, hydrogel injection implementation was not possible. Of 190 patients who underwent hydrogel spacer placement, 168 (88%) received a satisfactory placement. The median (range) width of hydrogel spacers was 13.1 (4.4-18.7) mm. Spacer asymmetry, higher position, rectal wall infiltration, and prostate subcapsular infiltration occurred in 7 (3.7%), 5 (2.6%), 12 (6.3%), and 1 (0.5%) patients, respectively. G1 and G3 adverse events occurred in 13 (7%) and 4 (2%) patients, respectively. Practitioner #1 who performed the highest number of procedures had significantly (p = 0.04) lower total scores in group B.

CONCLUSION

Spacer implantation yielded favorable outcomes with a high percentage of appropriate spacer implantation, and few major complications.

Hyaluronic acid spacer in prostate cancer radiotherapy: dosimetric effects, spacer stability and long-term toxicity and PRO in a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Perirectal spacers may be beneficial to reduce rectal side effects from radiotherapy (RT). Here, we present the impact of a hyaluronic acid (HA) perirectal spacer on rectal dose as well as spacer stability, long-term gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity and patient-reported outcome (PRO).

METHODS

In this phase II study 81 patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer received transrectal injections with HA before external beam RT (78 Gy in 39 fractions). The HA spacer was evaluated with MRI four times; before (MR0) and after HA-injection (MR1), at the middle (MR2) and at the end (MR3) of RT. GI and GU toxicity was assessed by physician for up to five years according to the RTOG scale. PROs were collected using the Swedish National Prostate Cancer Registry and Prostate cancer symptom scale questionnaires.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in rectal V70% (54.6 Gy) and V90% (70.2 Gy) between MR0 and MR1, as well as between MR0 to MR2 and MR3. From MR1 to MR2/MR3, HA thickness decreased with 28%/32% and CTV-rectum space with 19%/17% in the middle level. The cumulative late grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity at 5 years was 5% and the proportion of PRO moderate or severe overall bowel problems at 5 years follow-up was 12%. Cumulative late grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity at 5 years was 12% and moderate or severe overall urinary problems at 5 years were 10%.

CONCLUSION

We show that the HA spacer reduced rectal dose and long-term toxicity.

Hyaluronic acid rectal spacer in EBRT: Usability, safety and symmetry related to user experience

OBJECTIVES

To report on the usability, safety, symmetry, and effectiveness of hyaluronic acid (HA) injected between the prostate and the rectum for patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and present a novel definition of rectal spacer symmetry that is reproducible and independent of patient anatomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

102 consecutive patients with clinical stage of T1c-3b prostate cancer underwent general anaesthesia for fiducial marker insertion and injection of HA into the perirectal space before EBRT. HA safety, symmetry, separation, and usability based on user experience were assessed.

RESULTS

HA insertion was completed with a 100% success rate independent of user experience, rated as 'easy' or 'very easy' in all cases. There were no postoperative complications reported. The mean (SD) recto-prostatic separation for all patients at the base, midgland and apex were 12 (±2) mm, 11 (±2) mm, and 9 (±1) mm respectively. The mean sagittal length of the implant was 43 (±5) mm. The implant was rated as symmetrical in 98% of cases. The mean rV70Gy was 1.6% (IQR 0.8-3.3%) for patients receiving 78-80Gy. The mean rV53Gy was 2.8% (IQR 1.2-4.8%) for patients receiving 60-62Gy. The median prostate size was 43.5 cc (IQR 32-57).

CONCLUSION

Injection of HA was able to achieve highly symmetrical recto-prostatic separation, with new users able to produce excellent separation, particularly at the apex, achieving similar dosimetry outcomes as competent and experienced users. HA is safe, easy to use, and significantly reduced mean rV70Gy and rV53Gy compared to non-spacer patients.

Prostate Cancer Treatment with Pencil Beam Proton Therapy Using Rectal Spacers sans Endorectal Balloons

Purpose

Proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) has been used for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer with low rates of high-grade toxicity and excellent patient-reported quality-of-life metrics. Technological advances such as pencil beam scanning (PBS), Monte Carlo dose calculations, and polyethylene glycol gel rectal spacers have optimized prostate proton therapy. Here, we report the early clinical outcomes of patients treated for localized prostate cancer using modern PBS–PBT with hydrogel rectal spacing and fiducial tracking without the use of endorectal balloons.

Materials and Methods

This is a single institutional review of consecutive patients treated with histologically confirmed localized prostate cancer. Prior to treatment, all patients underwent placement of fiducials into the prostate and insertion of a hydrogel rectal spacer. Patients were typically given a prescription dose of 7920 cGy at 180 cGy per fraction using a Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm. Acute and late toxicity were evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 5. Biochemical failure was defined using the Phoenix definition.

Results

From July 2018 to April 2020, 33 patients were treated (median age, 75 years). No severe acute toxicities were observed. The most common acute toxicity was urinary frequency. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there were no high-grade genitourinary late toxicities; however, one grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. Late erectile dysfunction was common. One treatment failure was observed at 21 months in a patient treated for high-risk prostate cancer.

Conclusion

Early clinical outcomes of patients treated with PBS–PBT using Monte Carlo–based planning, fiducial placement, and rectal spacers sans endorectal balloons demonstrate minimal treatment-related toxicity with good oncologic outcomes. Rectal spacer stabilization without the use of endorectal balloons is feasible for the use of PBS–PBT.

Biological effective dose in analysis of rectal dose in prostate cancer patients who underwent a combination therapy of VMAT and LDR with hydrogel spacer insertion

This study aimed to evaluate rectal dose reduction in prostate cancer patients who underwent a combination of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and low‐dose‐rate (LDR) brachytherapy with insertion of hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR). For this study, 35 patients receiving hydrogel spacer and 30 patients receiving no spacer were retrospectively enrolled. Patient was treated to doses of 45 Gy to the primary tumor site and nodal regions over 25 fractions using VMAT and 100 Gy to the prostate using prostate seed implant (PSI). In VMAT plans of patients with no spacer, mean doses of rectal wall were 43.6, 42.4, 40.1, and 28.8 Gy to the volume of 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 cm³, respectively. In patients with SpaceOAR, average rectal wall doses decreased to 39.0, 36.9, 33.5, and 23.9 Gy to the volume of 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 cm³, respectively (p < 0.01). In PSI plans, rectal wall doses were on average 78.5, 60.9, 41.8, and 14.8 Gy to the volume of 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 cm³, respectively, in patients without spacer. In contrast, the doses decreased to 34.5, 28.4, 20.6 (p < 0.01), and 8.5 Gy (p < 0.05) to rectal wall volume of 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 cm³, respectively, in patient with SpaceOAR. To demonstrate rectal sum dose sparing, dose‐biological effective dose (BED) calculation was accomplished in those patients who showed >60% overlap of rectal volumetric doses between VMAT and PSI. In patients with SpaceOAR, average BED_sum was decreased up to 34%, which was 90.1, 78.9, 65.9, and 40.8 Gy to rectal volume of 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 cm³, respectively, in comparison to 137.4, 116.7, 93.0, and 50.2 Gy to the volume of 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 cm³, respectively, in those with no spacer. Our result suggested a significant reduction of rectal doses in those patients who underwent a combination of VMAT and LDR with hydrogel spacer placement.

Natural history of lower urinary tract symptoms among men undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer with and without a Rectal Hydrogel Spacer

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly used for prostate cancer, but has morbidity as both the bladder and rectum are radiated during treatment. Our goal was to document and compare lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) among men who underwent SBRT with and without SpaceOAR hydrogel (Augmenix, Inc., Bedford, MA).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 87 men (50 SpaceOAR and 37 non-SpaceOAR) who underwent SBRT. Primary outcomes were patient reported symptoms during radiation therapy, pharmacotherapy usage, and urologic and bowel survey scores up to 6-months post-SBRT.

RESULTS

78% of men were on α-inhibitors at the end of SBRT, an increase from 27.6% baseline usage (p < 0.001). Post-SBRT urinary frequency was more common in the non-SpaceOAR group versus the SpaceOAR group (68% versus 38%, p = 0.006), as was nocturia (35% vs. 8%, p = 0.002). Acute gastrointestinal symptoms did not differ. 58.8% of men were on α-inhibitors at 6-months of follow-up post-SBRT, an increase from 27.6% baseline usage (p < 0.001). Importantly, there was a difference of α-inhibitor use between non-SpaceOAR and SpaceOAR groups at the end of SBRT and at 1.5-, 3-, and 6-months follow up (86% vs. 53% [p = 0.002], 83% vs. 53% [p = 0.005], 72% vs. 49% [p = 0.038], respectively).

CONCLUSION

LUTS after SBRT remains a significant problem for men undergoing treatment for prostate cancer. LUTS affects men during and up to 6-months following SBRT. Owing to these increased LUTS, preemptive minimally invasive solutions and their mechanisms of protection, including the SpaceOAR, should be further investigated.

Separation effect and development of implantation technique of hydrogel spacer for prostate cancers

PURPOSE

The purpose was to improve the placement of a hydrogel spacer in prostate cancer patients receiving radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred and sixty patients with prostate cancer were classified into 3 groups as follows: group 1, no spacer (n = 30); group 2, spacer placed using conventional technique (n = 100); and group 3, spacer placed using new technique (n = 30). When placing the spacer, the tip of the needle was placed at the middle of the prostate gland (group 2) or at a level corresponding to a cranial:caudal ratio of 6:4 and as close to the prostate gland as possible (group 3). The separation effect was then examined and compared among the groups.

RESULTS

The separation in group 2 was larger than that in group 1 from the base to the apex (4 mm) level of the prostate, while the separation in group 3 was larger than that in group 2 from the middle to the apex (4 mm) level of the prostate. The separation values for the middle to the apex, the spacer thickness from the apex (10 mm) level to the apex, the rectal exclusion from the middle to the apex, and the laterality were correlated with the 50 and 60 Gray relative biological effectiveness (Gy(RBE)) rectal dose (p = 4.1 × 10^-9 - 0.046). The separation vales were strongly correlated with the spacer thickness at the apex (10 mm) and apex (4 mm) (p = 1.1 × 10^-18 - 1.8 × 10^-17). The rectal volumes at 10-60 Gy(RBE) differed among the groups (p = 5.1 × 10^-19 - 5.4 × 10^-3). The rectal volumes in group 2 were smaller than those in group 1 at all dose levels, while those in group 3 were smaller than those in group 2 at dose levels of 30-50 Gy(RBE).

CONCLUSIONS

The separation, spacer thickness and rectal exclusion from the middle to the apex of the prostate and the laterality of the hydrogel spacer affected the reduction in the rectal dose. The rectal dose can be further reduced by implanting a spacer on the caudal and the prostate side.

A Multi-Institutional Phase 2 Trial of High-Dose SAbR for Prostate Cancer Using Rectal Spacer

PURPOSE

High-dose SABR for prostate cancer offers the radiobiologic potency of the most intensified radiation therapy regimens but was associated with >90% rates of ulceration of the anterior rectal wall on endoscopic assessment; this infrequently progressed to severe rectal toxicity in prior prospective series. A multi-institutional phase 2 prospective trial was conducted to assess whether placement of a perirectal hydrogel spacer would reduce acute periprostatic rectal ulcer events after high-dose (>40 Gy) SABR.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible patients included men with stage ≤T2c localized grade group 1 to 3 prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≤15 ng/mL, American Urological Association Symptom Index = AUA-SI scores ≤18, and a gland volume ≤80 cm³. Patients underwent perirectal hydrogel spacer placement, followed by SABR of 45 Gy in 5 fractions every other day to the prostate only. Androgen deprivation was not allowed except for cytoreduction. The rectal wall was directly assessed by serial anoscopy during follow-up to determine whether the spacer would reduce acute periprostatic rectal ulcer events from >90% to <70% within 9 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Forty-four men were enrolled and 43 were eligible for protocol analysis. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 48 months. Acute periprostatic ulcers were observed in 6 of 42 patients (14.3%; 95% confidence interval, 6.0%-27%; P < .001) at a median of 2.9 months posttreatment (range, 1.7-5.6 months). All ulcers (grade 1, 5 ulcers; grade 2, 1 ulcer) resolved on repeat anoscopy within 8 months of incidence. There were no grade ≥3 late gastrointestinal toxicities; the incidence of late grade-2 gastrointestinal toxicities was 14.3%, with a prevalence at 3 years of 0%. No toxicities greater than grade 3 occurred in any domain. Four-year freedom from biochemical failure was 93.8% (95% CI, 85.2%-100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Temporary hydrogel spacer placement before high-dose SABR treatment for localized prostate cancer and use of strict dose constraints are associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of rectal ulcer events compared with prior phase 1/2 trial results.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in men with underlying inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Historically, IBD has been thought to increase the underlying risk of radiation related toxicity in the treatment of prostate cancer. In the modern era, contemporary radiation planning and delivery may mitigate radiation-related toxicity in this theoretically high-risk cohort. This is the first manuscript to report clinical outcomes for men diagnosed with prostate cancer and underlying IBD curatively treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

METHODS

A large institutional database of patients (n = 4245) treated with SBRT for adenocarcinoma of the prostate was interrogated to identify patients who were diagnosed with underlying IBD prior to treatment. All patients were treated with SBRT over five treatment fractions using a robotic radiosurgical platform and fiducial tracking. Baseline IBD characteristics including IBD subtype, pre-SBRT IBD medications, and EPIC bowel questionnaires were reviewed for the IBD cohort. Acute and late toxicity was evaluated using the CTCAE version 5.0.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were identified who had underlying IBD prior to SBRT for the curative treatment of prostate cancer. The majority (n = 18) were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis and were being treated with local steroid suppositories for IBD. No biochemical relapses were observed in the IBD cohort with early follow up. High-grade acute and late toxicities were rare (n = 1, grade 3 proctitis) with a median time to any GI toxicity of 22 months. Hemorrhoidal flare was the most common low-grade toxicity observed (n = 3).

CONCLUSION

To date, this is one of the largest groups of patients with IBD treated safely and effectively with radiation for prostate cancer and the only review of patients treated with SBRT. Caution is warranted when delivering therapeutic radiation to patients with IBD, however modern radiation techniques appear to have mitigated the risk of GI side effects.

Perirectal hydrogel spacer placement prior to prostate radiation therapy using a probe-mounted needle guide

•

Perirectal spacer placement minimizes the risk of bowel toxicity from prostate radiation therapy.

•

We show that a novel probe-mounted needle guide can be safely used for perirectal spacer insertion.

•

The main advantage of this device is that it ensures needle visualization throughout the procedure.

In this report we describe our successful adoption of a single-use, probe-mounted, needle guide for perirectal hydrogel spacer placement prior to radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Use of this device eliminates the need for a mechanical stepper unit and facilitates perirectal hydrogel placement by ensuring alignment of the injection needle with the ultrasound probe.

Expanding the Utilization of Rectal Spacer Hydrogel for Larger Prostate Glands (>80 cc): Feasibility and Dosimetric Outcomes

Purpose

The Hydrogel Spacer Prospective Randomized Pivotal Trial achieved mean rectoprostatic spacing of 12.6 mm resulting in lowering of rectal V70 from 12.4% (without spacer) to 3.3% (with spacer) in patients with glands up to 80 cm³. The value of this approach in patients with larger glands is inadequately established. This study assesses the feasibility and dosimetric outcomes of perirectal spacing in patients with prostate cancer with larger glands (>80 cm³).

Methods and Materials

Between January 2017 and December 2019, 33 patients with prostate glands >80 cm³ (mean 108.1 cm³; range, 81.1-186.6 cm³) were treated, 15 with glands >80 to 100 cm³ and 18 >100 cm³. Median follow-up was 10 months (range, 3-26). The median international prostate symptom score was 9 (range, 1-18). Hydrogel was placed under local anesthesia in all cases. Treatment modality included intensity modulated radiation therapy in 15 and proton therapy (PT) in 18 patients. Treatment targeted the prostate plus seminal vesicles in 21 patients and 12 also had elective nodal irradiation. Conventional fractionation (CF) to 78 Gy in 39 fractions was used in 16 and moderate hypofractionation (HF) to 70 Gy in 28 fractions in 17 patients.

Results

In the CF group, mean rectum (r) V75, 70, 60, 50 was 0.87%, 2.25%, 5.61%, and 10.5%, respectively. For glands >80 to 100 cm³ and >100 cm³, rV70 was 2.55% and 2%, respectively. In HF patients, mean rV65, 63, 60, and 50 was 1.67%, 2.3%, 3.4%, and 8.6%. For glands >80 to 100 cm³ and >100 cm³, rV63 was 2% and 2.56%, respectively. Overall, the mean midgland rectoprostatic hydrogel separation was 9.3 mm (range, 4.7-19.4 mm). All patients tolerated treatment well; no acute grade 2 or higher adverse gastrointestinal events were observed.

Conclusions

Hydrogel placement is feasible in prostate glands larger than 80 cm³ with favorable dosimetric outcomes.

Ten-year treatment complication outcomes of radical prostatectomy vs external beam radiation vs brachytherapy for 1503 patients with intermediate risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To compare 10-year late complications of radical prostatectomy (RP) versus external-beam-radiation-therapy (EBRT) versus brachytherapy (BT).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed on 1503 intermediate-risk-prostate-cancer patients treated from 2004 to 2007, using univariate comparisons. Eight hundred and nineteen underwent RP, 574 EBRT, and 110 BT. RP urinary and rectal complications were graded severe if patients required ≥3 pads/diapers per day, chronic condom catheter or penile clamp, daily clean-intermittent-catheterization, sling, artificial-urinary-sphincter, or rectal fistula. Complications for EBRT/BT were severe if graded 3/4 on the Radiation-Therapy-Oncology-Group scale for late effects. The prevalence of erectile-dysfunction-devices (EDD) of injections, pumps and/or penile implants were compared.

RESULTS

Median follow-up for RP versus EBRT versus BT were 10.0, 9.6, and 9.8 years. Median age were 62.1, 70.8, 65.3, p < 0.0001. The 10-year prevalence of severe urinary complications for RP versus EBRT versus BT were 10.1%, 12.5%, 4.6%, p = 0.03, and were less for RP <64 years, p = 0.03, and lower Charlson score, p = 0.05. Pretreatment American-Urological-Association (AUA) score existed for 7.3%, 11.5%, 97.3% of RP versus EBRT versus BT, p < 0.0001, and the 10-year prevalence of EDD were 24.3%, 6.6%, 8.2%, respectively, p< 0.0001. Severe rectal complications were slightly higher for EBRT, p = 0.06.

CONCLUSIONS

BT had lower prevalence of severe urinary complications, possibly by using AUA score to avoid patients with obstructive uropathy. Urinary complications may be reduced by limiting RP to younger, healthier patients, and by avoiding EBRT/BT with obstructive symptoms. RP had higher prevalence of EDD, despite having younger, healthier patients.

Personalized Radiation Attenuating Materials for Gastrointestinal Mucosal Protection

Cancer patients undergoing therapeutic radiation routinely develop injury of the adjacent gastrointestinal (GI) tract mucosa due to treatment. To reduce radiation dose to critical GI structures including the rectum and oral mucosa, 3D-printed GI radioprotective devices composed of high-Z materials are generated from patient CT scans. In a radiation proctitis rat model, a significant reduction in crypt injury is demonstrated with the device compared to without (p < 0.0087). Optimal device placement for radiation attenuation is further confirmed in a swine model. Dosimetric modeling in oral cavity cancer patients demonstrates a 30% radiation dose reduction to the normal buccal mucosa and a 15.2% dose reduction in the rectum for prostate cancer patients with the radioprotectant material in place compared to without. Finally, it is found that the rectal radioprotectant device is more cost-effective compared to a hydrogel rectal spacer. Taken together, these data suggest that personalized radioprotectant devices may be used to reduce GI tissue injury in cancer patients undergoing therapeutic radiation.

Polyethylene glycol-based hydrogel rectal spacers for prostate brachytherapy: a systematic review with a focus on technique

INTRODUCTION

Radiation dose to the rectum in prostate brachytherapy (PBT) can be reduced by the use of polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel spacers. This reduces the rate of rectal toxicity and allows dose escalation to the prostate. Our objectives were to provide an overview of technique for injection of a PEG hydrogel spacer, reduction in rectal dosimetry, gastrointestinal toxicity and potential complications.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the role of PEG hydrogel spacers in PBT using the Cochrane and PRISMA methodology for all English-language articles from January 2013 to December 2019. Data was extracted for type of radiotherapy, number of patients, type of PEG-hydrogel used, mean prostate-rectum separation, rectal dosimetry, acute and late GI toxicity, procedure-related complications and the technique used for hydrogel insertion.

RESULTS

Nine studies (671 patients and 537 controls) met our inclusion criteria. Of these 4 used DuraSeal® and 5 used SpaceOAR®. The rectal spacing achieved varied between 7.7-16 mm. Failure of hydrogel insertion was seen only in 12 patients, mostly related to failure of hydrodissection in patients undergoing salvage PBT. Where reported, the rectal D2 cc was reduced by between 21.6 and 52.6% and the median rectal V75% cc was reduced by between 91.8-100%. Acute GI complications were mostly limited to grade 1 or 2 toxicity (n = 153, 33.7%) with low levels of grade 3 or 4 toxicity (n = 1, 0.22%). Procedure-related complications were limited to tenesmus (0.14%), rectal discomfort (1.19%), and bacterial prostatitis (0.44%).

CONCLUSIONS

PEG hydrogel spacers are safe to insert. Gel insertion is easy, fast and has a low rate of failure. These studies convincingly demonstrate a significant reduction in rectal dosimetry. Although the results of spacers in reducing rectal toxicity is promising, these need to be confirmed in prospective randomised trial.

EUS-guided hydrogel microparticle injection in a cadaveric model

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A potential method to reduce gastrointestinal toxicity during radiation therapy in pancreatic head cancer is to create a physical space between the head of the pancreas (HOP) and the duodenum. To date, there have been early reports on the feasibility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hydrogel injection into the interface between the HOP and the duodenum to increase the peri-pancreatic space for radiotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility of EUS-guided hydrogel injection for the creation of space at the peri-pancreatic interface in a cadaveric model.

METHODS

Baseline abdominal computerized tomography (CT) was performed on three unfixed cadaveric specimens. The hydrogel was injected transduodenally into the interface between the HOP and duodenum using linear-array EUS and a 19G needle for fine needle aspiration (FNA). This procedure was repeated along the length of the HOP. CT imaging and gross dissection were performed after the procedure to confirm the localization of the hydrogel and to measure the distance between the HOP and the duodenum.

RESULTS

All cadavers underwent successful EUS-guided injection of the hydrogel. Cadavers 1, 2, and 3 were injected with 9.5, 27, and 10 cc of hydrogel, respectively; along the HOP, the formation of the peri-pancreatic space was a maximum size of 11.77, 13.20, and 12.89 mm, respectively. The hydrogel injections were clearly visualized as hyperechoic bullae during EUS and on post-procedure CT images without any artifacts in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that EUS-guided delivery of hydrogel is feasible, and that it increases the peri-pancreatic space in a cadaveric model. The polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel was clearly visible on EUS and CT, without significant artifacts. This may lead to new treatment approaches for pancreatic carcinomas.

Evaluation of the Forsvall biopsy needle in an ex vivo model of transrectal prostate biopsy - a novel needle design with the objective to reduce the risk of post-biopsy infection

BACKGROUND

Transrectal prostate biopsy (TRbx) transfers colonic bacteria into prostatic tissue, potentially causing infectious complications, including sepsis. Our objective was to determine whether biopsy needle shape, surface properties and sampling mechanism affect the number of bacteria transferred through the colon wall, and evaluate a novel needle with improved properties.

METHODS

The standard Tru-Cut biopsy needle used today was evaluated for mechanisms of bacterial transfer in a pilot study. A novel Tru-Cut needle (Forsvall needle prototype) was developed. TRbx was simulated using human colons ex-vivo. Four subtypes of the prototype needle were compared with a standard Tru-Cut needle (BARD 18 G). Prototype and standard needles were used to puncture 4 different colon specimens in 10 randomized sites per colon. Needles were submerged into culture media to capture translocated bacteria. The media was cultured on blood agar and then the total amount of transferred bacteria was calculated for each needle. The primary outcome measure was the percent reduction of bacteria translocated by the prototype needles relative to the standard needle. Secondary outcome measures were the effects of tip design and coating on the percent reduction of translocated bacteria.

RESULTS

Prototype needles reduced the number of translocated bacteria by, on average, 96.0% (95% confidence interval 93.0-97.7%; p < 0.001) relative to the standard needle. This percent reduction was not significantly affected by prototype needle tip style or surface coating.

CONCLUSIONS

The Forsvall needle significantly reduces colonic bacterial translocation, suggesting that it could reduce infectious complications in prostate biopsy. A clinical trial has been initiated.

An injectable double-crosslinking iodinated composite hydrogel as a potential radioprotective spacer with durable imaging function

Prostate cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer incidence among males worldwide. Radiotherapy can achieve similar oncological outcomes to those of radical prostatectomy. One concern is, however, radiation damage to the rectum because of the extreme proximity between the two organs. Inserting a biomaterial to separate the prostate and rectum is a promising strategy, and an injectable hydrogel is regarded to be the preferred spacer after screening of various materials. Nevertheless, there exist shortcomings for the currently available injectable hydrogel that cannot fully meet the unique requirements in clinical practice. In this work, a novel injectable hydrogel spacer based on carboxymethyl chitosan (CMC), aldehyde guar gum (AG), and aldehyde iohexol (DHQ) with an imaging function is fabricated. Contrast agent DHQ is chemically attached to CMC-AG network to form a double-crosslinking network to obtain a controlled degradation rate and high strength as well as durable CT imaging function. The hydrogel is injected subcutaneously into rats, where rapid gelation occurs and it serves as a hydrogel spacer. During the month-long in vivo studies, the spacer exhibits remarkable radiation dose attenuation and sustainable imaging function, as well as excellent toxicity profiles. This novel hydrogel shows excellent potential in the protection of critical organs during prostate cancer radiotherapy.

The impact of a rectal hydrogel spacer on dosimetric and toxicity outcomes among patients undergoing combination therapy with external beam radiotherapy and low-dose-rate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

Rectal hydrogel spacers have been shown to decrease rectal radiation dose and toxicity. In this study, we compared prostate and rectal dosimetry and acute toxicity outcomes in patients who had and had not received a rectal hydrogel spacer prior to combination therapy with external beam radiotherapy and low-dose-rate brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer who received combination therapy at our institution were identified between 2014 and 2019. Dosimetric outcomes of brachytherapy implants and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were compared between patients who had and had not received a hydrogel spacer.

RESULTS

A Total of 168 patients meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. Twenty-two patients had received a rectal hydrogel spacer, among whom the mean separation between the rectum and prostate was 7.5 mm, and the V100_rectum was reduced by 47% (0.09 cc vs. 0.17 cc, p = 0.04). There was no difference in the percentage of patients achieving a D90 of ≥100 Gy between those who had and had not received a spacer. The mean rate of change in I-PSS and SHIM scores did not differ between the two groups at 2 months after PID.

CONCLUSION

LDR brachytherapy appears feasible after the placement of a rectal hydrogel spacer. While there was a significantly reduced V100_rectum among patients who had received a hydrogel spacer, there was no statistically significant difference in patients achieving a D90_prostate of ≥100 Gy. Although there was no difference appreciated in QOL scores, the length of follow-up was limited in the rectal-spacer group.

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.

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.

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.

Biodegradable implantable balloons: Mechanical stability under physiological conditions

Rotator cuff tendons injuries occurs as a result of trauma, e.g. due to falling, mechanical injuries and frequent overhead activity and as natural degenerative tears in elderly people. Biodegradable balloon shaped spacer of Poly-(L-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) (PLCL) are applied in the treatment of these injuries. This type of treatment involves insertion of inflated biodegradable implant into the tissues of the damaged region in the shoulder to avoid shoulder impingement and reduce friction between the acromion and the humeral head and propagation of inflammation. The implant must maintain integrity under significant mechanical loading in order to remain effective. However, with time, the implant is exposed to the risk of failure due to the high pressure caused by the muscular motion and the friction with the bones. We report in this study the limits of the mechanical stability of the PLCL balloon shape spacer (implant) under prolonged cyclic loading, so as to be able to predict their physical stability in vivo. We have demonstrated in an in vitro settings that the implant withstands fatigue cycles for significantly longer than 8 weeks, which provides sufficient time window for patients to perform substantial rehabilitation and recover from an injury. The data presented herein is expected to assist medical practitioners in safety and efficacy measurements and assessment following spacer implantation.

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.

First report on extended distance between tumor lesion and adjacent organs at risk using interventionally applied balloon catheters: a simple procedure to optimize clinical target volume covering effective isodose in interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy of liver malignomas

Purpose

Organs at risk (OARs), which are very close to a clinical target volume (CTV), can compromise effective tumor irradiation. The present study investigated the feasibility and safety of a novel approach, in particular, the extent of the dosimetric effect of distancing CTV from adjacent OARs by means of interventionally applied balloon catheters.

Material and methods

Patients with peripheral hepatic malignancies, in whom the critical proximity of an OAR to the CTV in the assessment by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and the preplanning process were included. Additionally, patients underwent placement of an interventional balloon catheter during computed tomography (CT)-guided application of interstitial brachytherapy (iBT) catheters inserted into the tissue between hepatic capsule and adjacent OAR. The virtual position of an OAR without balloon catheter was anticipated and contoured in addition to contouring of CTV and OAR. The calculated dose values for CTV as well as 1 cc of the relevant OAR (D_1cc) with and without balloon were recorded. The D_1cc of the realized irradiation plan was statistically compared to the D_1cc of the virtually contoured OARs.

Results

In 31 cases, at least one balloon catheter was administered. The mean D_1cc of the OAR in the group with balloon(s) was 12.6 Gy compared with 16 Gy in the virtual cohort without the device, therefore significantly lower (p < 0.001). Overall, there were no acute complications. Severe (> 2 CTCAEv4.03) late complications observed in 3/31 (9.6%) patients during follow-up period after brachytherapy were most certainly not due to the balloon application. Side effects were probably associated with pre-existing serious diseases and potentially additional local late effects of the irradiation in general rather than with the balloon catheters.

Conclusions

The distancing of the adjacent OARs allows a higher D₁₀₀ value of CTV, therefore allowing for more efficient local control.

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.

Ano-rectal wall dose-surface maps localize the dosimetric benefit of hydrogel rectum spacers in prostate cancer radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To evaluate spatial differences in dose distributions of the ano-rectal wall (ARW) using dose-surface maps (DSMs) between prostate cancer patients receiving intensity-modulated radiation therapy with and without implantable rectum spacer (IMRT+IRS; IMRT-IRS, respectively), and to correlate this with late gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicities using validated spatial and non-spatial normal-tissue complication probability (NTCP) models.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For 26 patients DSMs of the ARW were generated. From the DSMs various shape-based dose measures were calculated at different dose levels: lateral extent, longitudinal extent, and eccentricity. The contiguity of the ARW dose distribution was assessed by the contiguous-DSH (cDSH). Predicted complication rates between IMRT+IRS and IMRT-IRS plans were assessed using a spatial NTCP model and compared against a non-spatial NTCP model.

RESULTS

Dose surface maps are generated for prostate radiotherapy using an IRS. Lateral extent, longitudinal extent and cDSH were significantly lower in IMRT+IRS than for IMRT-IRS at high-dose levels. Largest significant differences were observed for cDSH at dose levels >50 Gy, followed by lateral extent at doses >57 Gy, and longitudinal extent in anterior and superior-inferior directions. Significant decreases (p = 0.01) in median rectal and anal NTCPs (respectively, Gr 2 late rectal bleeding and subjective sphincter control) were predicted when using an IRS.

CONCLUSIONS

Local-dose effects are predicted to be significantly reduced by an IRS. The spatial NTCP model predicts a significant decrease in Gr 2 late rectal bleeding and subjective sphincter control. Dose constraints can be improved for current clinical treatment planning.

Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Hydrogel Rectal Spacer in Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

A hydrogel rectal spacer (HRS) is a medical device that is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to increase the separation between the prostate and rectum. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of HRS use for reduction in radiation therapy (RT) toxicities in patients with prostate cancer (PC) undergoing external beam RT (EBRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A multistate Markov model was constructed from the U.S. payer perspective to examine the cost-effectiveness of HRS in men with localized PC receiving EBRT (EBRT alone vs EBRT + HRS). The subgroups analyzed included site of HRS placement (hospital outpatient, physician office, ambulatory surgery center) and proportion of patients with good baseline erectile function (EF). Data on EF, gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities incidence, and potential risks associated with HRS implantation were obtained from a recently published randomized clinical trial. Health utilities and costs were derived from the literature and the 2018 Physician Fee Schedule and were discounted 3% annually. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs were modeled for a 5-year period from receipt of RT. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and value-based threshold analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The per-patient 5-year incremental cost for spacers administered in a hospital outpatient setting was $3578, and the incremental effectiveness was 0.0371 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $96,440/QALY for patients with PC undergoing HRS insertion in a hospital and $39,286/QALY for patients undergoing HRS insertion in an ambulatory facility. For men with good baseline EF, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $35,548/QALY and $9627/QALY in hospital outpatient and ambulatory facility settings, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, HRS is cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000. These results contain substantial uncertainty, suggesting more evidence is needed to refine future decision-making.

A novel model to correlate hydrogel spacer placement, perirectal space creation, and rectum dosimetry in prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The SpaceOAR hydrogel is employed to limit rectal radiation dose during prostate radiotherapy. We identified a novel parameter - the product of angle θ and hydrogel volume - to quantify hydrogel placement. This parameter predicted rectum dosimetry and acute rectal toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy to 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions.

METHODS

Twenty men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer underwent hydrogel placement from 2015 to 2017. Hydrogel symmetry was assessed on the CT simulation scan in 3 axial slices (midgland, 1 cm above midgland, 1 cm below midgland). Two novel parameters quantifying hydrogel placement - hydrogel volume and angle θ formed by the prostate, hydrogel, and rectum - were measured, and the normalized product of θ and hydrogel volume calculated. These were then correlated with perirectal distance, rectum maximum 1-3 cc point doses (rD_max 1-3 cc), and rectum volumes receiving 80-95% of the prescription dose (rV80-95%). Acute rectal toxicity was recorded per RTOG criteria.

RESULTS

In 50% of patients, hydrogel placement was symmetric bilaterally to within 1 cm of midline in all three CT simulation scan axial slices. Lateral hydrogel asymmetry < 2 cm in any one axial slice did not affect rectum dosimetry, but absence of hydrogel in the inferior axial slice resulted in a mean increase of 171 cGy in the rD_max 1 cc (p < 0.005). The perirectal distance measured at prostate midgland, midline (mean 9.1 ± 4.3 mm) correlated strongly with rV95 (R² 0.6, p < 0.001). The mean hydrogel volume and θ were 10.3 ± 4.5 cc and 70 ± 49°, respectively. Perirectal distance, rV95 and rD_max 1 cc correlated with hydrogel angle θ (p < 0.01), and yet more strongly with the novel metric θ*hydrogel volume (p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 14 months, no rectal toxicity >grade 2 was observed. Low grade rectal toxicity was observed in a third of men and resolved within 1 month of SBRT. Men who had these symptoms had higher rD_max 1 cc and smaller θ*hydrogel volume measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal hydrogel placement occurs at prostate midgland, midline. The novel parameter θ*hydrogel volume describes a large proportion of rectum dosimetric benefit derived from hydrogel placement, and can be used to assess the learning curve phenomenon for hydrogel placement.

Rectal radiation dose-reduction techniques in prostate cancer: a focus on the rectal spacer

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. External beam radiotherapy by a variety of methods is a standard treatment option with excellent disease control. However, acute and late rectal side effects remain a limiting concern in intensification of therapy in higher-risk patients and in efforts to reduce treatment burden in others. A number of techniques have emerged that allow for high-radiation dose delivery to the prostate with reduced risk of rectal toxicity, including image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy, endorectal balloons and various forms of rectal spacers. Image-guided radiation therapy, either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or stereotactic ablative radiation therapy, in conjunction with a rectal spacer, is an efficacious means to reduce acute and long-term rectal toxicity.

PROstate Multicentre External beam radioTHErapy Using a Stereotactic boost: the PROMETHEUS study protocol

Background

High Dose Rate Brachytherapy (HDRB) boost is a well-established treatment for prostate cancer (PC). We describe the PROstate Multicentre External beam radioTHErapy Using Stereotactic boost (PROMETHEUS) study. Non-surgical stereotactic techniques are used to deliver similar doses to HDRB boost regimens with a dose escalation sub-study.

Methods

Eligible patients have intermediate or high risk PC. PROMETHEUS explores the safety, efficacy and feasibility of multiple Australian centres cooperating in the delivery of Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) technology. A SBRT boost component Target Dose (TD) of 19Gy in two fractions is to be delivered, followed by a subsequent EBRT component of 46Gy in 23 fractions. Once accrual triggers have been met, SBRT doses can be escalated in 1 Gy increments to a maximum of 22Gy in two fractions. Patient safety will also be measured with the rate of both acute and late moderate to severe Gastro-Intestinal (GI) and Genito-Urinary (GU) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) toxicities as well as patient reported quality of life. Efficacy will be assessed via biochemical control after 3 years.

Discussion

PROMETHEUS aims to generate evidence for a non-surgical possible future alternative to HDRB boost regimens, and introduce advanced radiotherapy techniques across multiple Australian cancer centres.

Trial registration

The study was retrospectively registered on the ANZCTR (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry) with trial ID: ACTRN12615000223538.

Prospective analysis of hydrogel spacer for patients with prostate cancer undergoing radiotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To report on the dosimetric benefits and late toxicity outcomes after injection of hydrogel spacer (HS) between the prostate and rectum for patients treated with prostate radiotherapy (RT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 76 patients with a clinical stage of T1-T3a prostate cancer underwent general anaesthesia for fiducial marker insertion plus injection of the HS into the perirectal space before intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc RT (VMAT). HS safety, dosimetric benefits, and the immediate- to long-term effects of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were assessed.

RESULTS

There were no postoperative complications reported. The mean (range) prostate size was 66.0 (25.0-187.0) mm. Rectal dose volume parameters were observed and the volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy (rV₇₀ ), 75 Gy (rV₇₅ ) and 78 Gy (rV₇₈ ) was 7.8%, 3.6% and 0.4%, respectively. In all, 21% of patients (16/76) developed acute Grade 1 GI toxicities, but all were resolved completely by 3 months after treatment; whilst, 3% of patients (2/76) developed late Grade 1 GI toxicities. No patients had acute or late Grade ≥2 GI toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Injection of HS resulted in a reduction of irradiated rectal dose volumes along with minimal GI toxicities, irrespective of prostate size.

Efficacy of a rectal spacer with prostate SABR-first UK experience

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the use of implanted hydrogel rectal spacers for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy-volumetric modulated arc therapy (SABR-VMAT) patients, investigating practicality, dosimetric impact, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and early toxicity.

METHODS

Data from the first 6 patients treated within a prostate SABR and rectal spacer trial were examined to determine spacer insertion tolerability, resultant changes in treatment planning and dosimetry and early toxicity effects. CT scans acquired prior to spacer insertion were used to generate SABR plans which were compared to post-insertion plans. Plans were evaluated for target coverage, conformity, and organs at risk doses with NTCPs also determined from resultant dose fluences. Early toxicity data were also collected.

RESULTS

All patients had successful spacer insertion under local anaesthetic with maximal Grade 1 toxicity. All plans were highly conformal, with no significant differences in clinical target volume dose coverage between pre- and post-spacer plans. Substantial improvements in rectal dose metrics were observed in post-spacer plans, e.g. rectal volume receiving 36 Gy reduced by ≥42% for all patients. Median NTCP for Grade 2 + rectal bleeding significantly decreased from 4.9 to 0.8% with the use of a rectal spacer (p = 0.031). To date, two episodes of acute Grade 1 proctitis have been reported following treatment.

CONCLUSION

The spacer resulted in clinically and statistically significant reduction in rectal doses for all patients. Advances in knowledge: This is one of the first studies to investigate the efficacy of a hydrogel spacer in prostate SABR treatments. Observed dose sparing of the rectum is predicted to result in meaningful clinical benefit.