Epididymitis after prostate brachytherapy

Personalized Brachytherapy: Applications and Future Directions

Brachytherapy offers a highly conformal and adaptive approach to radiation therapy for various oncologic conditions. This review explores the rationale, applications, technological advances, and future directions of personalized brachytherapy. Integration of advanced imaging techniques, 3D-printed applicators, and artificial intelligence are rapidly enhancing brachytherapy delivery and efficiency, while genomic tests and molecular biomarkers are refining patient and dose selection. Emerging research on combining brachytherapy with immunotherapy offers unique synergistic potential, and technologies such as intensity-modulated and shielded brachytherapy applicators present novel opportunities to further optimize dose distributions. Despite these promising advances, the field faces challenges including a need to train more practitioners and develop new approaches to treating a broader range of malignancies. As personalized medicine evolves, brachytherapy's ability to deliver highly targeted, individualized treatments positions it as a critical component in future cancer care.

Complications and side effects of high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To describe technical challenges and complications encountered during and after high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) and review management of these complications.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The authors performed a systematic review of the literature on toxicities encountered after prostate HDR-BT +/- external beam radiotherapy. A total of 397 studies were identified, of which 64 were included. A focused review of literature regarding the management of acute and late toxicities also performed.

RESULTS

Most acute toxicities include grade 0-2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Overall, Grade 3+ Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity after HDR-BT was low [genitourinary: 0-1%; gastrointestinal 0-3%]. Rates of fistula formation were <1%, and radiation cystitis/proctitis were <14% and more commonly reported in cohorts treated with HDR-BT boost and external beam radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR-BT both as monotherapy or combined with external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer is well tolerated. Serious complications are rare.

Low-dose rate brachytherapy for men with localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Localized prostate cancer is a slow growing tumor for many years for the majority of affected men. Low-dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) is short-distance radiotherapy using low-energy radioactive sources. LDR-BT has been recommended for men with low risk localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefit and harm of LDR-BT compared to radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and no primary therapy (NPT) in men with localized prostatic cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1950), and EMBASE (from 1980) were searched in June 2010 as well as online trials registers and reference lists of reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, controlled trials comparing LDR-BT versus RP, EBRT, and NPT in men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data on study methods, participants, treatment regimens, observation period and outcomes were recorded by two reviewers independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified only one RCT (N = 200; mean follow up 68 months). This trial compared LDR-BT and RP. The risk of bias was deemed high. Primary outcomes (overall survival, cause-specific mortality, or metastatic-free survival) were not reported. Biochemical recurrence-free survival at 5 years follow up was not significantly different between LDR-BT (78/85 (91.8%)) and RP (81/89 (91.0%)); P = 0.875; relative risk 0.92 (95% CI: 0.35 to 2.42).For severe adverse events reported at 6 months follow up, results favored LDR-BT for urinary incontinence (LDR-BT 0/85 (0.0%) versus RP 16/89 (18.0%); P < 0.001; relative risk 0) and favored RP for urinary irritation (LDR-BT 68/85 (80.0%) versus RP 4/89 (4.5%); P < 0.001; relative risk 17.80, 95% CI 6.79 to 46.66). The occurrence of urinary stricture did not significantly differ between the treatment groups (LDR-BT 2/85 (2.4%) versus RP 6/89 (6.7%); P = 0.221; relative risk 0.35, 95% CI: 0.07 to 1.68). Long-term information was not available.We did not identify significant differences of mean scores between treatment groups for patient-reported outcomes function and bother as well as generic health-related quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose rate brachytherapy did not reduce biochemical recurrence-free survival versus radical prostatectomy at 5 years. For short-term severe adverse events, low-dose rate brachytherapy was significantly more favorable for urinary incontinence, but radical prostatectomy was significantly more favorable for urinary irritation. Evidence is based on one RCT with high risk of bias.

Rectal morbidity after permanent interstitial brachytherapy for prostate cancer--impact of day 1 vs. day 30 computed tomography-based postimplant dosimetry

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate bowel quality-of-life changes after prostate brachytherapy and the impact of Day 1 vs. Day 30 postimplant dosimetry.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In 61 patients, computed tomography (CT) scans were performed at Days 1 and 30 after (125)I brachytherapy. The patients have been surveyed prospectively before (time A), 1 month (time B), and >1 year after treatment (time C) using a validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite). Different parameters were tested for their predictive value on bowel quality-of-life changes (bowel bother score decrease >20 points at time B=BB20; bowel bother score decrease >10 points at time C=BC10), including seed displacements.

RESULTS

Mean bowel function/bother score decreased 13/13 points at time B (p<0.01) and 1/4 points at time C (change not significant). BB20 and BC10 were found in 25% and 20% of patients, respectively. Bowel bother score declines at time B correlated well with declines at time C (r=0.53; p<0.01). Prostate volume before implantation and the number of seeds per cubic centimeters were found to be predictive for BB20 and BC10. Smaller rectal wall volumes covered by the 60-100% isodoses at Day 1 were (paradoxically) found to be significantly predictive for BC10. Larger posterior seed displacements between Days 1 and 30 were significantly associated with BB20.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality-of-life scores have not been found to change significantly >1 year after brachytherapy. Larger rectal wall volumes within higher isodoses at Day 1 or 30 were not found to be predisposing for adverse quality-of-life changes.

Epididymitis after transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of prostate gland

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the incidence, predisposing factors, and time-course of epididymitis after transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) needle biopsy of the prostate gland.

METHODS

A total of 739 consecutive patients underwent TRUS-guided biopsy of the prostate gland from January 2000 through December 2002 using a systematic approach, 18-gauge needles, and antibiotic prophylaxis. A median of 9 biopsies was obtained per patient (range 4 to 16). All cases of epididymitis occurring within 6 months of biopsy were attributed to the TRUS procedure. The parameters evaluated for epididymitis included patient age, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, prostate-specific antigen density, number of biopsies obtained, and number of biopsies positive for malignancy.

RESULTS

Five patients (0.7%) developed biopsy-related epididymitis with a median onset of 85 days (range 13 to 143) after biopsy. Patients developing epididymitis were statistically older, with a trend for a greater number of prostate biopsies (P = 0.071 on linear regression analysis). Only 1 patient developed epididymitis within 3 weeks of biopsy. All cases of epididymitis responded to therapeutic antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

Epididymitis after TRUS-guided biopsy is a relatively uncommon event, with an incidence of approximately 1% and an onset of weeks to months after the procedure. Patients who developed epididymitis were statistically older, with a trend for a greater number of prostate biopsies taken.