High-dose-rate brachytherapy monotherapy versus low-dose-rate brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

Development of patient and catheter specific error thresholds for high dose rate prostate brachytherapy

BACKGROUND

In-vivo source tracking has been an active topic of research in the field of high-dose rate brachytherapy in recent years to verify accuracy in treatment delivery. Although detection systems for source tracking are being developed, the allowable threshold of treatment error is still unknown and is likely patient-specific due to anatomy and planning variation.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine patient and catheter-specific shift error thresholds for in-vivo source tracking during high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT).

METHODS

A module was developed in the previously described graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm. The module generates systematic catheter shift errors retrospectively into HDRPBT treatment plans, performed on 50 patients. The catheter shift model iterates through the number of catheters shifted in the plan (from 1 to all catheters), the direction of shift (superior, inferior, medial, lateral, cranial, and caudal), and the magnitude of catheter shift (1-6 mm). For each combination of these parameters, 200 error plans were generated, randomly selecting the catheters in the plan to shift. After shifts were applied, dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters were re-calculated. Catheter shift thresholds were then derived based on plans where DVH parameters were clinically unacceptable (prostate V100 < 95%, urethra D0.1cc > 118%, and rectum Dmax > 80%). Catheter thresholds were also Pearson correlated to catheter robustness values.

RESULTS

Patient-specific thresholds varied between 1 to 6 mm for all organs, in all shift directions. Overall, patient-specific thresholds typically decrease with an increasing number of catheters shifted. Anterior and inferior directions were less sensitive than other directions. Pearson's correlation test showed a strong correlation between catheter robustness and catheter thresholds for the rectum and urethra, with correlation values of -0.81 and -0.74, respectively (p < 0.01), but no correlation was found for the prostate.

CONCLUSIONS

It was possible to determine thresholds for each patient, with thresholds showing dependence on shift direction, and number of catheters shifted. Not every catheter combination is explorable, however, this study shows the feasibility to determine patient-specific thresholds for clinical application. The correlation of patient-specific thresholds with the equivalent robustness value indicated the need for robustness consideration during plan optimization and treatment planning.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Comparison of chronic gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities between brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy for patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

125I BT is an effective radiotherapy for prostate cancer. However, comparison data of GI and GU toxicities between BT, BT + EBRT, and EBRT-alone patient groups is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To define the GI and GU toxicities in prostate cancer to prevent adverse events after treatment.

METHODS

We searched published studies in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases up to December 31, 2022. The endpoints were the RRs of GI and GU toxicities. Pooled data were assessed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fifteen eligible studies were included into this analysis. LDR-BT had significantly lower RRs than LDR-BT + EBRT for acute GI (2.13; 95% CI, 1.22-3.69; P= 0.007) and late GI toxicities (3.96; 95% CI, 1.23-12.70; P= 0.02). Moreover, EBRT had significantly higher RRs than LDR-BT for acute GU (2.32; 95% CI, 1.29-4.15; P= 0.005) and late GU toxicities (2.38; 95% CI, 1.27-4.44; P= 0.007). HDR-BT had significantly higher RRs for acute GU toxicities than LDR-BT alone (0.30; 95% CI, 0.23-0.40; P< 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

The results implied that BT with and without EBRT can result in both GI and GU toxicities in patients with prostate cancer, with LDR-BT leading to a poorer urinary function than EBRT.

Feasibility of online adaptive HDR prostate brachytherapy: A novel treatment concept

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of online adaptive transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-based high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT) through retrospective simulation of source positioning and catheter swap errors on patient treatment plans.

METHOD

Source positioning errors (catheter shifts in 1 mm increments in the cranial/caudal, anterior/posterior, and medial/lateral directions up to ±6 mm) and catheter swap errors (between the most and least heavily weighted) were introduced retrospectively into DICOM treatment plans of 20 patients that previously received TRUS HDRPBT. Dose volume histogram (DVH) indices were monitored as errors were introduced sequentially into individual catheters, simulating potential errors throughout treatment. Whenever DVH indices were outside institution thresholds: prostate V100% <95%, urethra D0.1cc >118% and rectum Dmax >80%, the plan was adapted using remaining catheters (i.e., simulating previous catheters as previously delivered). The final DVH indices were recorded.

RESULTS

Prostate coverage (V100% >95%) could be maintained for source position errors up to 6 mm through online plan adaptation. The source position error at which the urethra D0.1cc and rectum Dmax was able to return to clinically acceptable levels using online adaptation varied between 6 mm to 1 mm, depending on the direction of the source position error and patient anatomy. After introduction of catheter swap errors to patient plans, prostate V100% was recoverable using online adaptation to near original plan characteristics. Urethra D0.1cc and rectum Dmax showed less recoverability.

CONCLUSION

Online adaptive HDRPBT maintains the prostate V100% to clinically acceptable values for majority of directional shifts. However, the current online adaptive method may not correct for source position errors near organs at risk.

Radioactive Iodine-125 in Tumor Therapy: Advances and Future Directions

Radioactive iodine-125 (I-125) is the most widely used radioactive sealed source for interstitial permanent brachytherapy (BT). BT has the exceptional ability to deliver extremely high doses that external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) could never achieve within treated lesions, with the added benefit that doses drop off rapidly outside the target lesion by minimizing the exposure of uninvolved surrounding normal tissue. Spurred by multiple biological and technological advances, BT application has experienced substantial alteration over the past few decades. The procedure of I-125 radioactive seed implantation evolved from ultrasound guidance to computed tomography guidance. Compellingly, the creative introduction of 3D-printed individual templates, BT treatment planning systems, and artificial intelligence navigator systems remarkably increased the accuracy of I-125 BT and individualized I-125 ablative radiotherapy. Of note, utilizing I-125 to treat carcinoma in hollow cavity organs was enabled by the utility of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs). Initially, I-125 BT was only used in the treatment of rare tumors. However, an increasing number of clinical trials upheld the efficacy and safety of I-125 BT in almost all tumors. Therefore, this study aims to summarize the recent advances of I-125 BT in cancer therapy, which cover experimental research to clinical investigations, including the development of novel techniques. This review also raises unanswered questions that may prompt future clinical trials and experimental work.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy using a hydrogel spacer for localized prostate cancer: A dosimetric comparison between tomotherapy with the newly-developed tumor-tracking system and cyberknife

Purpose

With a new tumor‐tracking system (Synchrony®) for tomotherapy (Radixact®), the internal and set‐up margins can be tightened, like cyberknife (CyberKnife®), in the planning of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer. Recently, the usefulness of placing a hydrogel spacer between the prostate and rectum has been established in prostate radiotherapy. We evaluated the characteristics of tomotherapy plans with the tumor‐tracking system and compared them with cyberknife SBRT plans for localized prostate cancer using a hydrogel spacer.

Methods

In 20 patients, two plans were created and compared using tomotherapy and cyberknife. All patients underwent hydrogel spacer injection behind the prostate before simulation CT and MRI for fusion. For all plans, 36.25 Gy in 7.25‐Gy fractions for a minimum coverage dose of 95% of planning target volume (PTV) (D95%) was prescribed. The D99% of PTV and D0.1 ml of the PTV, urethra, bladder, and rectum were intended to be > 90%, 110–130%, 100–110%, <110%, and <100%, respectively, of the prescribed doses.

Results

All plans using tomotherapy and cyberknife achieved the intended dose constraints. The cyberknife plans yielded better median PTV‐V110% (volume of PTV covered by 110% isodose line, 54.8%), maintaining lower median D0.1 ml of the urethra (37.5 Gy) and V80% of the bladder (11.0 ml) compared to the tomotherapy plans (39.0%; p < 0.0001, 38.2 Gy; p < 0.0001, and 18.3 ml; p < 0.0001, respectively). The tomotherapy plans were superior to the cyberknife plans for the rectum (V80% = 0.4 vs. 1.0 ml, p < 0.001; D1ml = 26.4 vs. 29.0 Gy, p = 0.013).

Conclusions

Our results suggested that tomotherapy with the tumor‐tracking system has reasonable potential for SBRT for localized prostate cancer using a hydrogel spacer.

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

PURPOSE

To evaluate the PSA outcomes and the late patient's reported health related quality of life (HRQOL) and toxicity after single-fraction High-Dose-Rate brachytherapy (HDRB) and Low-Dose-Rate brachytherapy (LDRB) for prostate cancer.

METHODS

Men with low and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer across 3 centres were randomized between monotherapy brachytherapy with either Iodine-125 LDRB or 19 Gy single-fraction HDRB. Biochemical outcomes were evaluated using the Phoenix definition, PSA nadir and absolute PSA value <0.4 ng/mL. Toxicities and HRQOL were recorded at 24 and 36 months.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were randomized, 15 in the LDRB arm and 16 patients in the HDRB arm. After a median follow-up of 45(36-53) months, 3 patients in the HDRB arm experienced biochemical failure (p = 0.092). Nineteen Gy single-fraction HDRB was associated with significantly higher PSA nadir compared to LDRB (1.02 ± 0.66vs 0.25 ± 0.39, p < 0.0001). Moreover, a significantly larger proportion of patients in the LDRB group had a PSA <0.4 ng/mL (13/15 vs 2/16, p < 0.0001). For late Genito-Urinary, Gastro-Intestinal, and sexual toxicities at 24 and 36 months, no significant differences were found between the 2 arms. As for HRQOL, the IPSS and EPIC-26 urinary irritative score were significantly better for patients treated with HDRB over the first 36 months post-treatment (p = 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively), reflecting superior HRQOL.

CONCLUSION

HDRB resulted in superior HRQOL in the irritative urinary domain compared to LDRB. PSA nadir was significantly lower in the LDRB group and a higher proportion of patients in the LDRB group reached PSA <0.4 ng/mL.

Dextran-Curcumin Nanosystems Inhibit Cell Growth and Migration Regulating the Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition in Prostate Cancer Cells

Functional nanocarriers which are able to simultaneously vectorize drugs to the site of interest and exert their own cytotoxic activity represent a significant breakthrough in the search for effective anticancer strategies with fewer side effects than conventional chemotherapeutics. Here, we propose previously developed, self-assembling dextran-curcumin nanoparticles for the treatment of prostate cancer in combination therapy with Doxorubicin (DOXO). Biological effectiveness was investigated by evaluating the cell viability in either cancer and normal cells, reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, apoptotic effect, interference with the cell cycle, and the ability to inhibit cell migration and reverse the epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). The results proved a significant enhancement of curcumin efficiency upon immobilization in nanoparticles: IC50 reduced by a half, induction of apoptotic effect, and improved ROS production (from 67 to 134%) at low concentrations. Nanoparticles guaranteed a pH-dependent DOXO release, with a more efficient release in acidic environments. Finally, a synergistic effect between nanoparticles and Doxorubicin was demonstrated, with the free curcumin showing additive activity. Although in vivo studies are required to support the findings of this study, these preliminary in vitro data can be considered a proof of principle for the design of an effective therapy for prostate cancer treatment.

Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms after Prostate Radiation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To present urologists with guidance on how to approach and manage lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in patients who have undergone radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are few studies that specifically examine treatment approaches for LUTS in patients who have undergone prostate cancer RT. LUTS after prostate RT are unique when compared to de novo LUTS. Understanding these distinctions is important for urologists' practice as well as patients' quality of life. Discussion of the risks and management of post-RT LUTS should be included in the shared decision-making process when counseling patients on various treatment options for prostate cancer. Further studies evaluating treatments for storage and voiding symptoms after RT are needed to help guide future care.

Radiotherapy for Clinically Localized T3b or T4 Very-High-Risk Prostate Cancer-Role of Dose Escalation Using High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost or High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

Simple Summary

Recently, high-risk prostate cancer was subdivided to a very-high-risk group considered to have the worst prognosis, including clinical stage T3b–T4, primary Gleason pattern 5, or more than four biopsy cores with Gleason score 8–10. Among these, T3b–T4 stage is a special interest in radiotherapy because of their wider target volume outside the prostate. We examined this subgroup and found that dose escalation in radiotherapy both with brachytherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) improved biochemical free survival rate but not in prostate cancer specific survival rate and overall survival rate.

Abstract

To examine the efficacy of dose escalating radiotherapy into patients with cT3b or T4 localized prostate cancer, we compared Group A (86 conventional dose external beam radiotherapy: EBRT group, treated with 70–72 Gy) and group B (39 high dose EBRT group (HDEBRT group, 74–80 Gy) and 124 high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR) + EBRT (HDR boost)) using multi-institutional retrospective data. The actuarial 5-year biochemical disease-free survival (bDFS) rate, prostate cancer specific survival rate (PSS), and overall survival rate (OS) were 75.8%, 96.8%, and 93.5%. Group B showed superior 5-year bDFS rate (81.2%) as compared to the group A (66.5%) (p < 0.0001) with a hazard ratio of 0.397. Equivocal 5-year PSS (98.3% and 94.8% in group B and group A) and OS (both 93.7%) were found between those groups. Accumulated late grade ≥ 2 toxicities in gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts were similar among those three groups. Therefore, both HDEBRT and HDR boost could be good options for improving the bDFS rate in cT3–T4 localized prostate cancer without affecting PSS and OS.

High-dose-rate brachytherapy with external beam radiotherapy versus low-dose-rate brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

To compare the outcomes of localized prostate cancer treatment with high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT), we examined 924 patients treated with HDR-BT + external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and 500 patients treated with LDR-BT ± EBRT using multi-institutional retrospective data. The HDR-BT treated advanced disease with more hormonal therapy than LDR-BT. To reduce background selection bias, we performed inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis using propensity scores and excluded patients with T3b-4 disease/ initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels > 50 ng/ml. The actuarial 5-year biochemical control rates (5y-bNED) were 96.3% and 95.7% in the HDR-BT and LDR-BT groups, respectively. The corresponding values were 100% and 96.5% in the low-risk group; 97.4% and 97.1% in the intermediate-risk group (97.2% and 97% in the higher titer group and 97.5% and 94.6% in the lower titer group, respectively); and 95.7% and 94.9% in the selected high-risk group, respectively. IPTW correction indicated no significant difference among the groups. The 5y-bNED in the HDR-BT + EBRT, LDR-BT + EBRT, and LDR-BT alone groups were 96.3%, 95.5%, and 97%, respectively (P = 0.3011). The corresponding values were 97.4%, 94.7%, and 96.6% (P = 0.1004) in the intermediate-risk group (97.5%, 100%, and 94.5% in the lower titer group [P = 0.122] and 97.2%, 96.2%, and 100% [P = 0.664] in the higher titer group, respectively) and 95.7%, 95.5%, and 100% (P = 0.859) in the high-risk group, respectively. The HDR-BT group showed a lower incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicities; the incidence of other early and late grade ≥ 2 toxicities were similar between the HDR-BT and LDR-BT groups. Acute genitourinary toxicity predicted the occurrence of late genitourinary toxicity. EBRT increased the risk of grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal toxicity. HDR-BT + EBRT is a good alternative to LDR-BT ± EBRT for low-, intermediate-, and selected high-risk patients.

Ablative Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer: Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and High Dose Rate Brachytherapy

Simple Summary

Radiation therapy is a standard of care treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer. Over the years, various radiation delivery modalities have contributed to the increased precision of radiation, employing radiobiological insights to shorten the overall treatment time with hypofractionation, while improving oncological control without increasing toxicities. Here, we discuss and compare two ablative radiation modalities, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT), in terms of oncological control, dose/fractionation and toxicities in men with localized prostate cancer. This review will highlight the levels of evidence available to support either modality as a monotherapy, will summarize safety and efficacy, help clinicians gain a deeper understanding of the safety and efficacy profiles of these two modalities, and highlight ongoing research efforts to address many unanswered questions regarding ablative prostate radiation.

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common noncutaneous solid organ malignancy among men worldwide. Radiation therapy is a standard of care treatment option that has historically been delivered in the form of small daily doses of radiation over the span of multiple weeks. PCa appears to have a unique sensitivity to higher doses of radiation per fraction, rendering it susceptible to abbreviated forms of treatment. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) are both modern radiation modalities that allow the precise delivery of ablative doses of radiation to the prostate while maximally sparing sensitive surrounding normal structures. In this review, we highlight the evidence regarding the radiobiology, oncological outcomes, toxicity and dose/fractionation schemes of SBRT and HDRBT monotherapy in men with low-and intermediate-risk PCa.

Brachytherapy: An overview for clinicians

Brachytherapy is a specific form of radiotherapy consisting of the precise placement of radioactive sources directly into or next to the tumor. This technique is indicated for patients affected by various types of cancers. It is an optimal tool for delivering very high doses to the tumor focally while minimizing the probability of normal tissue complications. Physicians from a wide range of specialties may be involved in either the referral to or the placement of brachytherapy. Many patients require brachytherapy as either primary treatment or as part of their oncologic care. On the basis of high-level evidence from randomized controlled trials, brachytherapy is mainly indicated: 1) as standard in combination with chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer; 2) in surgically treated patients with uterine endometrial cancer for decreasing the risk of vaginal vault recurrence; 3) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer to perform dose escalation and improve progression-free survival; and 4) in patients with breast cancer as adjuvant, accelerated partial breast irradiation or to boost the tumor bed. In this review, the authors discuss the clinical relevance of brachytherapy with a focus on indications, levels of evidence, and results in the overall context of radiation use for patients with cancer.

Treatment patterns of high-dose-rate and low-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Monotherapy with high-dose-rate (HDR) or low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy are both recommended modalities for prostate cancer. The choice between HDR and LDR is dependent on patient, physician, and hospital preferences. We sought to identify treatment patterns and factors associated with receipt of HDR or LDR monotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with localized low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with HDR or LDR monotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patterns of HDR vs. LDR. Patient characteristics were correlated with HDR vs. LDR using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 50,326 patients from 2004-2014: LDR 37,863 (75.2%) vs. HDR 12,463 (24.8%). Median follow-up was 70.3 months. The overall use of monotherapy declined over time. HDR application declined relative to LDR. In 2004, 27.0% of cases were HDR compared to 19.2% in 2014. Factors associated with increased likelihood of HDR on multivariable analysis included: increasing age (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.01-1.01), cT2c disease (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.11-1.41), treatment at an academic center (OR: 2.45, 95% CI: 2.24-2.65), non-white race (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.27-1.42), and income > $63,000 (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.59-1.88). LDR was more common in 2010-2014 (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.54-0.65), Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index > 0 (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.84-0.95), and for patients receiving hormone therapy (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.83-0.93). No difference in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason score and receipt of HDR vs. LDR was observed. Mean overall survival was 127.0 months for HDR and 125.4 for LDR, and was not statistically different.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed an overall decrease in brachytherapy (BT) monotherapy use since 2004 for localized prostate cancer. Despite similar survival outcomes, the use of HDR monotherapy declined relative to LDR.

Influence of transitioning of planning techniques in high-dose-rate brachytherapy monotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer from two- to three-dimensional planning

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of transitioning treatment planning techniques in high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy monotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We compared 113 patients treated with initial two-dimensional treatment planning (2D: 74% received 54 Gy/nine fractions) to 240 patients treated with three-dimensional planning (3D: 70 CT image-guided 3D [CT-3D]: 84% 45.5 Gy/seven fractions and 170 MRI image-guided [MRI-3D]: 87% received 49 Gy/nine fractions).

RESULTS

The actuarial 5-year biochemical failure-free survival rates for 2D and 3D planning were 88.4% and 95.1% (p = 0.0285 between 2D and 3D) (89.4% in CT-3D and 97.5% in MRI-3D), respectively; the rates for 2D and 3D planning were not available and 100% in the low-risk group (100% and 100%), 97.7% and 94.5% (p = 0.7626) (85.1% and 100%) in the intermediate-risk group, and 82.5% and 94.4% (p = 0.0507) (93.8% and 94.7%) for the high-risk group. Late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity Grade 1, Grade 2, and Grade 3 was found in 13%, 4%, and 1% in 2D, whereas 8%, 2%, and 0% in 3D group (p = 0.0699), respectively. 3D decreased GI toxicity Grade 2 ≤ than 2D (19% and 10%, p = 0.0169). Late genitourinary toxicity Grade 1, Grade 2, and Grade 3 was 21%, 12%, and 3% for 2D and 32%, 18%, and 3% for 3D, respectively (p = 0.0217).

CONCLUSIONS

The 3D technique has the potential to reduce GI toxicity and improve biochemical control rate compared to 2D planning, whereas 3D resulted in increased mild genitourinary toxicity.

Individualized Dose-Escalation of HDR Prostate Brachytherapy Implant to Decrease Required External Beam Radiation Dose: A Retrospective Feasibility Study

Purpose

High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is commonly combined with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Escalating the HDR-BT dose as far as organ-at-risk (OAR) constraints allow, on a personalized basis, would allow for a reduction in EBRT dose while achieving similar total biologic equivalence. The primary objective of this study was to determine the dosimetric feasibility of escalating the HDR-BT dose from 15 Gy to 16 or 17 Gy while continuing to meet OAR constraints from the original 15 Gy plan on an individualized basis.

Methods and materials

A total of 53 consecutive HDR-BT plans were retrospectively assessed to determine what percentage of plans could be reoptimized to deliver a dose of 16 Gy or 17 Gy, while meeting defined 15-Gy OAR constraints. Factors independently associated with dose escalation were examined.

Results

Thirty-nine plans (74%) and 2 plans (4%) were successfully escalated to a dose of 16 Gy and 17 Gy, respectively. Rectum V80 and urethra D_max were independently predictive of the ability to dose escalate to 16 Gy.

Conclusions

Individualized HDR-BT dose escalation beyond 15 Gy without compromising OAR constraints is dosimetrically feasible. This approach could allow for a corresponding reduction of EBRT fractions (ie, from 15 to 12 fractions) and would be beneficial in terms of resource savings for departments, convenience for patients, and potentially better tolerance of treatment with the expected reduction in biologically equivalent doses to OARs. A clinical trial is being developed to investigate the efficacy and tolerance of personalized HDR-BT/EBRT dose fractionation for localized intracapsular prostate cancer.

A Phase 2 Randomized Pilot Study Comparing High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy as Monotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer

Purpose

To compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRB) versus low dose-rate brachytherapy (LDRB) for localized prostate cancer in a multi-institutional phase 2 randomized trial.

Methods and Materials

Men with favorable-risk prostate cancer were randomized between monotherapy brachytherapy with either Iodine-125 LDRB to 144 Gy or single-fraction Iridium-192 HDRB to 19 Gy. HRQOL and urinary toxicity were recorded at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC)-26 scoring and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Independent samples t test and mixed effects modeling were performed for continuous variables. Time to IPSS resolution, defined as return to its baseline score ±5 points, was calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimator curves with the log-rank test. A multiple-comparison adjusted P value of ≤.05 was considered significant.

Results

LDRB and HDRB were performed in 15 and 16 patients, respectively, for a total of 31 patients. At 3 months, patients treated with LDRB had a higher IPSS score (mean, 15.5 vs 6.0, respectively; P = .003) and lower EPIC urinary irritative score (mean, 69.2 vs 85.3, respectively; P = .037) compared with those who received HDRB. On repeated measures at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, the IPSS (P = .003) and EPIC urinary irritative scores (P = .019) were significantly better in the HDR arm, translating into a lower urinary toxicity profile. There were no significant differences in the EPIC urinary incontinence, sexual, or bowel habit scores between the 2 groups at any measured time point. Time to IPSS resolution was significantly shorter in the HDRB group (mean, 2.0 months) compared with the LDRB group (mean, 6.0 months; P = .028).

Conclusions

HDRB monotherapy is a promising modality associated with a lower urinary toxicity profile and higher HRQOL in the first 12 months compared with LDRB.