Sexual quality of life following prostate intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with a rectal/prostate spacer: Secondary analysis of a phase 3 trial

Efficacy of a hydrogel spacer for improving quality of life in patients with prostate cancer undergoing low-dose-rate brachytherapy alone or in combination with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: An observational study using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether a hydrogel spacer can improve quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) alone or in combination with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS

We enrolled patients with prostate cancer who underwent LDR-BT alone with (n = 186) or without (n = 348) a hydrogel spacer, or underwent LDR-BT in combination with IMRT with (n = 70) or without (n = 217) a hydrogel spacer. QOL was evaluated using Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaires at baseline and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after implantation. The groups were compared using propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Among patients who underwent LDR-BT alone, there were no differences regarding changes in urinary, bowel, sexual, or hormonal domain scores between the spacer and no-spacer groups; however, the dose at the bowel was significantly lower in the spacer group than in the no-spacer group. Among patients who underwent LDR-BT in combination with IMRT, there were no differences regarding changes in urinary, sexual, or hormonal domain scores between the spacer and no-spacer groups. However, the changes in the bowel domain score were significantly lower in the spacer group than in the no-spacer group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A hydrogel spacer may not improve impaired urinary, bowel, or sexual QOL in patients undergoing LDR-BT alone. However, in patients undergoing LDR-BT in combination with IMRT, a hydrogel spacer can improve impaired bowel QOL but not sexual or urinary QOL.

Sexual Structure Sparing for Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Erectile dysfunction represents a major side effect of prostate cancer (PCa) treatment, negatively impacting men's quality of life. While radiation therapy (RT) advances have enabled the mitigation of both genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities, no significant improvement has been showed in sexual quality of life over time.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of this review was to assess sexual structures' dose-volume parameters associated with the onset of erectile dysfunction.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched the PubMed database and ClinicalTrials.gov until January 4, 2023. Studies reporting the impact of the dose delivered to sexual structures on sexual function or the feasibility of innovative sexual structure-sparing approaches were deemed eligible.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Sexual-sparing strategies have involved four sexual organs. The mean penile bulb doses exceeding 20 Gy are predictive of erectile dysfunction in modern PCa RT trial. Maintaining a D100% of ≤36 Gy on the internal pudendal arteries showed preservation of erectile function in 88% of patients at 5 yr. Neurovascular bundle sparing appears feasible with magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy, yet its clinical impact remains unanswered. Doses delivered to the testicles during PCa RT usually remain <2 Gy and generate a decrease in testosterone levels ranging from -4.6% to -17%, unlikely to have any clinical impact.

CONCLUSIONS

Current data highlight the technical feasibility of sexual sparing for PCa RT. The proportion of erectile dysfunction attributable to the dose delivered to sexual structures is still largely unknown. While the ability to maintain sexual function over time is impacted by factors such as age or comorbidities, only selected patients are likely to benefit from sexual-sparing RT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Technical advances in radiation therapy (RT) made it possible to significantly lower the dose delivered to sexual structures. While sexual function is known to decline with age, the preservation of sexual structures for prostate cancer RT is likely to be beneficial only in selected patients.

A pooled long-term follow-up after radiotherapy for prostate cancer with and without a rectal hydrogel spacer: impact of hydrogel on decline in sexual quality of life

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of prostate rectal spacers on sexual quality of life (QOL) following external beam radiation therapy (RT).

Methods and materials

Patient- reported QOL was evaluated using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC). Patients were pooled from two sources: a randomized controlled trial and a non-randomized cohort of patients from a single institution. Both cohorts used the same spacing product and QOL instrument. Analysis was limited to those with good baseline pre-treatment sexual QOL (EPIC >/= 60). Differences in QOL summary score and individual items were assessed compared with baseline and between treatment arms.

Results

A total of 128 men had good baseline sexual function and were evaluated (64% with spacer and 36% without) with QOL data available for median 33 months (range: 2.5-69.4 months). Men without spacer were more likely to have declines in sexual function (p < 0.0001), bother (p = 0.0002), and sexual summary score (p < 0.0001). A minimally important difference of 10 points (1xMID) and 20 point (2xMID) was more likely without rectal spacer [10 points: odds ratio 3.53, (95% confidence interval 1.11-11.2), p = 0.032; 20 points: odds ratio 3.29, (95% confidence interval 1.16-9.33), p = 0.025]. Seven of 13 QOL items were statistically superior with hydrogel (six of nine functional and one of four bother), while no items were statistically superior for control. At baseline, more men treated with hydrogel had erections sufficient for intercourse; however, when analyzed only by the men with best baseline erectile potential and excluding those with worse function, the benefit of rectal spacing was maintained with a higher likelihood of preservation of erections sufficient for intercourse in those treated with hydrogel.

Conclusion

In this pooled analysis of QOL after prostate RT, the utilization of a hydrogel spacer was associated with better sexual QOL, less men with measurable declines in sexual QOL, and higher rates of adequate erectile function.

Hyaluronic Acid Spacer for Hypofractionated Prostate Radiation Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer has been associated with greater acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxic effects compared with conventionally fractionated RT.

Objective

To evaluate whether a hyaluronic acid rectal spacer could (1) improve rectal dosimetry and (2) affect acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects for hypofractionated RT.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 2020 to June 2021 among 12 centers within the US, Australia, and Spain, with a 6-month follow-up. Adult patients with biopsy-proven, T1 to T2 prostate cancer with a Gleason score 7 or less and prostate-specific antigen level of 20 ng/mL or less (to convert to μg/L, multiply by 1) were blinded to the treatment arms. Of the 260 consented patients, 201 patients (77.3%) were randomized (2:1) to the presence or absence of the spacer. Patients were stratified by intended 4-month androgen deprivation therapy use and erectile quality.

Main Outcomes and Measures

For the primary outcome, we hypothesized that more than 70% of patients in the spacer group would achieve a 25% or greater reduction in the rectal volume receiving 54 Gy (V54). For the secondary outcome, we hypothesized that the spacer group would have noninferior acute (within 3 months) grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects compared with the control group, with a margin of 10%.

Results

Of the 201 randomized patients, 8 (4.0%) were Asian, 26 (12.9%) Black, 42 (20.9%) Hispanic or Latino, and 153 (76.1%) White; the mean (SD) age for the spacer group was 68.6 (7.2) years and 68.4 (7.3) years for the control group. For the primary outcome, 131 of 133 (98.5%; 95% CI, 94.7%-99.8%) patients in the spacer group experienced a 25% or greater reduction in rectum V54, which was greater than the minimally acceptable 70% (P < .001). The mean (SD) reduction was 85.0% (20.9%). For the secondary outcome, 4 of 136 patients (2.9%) in the spacer group and 9 of 65 patients (13.8%) in the control group experienced acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects (difference, -10.9%; 95% 1-sided upper confidence limit, -3.5; P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

The trial results suggest that rectal spacing with hyaluronic acid improved rectal dosimetry and reduced acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects. Rectal spacing should potentially be considered for minimizing the risk of acute grade 2 or higher toxic effects for hypofractionated RT.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04189913.

Long-Term Results of a Phase 3 Randomized Prospective Trial of Erectile Tissue-Sparing Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Men With Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to determine whether limiting the doses delivered to the penile bulb (PB) and corporal bodies with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) preserves erectile function compared with standard IMRT in men with prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 117 patients with low- to intermediate-risk, clinical T1a-T2c prostate adenocarcinoma were enrolled in a single-institution, prospective, single-blind, phase 3 randomized trial. All received definitive IMRT to 74 to 80 Gy in 37 to 40 fractions and standard IMRT (s-IMRT) or erectile tissue-sparing IMRT (ETS-IMRT), which placed additional planning constraints that limited the D90 to the penile bulb and corporal bodies to ≤15 Gy and ≤7 Gy, respectively. Erectile potency was assessed with components of the International Index of Erectile Function and phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5) medication records.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients received ETS-IMRT, and 54 received s-IMRT; 1 patient did not receive radiation therapy. Before treatment, all patients reported erectile potency. No patients received androgen deprivation therapy. In the intention-to-treat analysis, treatment arms did not differ in potency preservation at 24 months (37.1% ETS-IMRT vs 31.5% s-IMRT, P = .53). Of 85 evaluable patients with International Index of Erectile Function and PDE5 medication follow-up, erectile potency was seen in 47.9% of patients in the ETS-IMRT arm and 46.0% of patients in the s-IMRT arm (P = .86). PDE5 inhibitors were initiated in 41.7% of ETS-IMRT patients and 35.1% of s-IMRT patients (P = .54). Among all patients enrolled, there was no difference in freedom from biochemical failure between those treated with ETS-IMRT and s-IMRT (5-year 91.8% vs 90.7%, respectively, P = .77), with a median follow-up of 7.4 years. There were no differences in acute or late gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity. An unplanned per-protocol analysis demonstrated no differences in potency preservation or secondary endpoints between patients who exceeded erectile tissue-sparing constraints and those who met constraints, although power was limited by attrition and unplanned dosimetric crossover.

CONCLUSIONS

ETS-IMRT that strictly limits dose to the penile bulb and corporal bodies is safe and feasible. Use of this planning technique did not show an effect on potency preservation outcomes at 2 years, though power to detect a difference was limited.

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.

Application of Hydrogel Spacer SpaceOAR Vue for Prostate Radiotherapy

Damage in the surrounding structures, including the rectum, due to unintended exposure to radiation is a large burden to bear for patients who undergo radiation therapy for prostate cancer. The use of injectable rectal spacers to distance the anterior rectum from the prostate is a potential strategy to reduce the dose of unintended radiation to the rectum. Hydrogel spacers are gaining increasing popularity in the treatment regimen for prostate cancer. After FDA approval of SpaceOAR, specialists are receiving an increasing number of referrals for hydrogel placements. In this paper, we review hydrogel spacers, the supporting clinical data, the best practices for hydrogel placement, and the risk of adverse events.

Patient Reported Outcomes for Quality of Life (QOL) By Expanded Prostate Cancer Index (EPIC) on Average 15 Years Post Treatment

•

Reported here are patient reported outcomes to 15.8 median years of follow up for initial therapy including brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, and radical prostatectomy.

•

Differences within each domain across modalities differences were generally preserved beyond 6 years of follow up.

•

Limited changes in quality of life over time suggest that shorter interval changes are largely representative of persistent changes in quality of life.

•

Costly and time consuming reporting of long term quality of life beyond 2–5 years may be limited value in future studies.

Objective/purpose

Previously patient reported quality of life (QOL) was reported in men with prostate cancer a mean 2 and 6 years post treatment with open radical prostatectomy (RP), 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT), or ¹²⁵I low dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy (BT). Herein we update the results 15 years post-treatment QOL.

Materials/methods

The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index (EPIC) domains were scored with differences evaluated at a median 15.8 years follow up based upon mean EPIC summary domains by ANOVA with pairwise post-hoc comparisons adjusted for age. Patient differences of current survey from first cross-section are reported as median change in summary score for each treatment group at median of 2.2 and 6.0, and 15.8 years.

Results

Among men still alive response rate was 52% in BT, 60% in 3D CRT, and 62% in RP resulting in 30, 41, and 330 QOL questionnaires to evaluate for each corresponding modality at median follow up of 15.8 years. Men were a mean 75.3, 83.6, and 79.3 years of age after RP, 3DCRT, and BT, respectively.

At a median of 15.8 years, there were largely persistent differences in EPIC domains without substantial evolution in QoL from middle time points. Persistent worsening in urinary irritative and bowel domain with 3DRT or BT compared to RP. Trend towards worse urinary incontinence with RP were noted without statistical differences within radiotherapy options.

Conclusion

As the EPIC patient reported outcomes with the longest follow-up, these data uniquely reveal temporal trends from 2 to 15 years post treatment. However, the treatment modalities of open RP, 3D CRT without image guidance or intensity modulation, and BT without peripheral loading or MRI guidance may not reflect modern techniques.

Rationale for Utilization of Hydrogel Rectal Spacers in Dose Escalated SBRT for the Treatment of Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer

In this review we outline the current evidence for the use of hydrogel rectal spacers in the treatment paradigm for prostate cancer with external beam radiation therapy. We review their development, summarize clinical evidence, risk of adverse events, best practices for placement, treatment planning considerations and finally we outline a framework and rationale for the utilization of rectal spacers when treating unfavorable risk prostate cancer with dose escalated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT).

Pelvic Radiation Disease

Pelvic radiation is increasingly being used for the neoadjuvant and definitive treatment of pelvic organ malignancy. While this treatment can be highly effective, and may assist in organ sparing, it is also associated with significant toxicity and devastating adverse events that need to be considered. In broad terms, pelvic radiation disease affects both the primary target organ as well as adjacent organs and soft tissue structures, with complications that can be classified and graded according to consensus criteria. The complication grade is often modality, dose, and area dependent. The most common manifestations are proctitis, cystitis, recto-urethral fistula, ureteric stricture, and bone involvement. Toxicity can be misdiagnosed for many years, resulting in significant management delays. Complications can be difficult to prevent and challenging to treat, requiring specialized multi-disciplinary input to achieve the best possible strategy to minimize impact and improve patient quality of life.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of hydrogel spacer for rectal toxicity reduction in prostate external beam radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Contemporary methods of external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer have reduced toxicity rates through beam modulation and image guidance, however, rectal injury has not been eliminated completely in this population. For patients at greatest risk of developing rectal toxicities, hydrogel spacers are a viable option for risk reduction. Translation of clinical trial results into routine clinical practice relies on an understanding of the economic implications. This study completed a cost-effectiveness analysis of hydrogel spacers in the Australian healthcare setting.

METHOD

Simulation of possible health states following treatment was performed using a Markov model. Model outcomes included the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and the net monetary benefit (NMB) at three published willingness-to-pay thresholds derived from literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were provided on these results. A baseline cohort without hydrogel spacer use was compared to treat all and selective use cohorts. Cost variation scenarios were also investigated to assess the impact of hydrogel spacer cost on outcomes.

RESULTS

Using hydrogel spacers in a selective cohort was more likely to be cost-effective than giving to all patients (NMB -$43 versus -$997, respectively); however, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not below the $28 000 willingness-to-pay threshold for a healthcare provider perspective. These outcomes were influenced by large parameter uncertainty. Cost variation strategies are worth investigating further as a method to achieve willingness-to-pay threshold targets.

CONCLUSION

The influence of parameter uncertainty currently limits the cost-effectiveness of this intervention in the Australian public health setting. However, a cost variation solution has been demonstrated to improve cost-effectiveness estimates for selected patients and should be examined further.

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.

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.

Dosimetric and clinical outcomes of SpaceOAR in men undergoing external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review

SpaceOAR, an absorbable polyethylene glycol hydrogel, increases the space between the prostate and rectum to reduce the radiation received by the rectum during prostate cancer radiation therapy. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate controlled studies on the dosimetric and clinical outcomes of SpaceOAR in men undergoing external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Eight studies were included in the review. All of the studies showed SpaceOAR to reduce the radiation dose volume to the rectum over numerous dosimetry levels. Of the four studies that assessed toxicity, one reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease acute Grade 1 diarrhoea and two reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease late Grade 1 and Grade ≥2 rectal toxicities. Two studies assessed cumulative incidence of toxicity at 3 years in which one reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease urinary incontinence and Grade ≥1 and Grade ≥2 rectal toxicities, and the other reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease Grade 1 diarrhoea and Grade 2 proctitis. Moreover, one study reported that fewer SpaceOAR patients experienced 10-point declines in bowel quality of life at 3 years, but another study reported no significant difference in 10-point declines in bowel quality of life between the SpaceOAR and control groups at 5 years. With the current research available, SpaceOAR may be beneficial to those who did not meet the standard rectal dose-volume criteria, have higher risk factors of developing rectal toxicities post-radiation, or wish to decrease the length and costs of radiotherapy by increasing the dose of radiation per fraction.

Effect of the timing of hydrogel spacer placement on prostate and rectal dosimetry of low-dose-rate brachytherapy implants

Purpose

To verify the dose sparing effect of hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR™) on rectal dosimetry for prostate brachytherapy, and to determine whether prostate and rectal dosimetry was affected by the time gap between hydrogel spacer injection and brachytherapy dosimetry.

Material and methods

The ¹⁰³Pd brachytherapy dosimetry of 174 consecutive intermediate- and high-risk patients injected with hydrogel was compared with a dosimetry of 174 contemporaneous patients without hydrogel injections. Of the SpaceOAR™ patients, 91 had hydrogel injected upon completion of brachytherapy implant, while the remaining 83 patients had hydrogel placed prior to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), followed 2-10 weeks later by brachytherapy. Brachytherapy implants were either planned with the prostate undistorted by any hydrogel or planned with hydrogel in place. Dosimetry of the prostate and tissues at risk was determined from CT imaging on the day of brachytherapy implant.

Results

SpaceOAR™ significantly reduced mean and maximum rectal doses as well as rectal wall V₅₀, but there was a statistically significant reduction of planning target volume (PTV) D₉₀ to 121.1% of the prescribed dose in hydrogel patients compared to 123.3% in the non-hydrogel patients. Rectal dosimetry was similar between patients injected with hydrogel after brachytherapy and those with spacer injected prior to EBRT. However, patients who had hydrogel placed prior to EBRT had statistically significantly higher dosimetry indices of PTV and urethra relative to those with spacer placed at the completion of brachytherapy.

Conclusions

There was a significant rectal dose sparing in the cohort with hydrogel spacer compared to a reference group without spacer injection. The rectal dose sparing effect was similar in the sub-group of patients injected with hydrogel prior to EBRT and the sub-group injected with hydrogel at the conclusion of brachytherapy.

Dosimetric feasibility of neurovascular bundle-sparing stereotactic body radiotherapy with periprostatic hydrogel spacer for localized prostate cancer to preserve erectile function

Objective:

We aim to test the hypothesis that neurovascular bundle (NVB) displacement by rectal hydrogel spacer combined with NVB delineation as an organ at risk (OAR) is a feasible method for NVB-sparing stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Methods:

Thirty-five men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer who underwent rectal hydrogel spacer placement and pre-, post-spacer prostate MRI studies were treated with prostate SBRT (36.25 Gy in five fractions). A prostate radiologist contoured the NVB on both the pre- and post-spacer T2W MRI sequences that were then registered to the CT simulation scan for NVB-sparing radiation treatment planning. Three SBRT treatment plans were developed for each patient: (1) no NVB sparing, (2) NVB-sparing using pre-spacer MRI, and (3) NVB-sparing using post-spacer MRI. NVB dose constraints include maximum dose 36.25 Gy (100%), V34.4 Gy (95% of dose) <60%, V32Gy <70%, V28Gy <90%.

Results:

Rectal hydrogel spacer placement shifted NVB contours an average of 3.1 ± 3.4 mm away from the prostate, resulting in a 10% decrease in NVB V34.4 Gy in non-NVB-sparing plans (p < 0.01). NVB-sparing treatment planning reduced the NVB V34.4 by 16% without the spacer (p < 0.01) and 25% with spacer (p < 0.001). NVB-sparing did not compromise PTV coverage and OAR endpoints.

Conclusions:

NVB-sparing SBRT with rectal hydrogel spacer significantly reduces the volume of NVB treated with high-dose radiation. Rectal spacer contributes to this effect through a dosimetrically meaningful displacement of the NVB that may significantly reduce RiED. These results suggest that NVB-sparing SBRT warrants further clinical evaluation.

Advances in knowledge:

This is a feasibility study showing that the periprostatic NVBs can be spared high doses of radiation during prostate SBRT using a hydrogel spacer and nerve-sparing treatment planning.

Sexual organ-sparing with hydrogel spacer injections for rectal cancer radiotherapy: a feasibility pilot study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this pilot study was to investigate in two rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT) the implant feasibility and dosimetric benefit in sexual organ-sparing of an injectable, absorbable, radiopaque hydrogel spacer.

METHODS

Two rectal cancer patients (one male and one female) underwent hydrogel implant between rectum and vagina/prostate before nCRT and curative surgery. A CT scan was performed before and after injection and a comparative dosimetric study was performed testing a standard (45/50 Gy) and a dose escalated (46/55.2 Gy) schedule.

RESULTS

In both patients, the spacer implant in the recto-prostatic or recto-vaginal space was feasible and well tolerated. For the male, the dosimetric benefit with spacer was minimal for sexual organs. For the female however, doses delivered to the vagina were significantly reduced with spacer with a mean reduction of more than 5 Gy for both regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

For organ preservation protocols and selected sexually active female patients, use of hydrogel spacers can be considered to spare sexual organs from the high radiotherapy dose levels.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

For females with advanced rectal tumor, a spacer implant between the rectum and the vagina before nCRT is feasible and reduces doses delivered to the vagina.

Promoting Sexual Well-being for Men and Their Partners Affected by Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To present an overview of the issues related to the sexual well-being of people affected by prostate cancer and their partners, and propose ways to manage and address these by oncology nurses and the wider multi-disciplinary team.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases such as PubMed and Cinahl were used to retrieve relevant literature published between 2010 and 2020.

CONCLUSION

Sexual well-being in patients with prostate cancer and their partners is multifaceted, comprising physical, emotional, social, and cultural aspects.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

A combination of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions, together with enhanced communication, can be successful in providing culturally competent, person-centered care by oncology nurses and the wider multi-disciplinary team.

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

Importance

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

Objective

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

Data Sources

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

Study Selection

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

Data Extraction and Synthesis

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

Main Outcomes and Measures

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

Results

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

Conclusions and Relevance

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

Challenges in Reporting the Effect of Radiotherapy on Erectile Function

BACKGROUND

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is the most common side effect of prostate radiotherapy (RT), but reported rates over time and across modalities have varied widely.

AIM

To evaluate the published literature between 2002 and 2018 for high quality data utilizing prospectively gathered patient-reported ED, and to summarize the challenges in reporting of RT-induced ED (RIED).

METHODS

A PubMed search and literature review was performed to identify articles describing rates of ED before and after definitive external beam RT or brachytherapy without androgen deprivation.

OUTCOMES

Patient-reported ED, patient and treatment variables, and study follow-up constituted the main outcomes of this study.

RESULTS

24 articles were identified, reporting RIED rates between 17% and 90%. Variables contributing to this range included patient, treatment, and study characteristics known to impact ED reporting.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

For future studies, we recommend the use of validated patient-reported questionnaires and reporting of baseline function and comorbidities, RT type and dose, and use of androgen deprivation therapy and erectile aids at the time of ED measurement. With sufficient follow-up to understand the late nature of RIED, these recommendations will improve comparison of results between studies and the applicability of results to patients undergoing pretreatment counseling regarding the risks of RIED.

STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS

The literature search and formulation of results were based on a broad understanding of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and the literature, but because of the focus on data reporting, a comprehensive systematic review of all RIED literature was not performed.

CONCLUSION

Reported rates of ED after RT vary widely due to differences in patients' baseline reported erectile function, age, comorbidities, and characteristics of the treatment delivered. The methodology of ED measurement has significant impact on the applicability and comparability of results to other studies and clinical practice. Nukala V, Incrocci L, Hunt AA, et al. Challenges in Reporting the Effect of Radiotherapy on Erectile Function. J Sex Med 2020;17:1053-1059.

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.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

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.

Clinical trials involving carbon-ion radiation therapy and the path forward

To describe the international landscape of clinical trials in carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT), the authors reviewed the current status of 63 ongoing clinical trials (median, 47 participants) involving CIRT identified from the US clinicaltrials.gov trial registry and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Platform Registry. The objectives were to evaluate the potential for these trials to define the role of this modality in the treatment of specific cancer types and identify the major challenges and opportunities to advance this technology. A significant body of literature suggested the potential for advantageous dose distributions and, in preclinical biologic studies, the enhanced effectiveness for CIRT compared with photons and protons. In addition, clinical evidence from phase I/II trials, although limited, indicated the potential for CIRT to improve cancer outcomes. However, current high-level phase III randomized clinical trial evidence does not exist. Although there has been an increase in the number of trials investigating CIRT since 2010, and the number of countries and sites offering CIRT is slowly growing, this progress has excluded other countries. Several recommendations are proposed to study this modality to accelerate progress in the field, including: 1) increasing the number of multinational randomized clinical trials, 2) leveraging the existing CIRT facilities to launch larger multinational trials directed at common cancers combined with high-level quality assurance; and 3) developing more compact and less expensive next-generation treatment systems integrated with radiobiologic research and preclinical testing.

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.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Radiation therapy (RT) is a curative treatment modality for localized prostate cancer. Over the past two decades, advances in technology and imaging have considerably changed RT in prostate cancer treatment. Treatment has evolved from 2-dimensional (2D) planning using X-ray fields based on pelvic bony landmarks to 3-dimensional (3D) conformal RT (CRT) which uses computed tomography (CT) based planning. Despite improvements with 3D-CRT, dose distributions often remained suboptimal with portions of the rectum and bladder receiving unacceptably high doses. In more recent years, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has become the standard of care to deliver external beam RT. IMRT uses multiple radiation beams of different shapes and intensities delivered from a wide range of angles to ‘paint’ the radiation dose onto the tumor. IMRT allows for a higher dose of radiation to be delivered to the prostate while reducing dose to surrounding organs. Multiple clinical trials have demonstrated improved cancer outcomes with dose escalation, but toxicities using 3D-CRT and escalated doses have been problematic. IMRT is a method to deliver dose escalated RT with more conformal dose distributions than 3D-CRT and has been associated with improved toxicity profiles. IMRT also appears to be the safest method to deliver hypofractionated RT and pelvic lymph node radiation. The purpose of this review is to summarize the technical aspects of IMRT planning and delivery, and to review the literature supporting the use of IMRT for prostate cancer.

A multi-institutional phase 2 trial of prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using continuous real-time evaluation of prostate motion with patient-reported quality of life

PURPOSE

The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer has been reported predominantly from single institutional studies, although concerns for broader adoption exist.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From 2011 through 2013, 66 men were accrued to a phase 2 trial at 5 centers. SBRT consisted of 5 fractions of 7.4 Gy to a total dose of 37 Gy using conventional linear accelerators. Electromagnetic transponders were used for motion management. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was evaluated via the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26 questionnaire. Acute and late toxicities were collected according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Linear mixed modeling was performed to assess changes in HRQOL over time.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 36 months. All men had low- or intermediate-risk disease. There have been 0 biochemical recurrences. No grade 3 urinary or bowel toxicity was reported. Twenty-three percent of patients had acute grade 2 urinary toxicity, with 9% late grade 2 urinary toxicity. Four percent and 5% experienced acute or late grade 2+ bowel toxicity, respectively. Urinary bother and bowel HRQOL transiently decreased during the first 6 to 12 months post-SBRT, and then returned to baseline. In men with good erectile function at baseline, sexual HRQOL declined during the first 6 months and stabilized thereafter. On linear mixed modeling, the strongest predictor of sustained bowel and sexual HRQOL was baseline HRQOL.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multi-institutional phase 2 clinical trial using continuous real-time evaluation of prostate motion, prostate SBRT has excellent intermediate-term tumor control with mild and expected treatment-related side effects.