Gastrointestinal toxicity of transperineal interstitial prostate brachytherapy

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.

Effect of Race and Ethnicity on Risk of Radiotherapy Toxicity and Implications for Radiogenomics

AIMS

Patient factors affect the risk of radiotherapy toxicity, but many are poorly defined. Studies have shown that race affects cancer incidence, survival, drug response, molecular pathways and epigenetics. Effects on radiosensitivity and radiotherapy toxicity are not well studied. The aim of the present study was to identify the effects of race and ethnicity on the risk of radiotherapy toxicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was carried out of PubMed, Ovid Medline and Ovid Embase with no year limit. PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed. Two independent assessors reviewed papers.

RESULTS

Of 607 papers screened, 46 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Papers were published between 1996 and 2021 and involved 30-28,354 individuals (median 433). Most involved patients with prostate (33%), breast (26%) and lung (9%) cancer. Both early and late toxicities were studied. Some studies reported a higher risk of toxicity in White men with prostate cancer compared with other races and ethnicities. For breast cancer patients, some reported an increased risk of toxicity in White women compared with other race and ethnic groups. In general, it was difficult to draw conclusions due to insufficient reporting and analysis of race and ethnicity in published literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of race and ethnicity in radiotherapy studies must be harmonised and improved and frameworks are needed to improve the quality of reporting. Further research is needed to understand how ancestral heritage might affect radiosensitivity and risk of radiotherapy toxicity.

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

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

Rectal ulcer and pseudomalignant epithelial changes after prostate seed brachytherapy: A rare complication with a diagnostic pitfall

BACKGROUND

Implant brachytherapy (IBT) is a well-recognized treatment modality for early stage prostate cancer. Rectal ulcer and rectourethral fistula complicating IBT may cause an alteration of the normal anatomic landmarks. In this context, pseudomalignant radiation-induced changes within prostatic epithelium may be misinterpreted as a primary rectal malignancy. Such challenging and misleading findings have not been described, and may not be recognized as such.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We present the clinical and pathologic aspects of two patients who underwent IBT for low stage prostate cancer that was complicated by deep rectal ulcer. Both patients underwent extensive palliative surgical resection for disease control.

RESULTS

The histologic changes in both cases were noteworthy for extensive necrosis and inflammation of the prostate, associated with loss of recto-prostatic anatomical landmarks. Prostatic glands showed striking radiation-induced atypia and pseudomalignant epithelial changes extending to the rectal ulcer bed, with no residual viable tumor. The first patient had undergone a biopsy of the rectal ulcer bed that was misinterpreted as a rectal adenocarcinoma prior to surgery. The similarity between atypical glands of the biopsy and the benign prostatic tissue with radiation-induced atypia in resection specimen confirmed their benign nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep rectal ulcer complicating IBT may lead to distortion of the normal recto-prostatic anatomical landmarks, resulting in detection of pseudo-malignant prostatic glands at the ulcer base. Such findings may be mistaken for a primary rectal malignancy in limited biopsy material if not familiar to the pathologist.

Three-Dimensional Conformal External Beam Radiotherapy versus the Combination of External Radiotherapy with High-Dose Rate Brachytherapy in Localized Carcinoma of the Prostate: Comparison of Acute Toxicity

Aims and background

Radiotherapy represents one of the basic therapeutic methods in treatment of localized carcinoma of the prostate. Optimal irradiation dose is the cornerstone of a successful treatment. Along with local control of the disease and overall survival of the patient, possible acute and long-term side effects need to be monitored very closely.

Methods

A non-randomized prospective study comparing the acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity in patients irradiated for localized carcinoma of the prostate. Fifty-seven patients were treated with three-dimensional conformal external beam radiotherapy alone, and in the second treatment arm a combination of external beam radiotherapy and high-dose rate brachytherapy was employed in 40 patients.

Results

Three-dimensional conformai external beam radiotherapy. Acute G1 genitourinary toxicity was recorded in 35.1% of patients, G2 in 22.8%, and G2-3 in one patient (1.7%). Acute gastrointestinal toxicity was experienced by 54.4% of patients, G1 in 28.1%, G2 in 17.5%, and G3 in 8.8%. Three-dimensional conformal external beam radiotherapy + brachytherapy. Acute G1 genitourinary toxicity was recorded in 37.5% and grade 2 in 15% of the patients. Only G1 acute gastrointestinal toxicity was recorded in 40% of the patients.

Conclusions

Acute G1 genitourinary toxicity was experienced by a similar percentage of patients in both treatment arms. Acute G2 genitourinary toxicity was more frequent in the three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy arm. Higher acute genitourinary toxicity, G3 or G4, was recorded only in one patient per treatment arm. Acute gastrointestinal toxicity was more frequent in the three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy arm. Higher acute gastrointestinal toxicity, G2 and G3, was only observed in the three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy arm. The acute toxicity observed was of a low grade. The combination of external beam radiotherapy with brachytherapy resulted in a lower incidence of gastrointestinal toxicity than external beam radiotherapy alone.

Placement of an absorbable rectal hydrogel spacer in patients undergoing low-dose-rate brachytherapy with palladium-103

PURPOSE

Rates of rectal toxicity after low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy for prostate cancer are dependent on rectal dose, which is associated with rectal distance from prostate and implanted seeds. Placement of a hydrogel spacer between the prostate and rectum has proven to reduce the volume of the rectum exposed to higher radiation dose levels in the setting of external beam radiotherapy. We present our findings with placing a rectal hydrogel spacer in patients following LDR brachytherapy, and we further assess the impact of this placement on dosimetry and acute rectal toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between January 2016 and April 2017, 74 patients had placement of a hydrogel spacer, immediately following a Pd-103 seed-implant procedure. Brachytherapy was delivered as follows: as a monotherapy to 26 (35%) patients; as part of planned combination therapy with external beam radiotherapy to 40 (54%) patients; or as a salvage monotherapy to eight (11%) patients. Postoperative MRI was used to assess separation achieved with rectal spacer. Acute toxicity was assessed retrospectively using Radiation Oncology Therapy Group radiation toxicity grading system. Rectal dosimetry was compared with a consecutive cohort of 136 patients treated with seed implantation at our institution without a spacer, using a 2-tailed paired Student's t test (p < 0.05 for statistical significance).

RESULTS

On average, 11.2-mm (SD 3.3) separation was achieved between the prostate and the rectum. The resultant mean rectal volume receiving 100% of prescribed dose (V_100%), dose to 1 cc of rectum (D_1cc), and dose to 2 cc of rectum (D_2cc) were 0 (SD 0.05 cc), 25.3% (SD 12.7), and 20.5% (SD 9.9), respectively. All rectal dosimetric parameters improved significantly for the cohort with spacer placement as compared with the nonspacer cohort. Mean prostate volume, prostate V₁₀₀ and dose to 90% of gland (D₉₀) were 29.3 cc (SD 12.4), 94.0% (SD 3.81), and 112.4% (SD 12.0), respectively. Urethral D₂₀, D_5cc, and D_1cc were 122.0% (SD 17.27), 133.8% (SD 22.8), and 144.0% (SD 25.4), respectively. After completing all treatments, at the time of first the followup, 7 patients reported acute rectal toxicity-6 experiencing Grade 1 rectal discomfort and 1 (with preexisting hemorrhoids) experiencing Grade 1 bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Injection of rectal spacer is feasible in the post-LDR brachytherapy setting and reduces dose to the rectum with minimal toxicity. Prostate and urethral dosimetries do not appear to be affected by the placement of a spacer. Further studies with long-term followup are warranted to assess the impact on reduction of late rectal toxicity.

Predictive factors of rectal toxicity after permanent iodine-125 seed implantation: Prospective cohort study in 2339 patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the incidence and the associated factors of rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer undergoing permanent seed implantation (PI) with or without external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in a nationwide prospective cohort study in Japan (J-POPS) during the first 2 years.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 2,339 subjects were available for the analyses. Rectal toxicity was evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0.

RESULTS

The 3-year cumulative incidence for grade ≥2 rectal toxicity was 2.88%, 1.76%, and 6.53% in all subjects, PI group and EBRT combination therapy group, respectively. On multivariate analysis, among all subjects, grade ≥2 rectal toxicity was associated with rectal volumes receiving 100% of the prescribed dose (R₁₀₀; p < 0.0001) and EBRT combination therapy (p = 0.0066). R₁₀₀ in the PI group (p = 0.0254), and R₁₀₀ (p = 0.0011) and interactive planning (p = 0.0267) in the EBRT combination therapy group were also associated with grade ≥2 toxicity. The 3-year cumulative incidence of grade ≥2 rectal toxicity was 3.80% and 1.37% for R₁₀₀ ≥ 1 mL and R₁₀₀ < 1 mL, respectively, in the PI group (p = 0.0068), and 14.09% and 5.52% for R₁₀₀ ≥ 1 mL and R₁₀₀ < 1 mL, respectively, in the EBRT combination therapy group (p = 0.0070).

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal toxicity was relatively rare in this study compared with previous reports. For Japanese prostate cancer patients, R₁₀₀ < 1 mL in both PI and EBRT combination therapy groups and interactive planning in EBRT combination therapy group may be effective in decreasing the incidence of rectal toxicity.

Hypofractionated image guided radiation therapy followed by prostate seed implant boost for men with newly diagnosed intermediate and high risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate: Preliminary results of a phase 2 prospective study

PURPOSE

A phase 2 protocol was designed and implemented to assess the toxicity and efficacy of hypofractionated image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IG-IMRT) combined with low-dose rate 103Pd prostate seed implant for treatment of localized intermediate- and high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a report of an interim analysis on 24 patients enrolled on an institutional review board-approved phase 2 single-institution study of patients with intermediate- and high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate. The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level was 8.15 ng/mL. The median Gleason score was 4 + 3 = 7 (range, 3 + 4 = 7 - 4 + 4 = 8), and the median T stage was T2a. Of the 24 patients, 4 (17%) were high-risk patients as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria, version 2016. The treatment consisted of 2465 cGy in 493 cGy/fraction of IG-IMRT to the prostate and seminal vesicles. This was followed by a 103Pd transperineal prostate implant boost (prescribed dose to 90% of the prostate volume of 100 Gy) using intraoperative planning. Five patients received neoadjuvant, concurrent, and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 18 months (range, 1-42 months). The median nadir prostate-specific antigen was 0.5 ng/mL and time to nadir was 16 months. There was 1 biochemical failure associated with distant metastatic disease without local failure. Toxicity (acute or late) higher than grade 3 was not observed. There was a single instance of late grade 3 genitourinary toxicity secondary to hematuria 2 years and 7 months after radiation treatment. There were no other grade 3 gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Early results on the toxicity and efficacy of the combination of hypofractionated IG-IMRT and low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost are favorable. Longer follow-up is needed to confirm safety and effectiveness.

Long-Term Endoscopic Follow-Up of Patients with Chronic Radiation Proctopathy after Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer

Background. Chronic radiation proctopathy (CRP) is late toxicity and associated with morbidity. Aim. To investigate the predictors of prognosis in patients with CRP after brachytherapy (BT). Methods. One hundred four patients with prostate cancer were treated with BT or BT followed by external-beam radiotherapy (BT + EBRT). We retrospectively investigated the 5-year incidence of rectal bleeding and endoscopic findings of CRP using the Vienna Rectoscopy Score (VRS). Twenty patients with VRS ≥ 1 were divided into the improved VRS group without treatment, unchanged VRS group, and treated group. The parameters associated with alteration of VRS were analyzed. Results. The incidence of rectal bleeding was 24%. The risk of rectal bleeding was higher in patients treated with BT + EBRT compared to those treated with BT (p < 0.0001). The incidence of superficial microulceration was higher in the improved VRS group than in the unchanged VRS group (p < 0.05). The incidence of multiple confluent telangiectasia or superficial ulcers > 1 cm² was higher in the treated group than in both the improved and unchanged VRS groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions. Patients treated with BT + EBRT have a high risk of CRP. Endoscopic findings were useful for prognostic prediction of CRP.

Comparison of genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity among four radiotherapy modalities for prostate cancer: Conventional radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and permanent iodine-125 implantation with or without external beam radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To compare late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity following different prostate cancer treatment modalities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 1084 consecutive prostate cancer patients treated with conventional radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), permanent iodine-125 implantation (PI) alone, and PI combined with external beam radiotherapy (PI+EBRT). The effects of treatment- and patient-related factors on late grade ⩾ 2 (G2+) GU/GI toxicity risk were assessed.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 43 months (range, 12-97 months). Compared to the PI+EBRT, there was significantly less G2+ GU toxicity in the conventional radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.20-0.77) and the IMRT (HR=0.45, 95% CI, 0.27-0.73). Compared to the PI+EBRT, there was significantly more G2+ GI toxicity in the IMRT (HR = 2.38; 95% CI, 1.16-4.87). In PI-related groups, prostate equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions was a significant predictor of G2+ GU toxicity (p = 0.001), and the rectal volume receiving more than 100% of the prescribed dose was a significant predictor of G2+ GI toxicity (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The differences in the late G2+ GU/GI risk cannot be explained by the differences in treatment modalities themselves, but by the total radiation dose to the GU/GI tract, which had a causal role in the development of late G2+ GU/GI toxicity across all treatment modality groups.

Phase I/II prospective trial of cancer-specific imaging using ultrasound spectrum analysis tissue-type imaging to guide dose-painting prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To assess the technical feasibility, toxicity, dosimetry, and preliminary efficacy of dose-painting brachytherapy guided by ultrasound spectrum analysis tissue-type imaging (TTI) in low-risk, localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fourteen men with prostate cancer who were candidates for brachytherapy as sole treatment were prospectively enrolled. Treatment planning goal was to escalate the tumor dose to 200% with a modest de-escalation of dose to remaining prostate compared with our standard. Primary end points included technical feasibility of TTI-guided brachytherapy and equivalent or better toxicity compared with standard brachytherapy. Secondary end points included dose escalation to tumor regions and de-escalated dose to nontumor regions on the preimplant plan, negative prostate biopsy at 2 years, and freedom from biochemical failure.

RESULTS

Thirteen of fourteen men successfully completed the TTI-guided brachytherapy procedure for a feasibility rate of 93%. A software malfunction resulted in switching one patient from TTI-guided to standard brachytherapy. An average of 2.7 foci per patient was demonstrated and treated with an escalated dose. Dosimetric goals on preplan were achieved. One patient expired from unrelated causes 65 days after brachytherapy. Toxicity was at least as low as standard brachytherapy. Two-year prostate biopsies were obtained from six men; five (83%) were definitively negative, one showed evidence of disease with treatment effect, and none were positive. No patients experienced biochemical recurrence after a median followup of 31.5 (24-52) months.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated that TTI-guided dose-painting prostate brachytherapy is technically feasible and results in clinical outcomes that are encouraging in terms of low toxicity and successful biochemical disease control.

Urinary and Rectal Toxicity Profiles After Permanent Iodine-125 Implant Brachytherapy in Japanese Men: Nationwide J-POPS Multi-institutional Prospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To assess, in a nationwide multi-institutional cohort study begun in 2005 and in which 6927 subjects were enrolled by 2010, the urinary and rectal toxicity profiles of subjects who enrolled during the first 2 years, and evaluate the toxicity profiles for permanent seed implantation (PI) and a combination therapy with PI and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Baseline data for 2339 subjects out of 2354 patients were available for the analyses. Toxicities were evaluated using the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and the International Prostate Symptom Scores were recorded prospectively until 36 months after radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Grade 2+ acute urinary toxicities developed in 7.36% (172 of 2337) and grade 2+ acute rectal toxicities developed in 1.03% (24 of 2336) of the patients. Grade 2+ late urinary and rectal toxicities developed in 5.75% (133 of 2312) and 1.86% (43 of 2312) of the patients, respectively. A higher incidence of grade 2+ acute urinary toxicity occurred in the PI group than in the EBRT group (8.49% vs 3.66%; P<.01). Acute rectal toxicity outcomes were similar between the treatment groups. The 3-year cumulative incidence rates for grade 2+ late urinary toxicities were 6.04% versus 4.82% for the PI and the EBRT groups, respectively, with no significant differences between the treatment groups. The 3-year cumulative incidence rates for grade 2+ late rectal toxicities were 0.90% versus 5.01% (P<.01) for the PI and the EBRT groups, respectively. The mean of the postimplant International Prostate Symptom Score peaked at 3 months, but it decreased to a range that was within 2 points of the baseline score, which was observed in 1625 subjects (69.47%) at the 1-year follow-up assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

The acute urinary toxicities observed were acceptable given the frequency and retention, and the late rectal toxicities were more favorable than those of other studies.

Late rectal toxicity after low-dose-rate brachytherapy: incidence, predictors, and management of side effects

As clinical outcomes for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer continue to improve, patients and physicians are increasing making treatment decisions based on concerns regarding long-term morbidity. A primary concern is late radiation proctitis, a clinical entity embodied by various signs and symptoms, ranging from diarrhea to rectal fistulas. Here, we present a comprehensive literature review examining the clinical manifestations and pathophysiology of late radiation proctitis after low-dose-rate brachytherapy (BT), as well as its incidence and predictors. The long-term risks of rectal bleeding after BT are on the order of 5-7%, whereas the risks of severe ulceration or fistula are on the order of 0.6%. The most robust predictor appears to be the volume of rectum receiving the prescription dose. In certain situations (e.g., salvage setting, for patients with increased radiosensitivity, and following aggressive biopsy after BT), the risk of these severe toxicities may be increased by up to 10-fold. A variety of excellent management options exist for rectal bleeding, with endoscopic methods being the most commonly used.

A comparison of the impact of isotope ((125)I vs. (103)Pd) on toxicity and biochemical outcome after interstitial brachytherapy and external beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To compare biochemical outcomes and morbidity associated with iodine-125 ((125)I) and palladium-103 ((103)Pd) brachytherapy as part of combined modality therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between October 2002 and December 2008, 259 patients underwent prostate brachytherapy ((125)I prescription dose, 110Gy: n=199; (103)Pd prescription dose, 100Gy: n=60) followed by external beam radiotherapy (median dose, 50.4Gy). Eighty-seven patients also received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Toxicities were recorded with CTCAE v 3.0, International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS), and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires.

RESULTS

Overall, acute Grade ≥2 genitourinary toxicity occurred in 21% and 30% of patients treated with (125)I and (103)Pd, respectively (p=0.16). There were no significant differences in IPSS change or urinary quality-of-life scores between the isotopes at 4, 6, or 12 months (p=0.20, 0.21, and 1.0, respectively). IPSS resolution occurred at a median of 11 and 6 months for (125)I and (103)Pd patients, respectively (p=0.03). On multivariate analysis, only the use of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy was predictive of time to IPSS resolution (p=0.046). Late Grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity occurred in 7% of (125)I patients and 6% of patients treated with (103)Pd. Of 129 potent patients at baseline, there was better erectile function in patients who received (103)Pd (p=0.02); however, the followup was shorter for these patients. The 5-year prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival for (125)I and (103)Pd patients was 95.2% and 98.2% (p=0.73), respectively.

CONCLUSION

There were no differences in acute or long-term genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity between (125)I and (103)Pd in combined modality therapy for prostate cancer. There may be less erectile toxicity with the use of (103)Pd; however, additional followup of these patients is needed. There was no significant difference in 5-year prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival between (103)Pd and (125)I.

Rectal toxicity and rectal dosimetry in low-dose-rate (125)I permanent prostate implants: a long-term study in 1006 patients

OBJECTIVE

To describe the acute and late rectal toxicity in 1006 prostate brachytherapy patients implanted 1998-2003. To determine whether rectal dose-volume histogram as well as patient and treatment factors were associated with rectal toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Median followup was 60.7 months. Rectal dosimetry was calculated as dose-volume histogram of the rectum using Day 28 CT-based dosimetry and expressed as volume of the rectum in cc receiving 50%, 100%, and 150% of the prescription dose (VR(50cc), VR(100cc), and VR(150cc), respectively). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to examine the influence of patient, implant, dosimetry, and learning curve factors on the development of acute and late toxicities using a modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale. Acute toxicity was analyzed using logistic regression and late toxicity using Cox proportional hazards regression. Analysis of variance was used to examine the association between rectal toxicity and rectal dose.

RESULTS

Rectal dosimetry in 93.5% and rectal toxicity in 96.2% have been recorded. Median VR(100)=1.05cc. Late RTOG Grades 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 were recorded in 68%, 23%, 7.3%, 0.9%, and 0.2% patients, respectively. On multivariate analysis, acute RTOG ≥2 rectal toxicity was associated with urinary retention (p=0.036) and learning curve (p=0.015); late RTOG ≥2 was associated with the presence of acute toxicity (p=0.0074), higher VR(100) (p=0.030) and learning curve (p=0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Late rectal RTOG ≥2 rectal toxicity in this cohort was 8%. Increased VR(100), presence of acute rectal toxicity, and learning curve were associated with higher rate of late RTOG ≥2 toxicity. Severe late rectal toxicity after prostate brachytherapy was 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.

Comparison of acute and late toxicities for three modern high-dose radiation treatment techniques for localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We compared acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities in prostate cancer patients treated with three different high-dose radiation techniques.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 1,903 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with definitive RT at William Beaumont Hospital from 1992 to 2006: 22% with brachytherapy alone (BT), 55% with image-guided external beam (EB-IGRT), and 23% external beam with high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (EBRT+HDR). Median dose with BT was 120 Gy for LDR and 38 Gy for HDR (9.5 Gy × 4). Median dose with EB-IGRT was 75.6 Gy (PTV) to prostate with or without seminal vesicles. For EBRT+HDR, the pelvis was treated to 46 Gy with an additional 19 Gy (9.5 Gy × 2) delivered via HDR. GI and GU toxicity was evaluated utilizing the NCI-CTC criteria (v.3.0). Median follow-up was 4.8 years.

RESULTS

The incidences of any acute ≥ Grade 2 GI or GU toxicities were 35%, 49%, and 55% for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR (p < 0.001). Any late GU toxicities ≥ Grade 2 were present in 22%, 21%, and 28% for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR (p = 0.01), respectively. Patients receiving EBRT+HDR had a higher incidence of urethral stricture and retention, whereas dysuria was most common in patients receiving BT. Any Grade ≥ 2 late GI toxicities were 2%, 20%, and 9% for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR (p < 0.001). Differences were most pronounced for rectal bleeding, with 3-year rates of 0.9%, 20%, and 6% (p < 0.001) for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Each of the three modern high-dose radiation techniques for localized prostate cancer offers a different toxicity profile. These data can help patients and physicians to make informed decisions regarding radiotherapy for prostate andenocarcinoma.

Combination of IG-IMRT and permanent source prostate brachytherapy in patients with organ-confined prostate cancer: GU and GI toxicity and effect on erectile function

PURPOSE

To assess toxicity outcomes of image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IG-IMRT) combined with permanent prostate seed implant in a cohort of patients with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 67 patients with the median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level of 5.4. The Gleason score was less than 7 in 7 patients, 7 in 52 patients, and greater than 7 in 8 patients. The median followup was 28.2 months (range, 12-89.5 months). Treatment consisted of 45 (n=65) or 50.4 Gy (n=2) at 1.8 Gy/fraction of IG-IMRT to the prostate and seminal vesicles. Eight patients had simultaneous irradiation of pelvic lymph nodes to 45 (n=65) or 50.4 Gy (n=2). After IG-IMRT, patients received transperineal prostate implant boost with either (103)Pd (n=65, the prescribed D(90) of 100 Gy) or (125)I (n=2, D(90) of 110 Gy). Eleven patients received androgen deprivation therapy with radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Toxicity higher than Grade 3 was not observed. The combined incidence of acute and late Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity was 6%. The combined incidence of acute and late Grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was 3%. At least one episode of gastrointestinal bleeding on followup, which could be attributed to radiation, was recorded in 14.9% of patients. For patients achieving erections before radiation, the 3-year Kaplan-Meier potency preservation rate was 66.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The early toxicity of the combination of IG-IMRT and low-dose rate brachytherapy boost in this study was favorable.

Is endorectal coil necessary for the staging of clinically localized prostate cancer? Comparison of non-endorectal versus endorectal MR imaging

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to compare the diagnostic use and safety of endorectal coil (ERC) MRI with those of phased-array coil MRI.

METHODS

We retrospectively included 91 consecutive patients who had undergone 1.5-T MRI with ERC or with phased-array coil MRI before radical prostatectomy at our institution. We compared 47 patients' phased-array coil MRI and 44 patients' ERC-MRI with histologic findings. We also evaluated adverse events following the MRI procedure.

RESULTS

The serum PSA levels ranged from 2.85 to 33.51 ng/mL (10.72 ± 1.9), and the median Gleason score was 7 (range 4-9). The mean interval between diagnostic prostate biopsy and staging MRI was 18.4 days (range 2-37). In assessing organ-confined disease, extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion by MRI, there were no significant differences between ERC-MR group and phased-array coil MR group. The AUC values were 0.671 (95% CI 0.530-0.813) for ERC-MR and 0.657 (95% CI 0.503-0.811) for phased-array coil MR. No significant differences were found between the two groups (p = 0.24). Five patients (11.4%) developed rectal complications after ERC-MRI. However, no complications were found in phased-array coil MRI group.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of diagnostic accuracy and comfort of patients, the use of ERC-MRI did not significantly improve the staging of prostate cancer and presented several complications. Therefore, phased-array coil MRI is a better alternative considering comorbidity.

Late rectal toxicity after prostate brachytherapy: influence of supplemental external beam radiation on dose-volume histogram analysis

PURPOSE

To describe the rate of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity after prostate brachytherapy and describe how external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) may influence the association of rectal dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters with rectal toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred ten patients with prostate cancer were treated with I-125 brachytherapy alone (n=62, 144 Gy) or as a boost (n=48, 108 Gy) after 45-Gy EBRT. CT-based dosimetry was performed a median of 29 days after implantation. GI toxicity was evaluated by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. Median followup was 41 months.

RESULTS

Eleven patients developed Grade 2+GI toxicity. Men treated with EBRT had an increased risk of GI toxicity, with freedom from Grade 2+ toxicity of 82% vs. 91% for implant alone, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.3044). Of the DVH parameters analyzed, only the rectal volume receiving the prescription dose (rV(100)(%)) was associated with late Grade 2+GI toxicity. Men with rV(100%) >or= 0.05 cc had a 4-year freedom from Grade 2+ toxicity of 77% vs. 100% for those with an rV(100%) <0.05 cc (p=0.0248). However, this relationship was only significant for the subset of patients treated with EBRT, where men with rV(100%) >or= 0.05 cc had a 26% risk of Grade 2+ toxicity compared with 0% for rV(100%) <0.05 cc. Additional DVH parameters, including dose to the hottest 0.1 cc (p=0.0199), 1% (p=0.0086), and 3% (p=0.0043), were also associated with GI toxicity but only in men treated with EBRT.

CONCLUSIONS

Supplemental EBRT may lower the threshold for rectal toxicity after prostate brachytherapy. Morbidity can be minimized by observing rectal constraints.

Late rectal complications after prostate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: incidence and management

This review of the literature on late rectal complications after prostate brachytherapy indicated that it is a highly effective treatment modality for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer but can cause chronic radiation proctitis. The most common manifestation of chronic radiation proctitis was anterior rectal wall bleeding, which often occurred within the first 2 years after brachytherapy. It is interesting to note that the rates of late rectal morbidity appear to have declined over time, which may reflect improvements in implantation techniques and imaging. Rectal biopsy as part of the workup to evaluate rectal bleeding can lead to rectal fistula and the need for colostomy, a rare but major complication. The authors recommend 1) screening colonoscopy before brachytherapy for patients who have not had a screening colonoscopy within the preceding 3 years to rule out colorectal malignancies and, thus, facilitate conservative management should rectal bleeding occur; 2) lifestyle modifications during treatment to limit exposure of the rectum to radiation; and 3) conservative management for rectal bleeding that occurs within 2 years after brachytherapy. Cancer 2009. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.

Technology Insight: Combined external-beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy in the management of prostate cancer

External-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) combined with brachytherapy is an attractive treatment option for selected patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. This therapeutic strategy offers dosimetric coverage if local-regional microscopic disease is present and provides a highly conformal boost of radiation to the prostate and immediate surrounding tissues. Either low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent brachytherapy or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary brachytherapy can be combined with EBRT; such combined-modality therapy (CMT) is typically used to treat patients with intermediate-risk to high-risk, clinically localized disease. Controversy persists with regard to indications for CMT, choice of LDR or HDR boost, isotope selection for LDR, and integration of EBRT and brachytherapy. Initial findings from prospective, multicenter trials of CMT support the feasibility of this strategy. Updated results from these trials as well as those of ongoing and new phase III trials should help to define the role of CMT in the management of prostate cancer. In the meantime, long-term expectations for outcomes of CMT are based largely on the experience of single institutions, which demonstrate that CMT with EBRT and either LDR or HDR brachytherapy can provide freedom from disease recurrence with acceptable toxicity.

Secondary effects and biochemical control in patients with early prostate cancer treated with (125)-I seeds

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively evaluate the toxicity of low-dose-rate brachytherapy and to relate it to the dose-volume to organs at risk.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We study 160 patients with early prostate cancer, treated with (125)-I implants. Most of them were T1c (63.1%), T2a (35.6%) and Gleason < or =6 (96.2%). Median PSA was 7.2 ng/ml (2.3-13.5); 85.6% were lowrisk cases and 14.4% high-risk cases. Mean follow-up was 24 months (7-48).

RESULTS

Acute urinary toxicity related to urological quality of life (UQL=CVU) was tolerable in 75% and unsatisfactory in 25%. Urinary retention was present in 6.9%. IPSS, V100 and D90 were related to the urinary toxicity grade. Rectal toxicity (RTOG) G2 was 0.6%. Sexual potency showed no changes with regard to the basal in 69%. Actuarial biochemical control was 89.8% at four years.

CONCLUSIONS

Brachytherapy with (125)-I seeds yields acceptable toxicity and excellent biochemical control.

Combined brachytherapy with external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: reduced morbidity with an intraoperative brachytherapy planning technique and supplemental intensity-modulated radiation therapy

PURPOSE

To report the acute and late treatment-related toxicities of combined permanent interstitial (125)I implantation delivered via real-time intraoperative planning and supplemental intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred twenty-seven patients were treated with a combined modality (CM) regimen consisting of (125)I implantation (110Gy) using a transrectal ultrasound-guided approach followed 2 months later by 50.4Gy of IMRT directed to the prostate and seminal vesicles. Late toxicity was scored according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity scale. The acute and late toxicities were compared to a contemporaneously treated cohort of 216 patients treated with (125)I alone to a prescribed dose of 144Gy.

RESULTS

The incidence of Grade 2 acute rectal and urinary side effects was 1% and 10%, respectively, and 2 patients developed Grade 3 acute urinary toxicities. The 4-year incidence of late Grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was 9%, and no Grade 3 or 4 complications have been observed. The 4-year incidence of late Grade 2 gastrourinary toxicities was 15% and 1 patient developed a Grade 3 urethral stricture, which was corrected with urethral dilatation. The percentage of patients who experienced resolution of late rectal and urinary symptoms was 92% and 65%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that in addition to higher baseline International Prostate Symptom Score, those patients treated with implant alone compared to CM were more likely to experience Grade 2 acute urinary symptoms. Increased Grade 2 late rectal toxicities were noted for CM patients (9% vs. 1%; p=0.001) as well as a significant increase for late Grade 2 urinary toxicities (15% vs. 9%; p=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to dose constraints with combination real-time brachytherapy using real-time intraoperative planning and IMRT is associated with a low incidence of acute and late toxicities. Acute urinary side effects were significantly less common for CM patients compared to those treated with implantation alone. Late Grade 2 rectal and urinary toxicities were more common for patients treated with CM compared to implant alone.

Prostate Postbrachytherapy Seed Distribution: Comparison of High-Resolution, Contrast-Enhanced, T1- and T2-Weighted Endorectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Computed Tomography: Initial Experience

PURPOSE

To compare contrast-enhanced, T1-weighted, three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (CEMR) and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (T2MR) with computed tomography (CT) for prostate brachytherapy seed location for dosimetric calculations.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Postbrachytherapy prostate MRI was performed on a 1.5 Tesla unit with combined surface and endorectal coils in 13 patients. Both CEMR and T2MR used a section thickness of 3 mm. Spiral CT used a section thickness of 5 mm with a pitch factor of 1.5. All images were obtained in the transverse plane. Two readers using CT and MR imaging assessed brachytherapy seed distribution independently. The dependency of data read by both readers for a specific subject was assessed with a linear mixed effects model.

RESULTS

The mean percentage (+/- standard deviation) values of the readers for seed detection and location are presented. Of 1205 implanted seeds, CEMR, T2MR, and CT detected 91.5% +/- 4.8%, 78.5% +/- 8.5%, and 96.1% +/- 2.3%, respectively, with 11.8% +/- 4.5%, 8.5% +/- 3.5%, 1.9% +/- 1.0% extracapsular, respectively. Assignment to periprostatic structures was not possible with CT. Periprostatic seed assignments for CEMR and T2MR, respectively, were as follows: neurovascular bundle, 3.5% +/- 1.6% and 2.1% +/- 0.9%; seminal vesicles, 0.9% +/- 1.8% and 0.3% +/- 0.7%; periurethral, 7.1% +/- 3.3% and 5.8% +/- 2.9%; penile bulb, 0.6% +/- 0.8% and 0.3% +/- 0.6%; Denonvillier's Fascia/rectal wall, 0.5% +/- 0.6% and 0%; and urinary bladder, 0.1% +/- 0.3% and 0%. Data dependency analysis showed statistical significance for the type of imaging but not for reader identification.

CONCLUSION

Both enumeration and localization of implanted seeds are readily accomplished with CEMR. Calculations with MRI dosimetry do not require CT data. Dose determinations to specific extracapsular sites can be obtained with MRI but not with CT.

Late toxicity and biochemical recurrence after external-beam radiotherapy combined with permanent-source prostate brachytherapy: analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group study 0019

BACKGROUND

The combination of external-beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy is used commonly to treat men with prostate cancer. In this analysis, the authors examined the rate of biochemical recurrence (BR) and late grade > or =3 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity after treatment with external-beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy in a multiinstitutional, cooperative group setting.

METHODS

All eligible patients received external-beam radiotherapy (45 Gray [Gy] in 25 fractions) followed 2 to 6 weeks later by an interstitial implant using iodine-125 to deliver an additional 108 Gy. BR was defined in 2 ways: according to the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) Consensus Definition (ACD) and according to the Phoenix definition (PD) (prostate-specific antigen nadir +2 ng/mL). The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group(RTOG)/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer late radiation morbidity scoring system was used to grade all toxicity.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight patients were enrolled, and 130 were eligible for the current analysis. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 49 months (range, 20-60 months). The 48-month estimate of late grade > or =3 GU/GI toxicity was 15% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 8-21%), and the 48-month estimate of BR was 19% (95% CI, 12-26%) and 14% (95% CI, 8-20%) according to the ACD and PD, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The morbidity observed in this multiinstitutional, cooperative group study was slightly higher than that reported in recent RTOG studies using brachytherapy alone or high-dose external-beam radiotherapy. The BR rate observed in this report was similar to that observed with high-dose external-beam radiotherapy alone in similar patients.

Patient and Treatment Factors Associated With Complications After Prostate Brachytherapy

Purpose

To assess the prevalence and predictors of complications after prostate brachytherapy in a population-based sample of older men.

Patients and Methods

We analyzed claims for Medicare-enrolled men older than age 65 years living in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) surveillance areas diagnosed with prostate cancer from 1991 to 1999 who underwent brachytherapy as initial treatment.

Results

There were 5,621 men who had brachytherapy with at least 2 years of follow-up. A complication diagnosis or invasive procedure occurred in 54.5% of men within 2 years, with 14.1% undergoing an invasive procedure. Urinary, bowel, and erectile morbidity rates were 33.8%, 21.0%, and 16.7%, respectively, and invasive procedure rates were 10.3%, 0.8%, and 4.0%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, combined urinary diagnoses and invasive procedures (obstruction, incontinence, bleeding, fistula) were associated with older age (P < .01), nonwhite race (odds ratio [OR], 1.30; P = .01), low income (OR, 1.74; P < .01), external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT; OR, 0.85; P = .01), androgen deprivation (OR, 1.31; P < .01), later year of brachytherapy (OR, 1.03/yr; P = .02), higher Charlson comorbidity score (P < .01), and prior transurethral resection of the prostate (OR, 1.65; P < .01). Bowel morbidity (bleeding/proctitis, injury) was associated with older age (P = .04), EBRT (OR, 1.46; P < .01), later year (OR, 1.04/yr; P < .01), higher Charlson score (P = .01), and inflammatory bowel disease (OR, 2.60; P < .01). Erectile morbidity was associated with younger age (P < .01), nonwhite race (OR, 1.37; P < .01), AD (OR, 1.18; P = .04), and later year (OR, 1.08/yr; P < .01). Invasive procedure rates declined with later year of brachytherapy (OR, 0.93/yr; P < .01).

Conclusion

Morbidity after prostate brachytherapy was common, though invasive procedures were required infrequently. Invasive procedures for complications declined during the 1990s, suggesting technical improvement with experience.

A phase II study of external beam radiotherapy combined with permanent source brachytherapy for intermediate-risk, clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: Preliminary results of RTOG P-0019

PURPOSE

To estimate the rate of acute and late Grade 3-5 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity after treatment with external beam radiotherapy and permanent source brachytherapy in a multi-institutional, cooperative group setting.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

All patients were treated with external beam radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions), followed 2-6 weeks later by an interstitial implant using 125I to deliver an additional 108 Gy. Late genitourinary toxicity was graded according to the Common Toxicity Criteria Version 2.0, and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer late radiation morbidity scoring system was used for all other toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients from 28 institutions were entered on this study. Acute toxicity information was available in 131 patients, and 127 patients were analyzable for late toxicity. Acute Grade 3 toxicity was documented in 10 of 131 patients (7.6%). No Grade 4 or 5 acute toxicity has been observed. The 18-month month estimate of late Grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity was 3.3% (95% confidence interval, 0.1-6.5). No late Grade 4 or 5 toxicity has been observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The acute and late morbidity observed in this multi-institutional, cooperative group study is consistent with previous reports from single institutions with significant prostate brachytherapy experience.

Factors predictive of rectal bleeding after 103Pd and supplemental beam radiation for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the contribution of various clinical and radiation treatment parameters to the likelihood of late rectal bleeding after brachytherapy plus supplemental beam radiation (EB).

METHODS

A total of 161 intermediate risk patients, with Gleason score 7 or higher and/or PSA 10-20 ng/ml randomized to implantation with (103)Pd (90 versus 115 Gy) with 44 versus 20 Gy EB (2 Gy/day) were studied. Beam radiation was delivered with a four-field arrangement designed to cover the prostate and seminal vesicles with a 2 cm margin (reduced to 1.0 cm posteriorly). Isotope implantation was performed by standard techniques, using a modified peripheral loading pattern. A postimplant CT scan (3 mm slice thickness) was obtained 1-4 h after implantation. Dose volume histograms of the prostate and rectum were calculated using the outer prostatic and rectal margins identified on CT scan by one investigator (KW). Rectal doses were expressed as the R100, R200, and R300, defined as the rectal volume (cc) that received at least 100%, 200%, or 300% of the prescription dose, respectively. External beam doses were expressed as EB75% (cc)-the volume of rectum that received 75% of the beam prescription dose. Treatment-related rectal morbidity was monitored by mailed questionnaires, using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria, at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Patients who reported Grade 1 or higher RTOG morbidity were contacted by telephone to obtain more details regarding their rectal bleeding.

RESULTS

In univariate analysis, rectal bleeding was statistically related to the R100, R200, and R300 values, with p-values of 0.0055, 0.0007, and 0.012, respectively. Bleeding was not related to gap times, prostate size, patient age, V100 or D90 values. The EB75% values were similar in 44 Gy patients with or without late bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Considering the potential severity of rectal morbidities and their relationship to implant dose, we urge our colleagues to routinely monitor the rectal implant doses of their own patients to make sure that such doses are kept within an accepted range.

High Dose Rate Brachytherapy as Prostate Cancer Monotherapy Reduces Toxicity Compared to Low Dose Rate Palladium Seeds

PURPOSE

We evaluated the potential for differing acute and chronic toxicities between 2 monotherapy methods of image guided conformal brachytherapy, high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy alone and low dose rate (LDR) permanent palladium seeds.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 149 patients with biopsy proven, early stage prostate cancer were consecutively treated with interstitial brachytherapy as the sole method of treatment at William Beaumont Hospital between 1999 and 2001. Of the 149, 65 patients were treated with HDR using 192 iridium (192Ir), and 84 patients were treated with LDR using 103 palladium (103Pd). The majority of patients had clinical stage II, T1c or T2a disease, pretreatment prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml and Gleason score 6 or less. Neoadjuvant hormones were used in 36% of patients for gland volume optimization. All treatments were performed transperineally with trans-rectal ultrasound guidance and fluoroscopy for verification of needle/seed positions. The HDR dose was 38 Gy delivered in 4 fractions, 2 times daily during 2 days. The LDR dose was 120 Gy. Acute and chronic toxicities were scored according to the Common Toxicity Criteria scale, version 2.0.

RESULTS

Median followup for all patients was 35 months. The 2 treatment groups were well-balanced with respect to age, clinical stage, prostate specific antigen, Gleason score, use of neoadjuvant hormones, pretreatment genitourinary symptoms, implanted gland volume and length of followup. Biochemical control (American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology definition) was 97% and 98% for LDR and HDR, respectively. HDR brachytherapy alone was associated with decreased acute rates of grade 1 to 3 dysuria (67% versus 36%, p <0.001), urinary frequency/urgency (92% versus 54%, p <0.001) and rectal pain (20% versus 6%, p = 0.017). These differences remained significant when patients who received prior hormonal therapy were excluded from analysis. Selected chronic toxicities were also decreased with HDR, including long-term urinary frequency and urgency, 32% (HDR) vs 56% (103Pd), p = 0.004. There were no differences in the rates of chronic dysuria, urinary incontinence, retention or hematuria. Urethral stricture rates were 8% in the HDR alone group vs 3% for 103 Pd (p = 0.177). The 3-year actuarial impotence rate was 45% for the LDR group and only 16% for HDR. The majority of complications were grade 1. No grade 4 toxicities were encountered in either group. HDR decreased treatment cost by 19%.

CONCLUSIONS

While HDR (192 iridium) and LDR (103Pd) monotherapy maintained the same biochemical control, the use of HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy was associated with decreased rates of acute urinary frequency, urgency, dysuria and rectal pain compared to LDR. Chronic urinary frequency, urgency and grade 2 rectal toxicities were also decreased with HDR. A dramatic decrease (66%) was noted in the rate of sexual impotency with HDR. In addition, patients treated with HDR did not remain radioactive after treatment. There was a decrease in cost from not purchasing seeds per patient. HDR monotherapy as prostate cancer treatment resulted in the same biochemical control with much lower toxicity. It is an accepted, convenient, cost-effective method of prostate brachytherapy for patients with favorable risk prostate cancer.

Urinary and rectal complications of contemporary permanent transperineal brachytherapy for prostate carcinoma with or without external beam radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

Prostate brachytherapy is increasingly used to treat prostate carcinoma, alone or combined (combination therapy) with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). This report cites the frequency and nature of urinary and rectal complications requiring unplanned interventions after contemporary brachytherapy with or without EBRT.

METHODS

A total of 177 consecutive patients underwent either brachytherapy (100 patients [56.5%]) or combination therapy (77 patients [43.5%]) for clinical T1-2 prostate carcinoma between July 1998 and July 2000. All the patients were analyzed with regard to disease characteristics, treatment details, and complications requiring unplanned interventions in up to 48 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Catheter drainage for urinary retention was required for a median of 55 days (range, 3-330 days) in 36 patients (20%), including 24% after brachytherapy and 16% after combination therapy. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was performed at a median of 12 months (range, 8-18 months) after implantation in 5% of patients after brachytherapy and 14.5% of patients after combination therapy (P = 0.029). Colonoscopy with or without fulguration for rectal bleeding was performed in 37 of 158 patients (97 in the brachytherapy group and 61 in the combination therapy group) (23.4%) at a median of 17 months (range, 4-45 months), including 15 patients (15.5%) after brachytherapy and 22 patients (36%) after combination therapy (P = 0.002). Combination therapy resulted in fecal diversion in 6.6% of patients (P = 0.021), urinary diversion in 3.2% of patients (P = 0.148), and clean intermittent self-catheterization for recurrent stricture after multiple TURPs in 4.9% of patients (P = 0.055), none of which occurred after brachytherapy. Overall, 20.6% of patients underwent TURP or colonoscopy after brachytherapy, whereas 44.2% underwent those or more extensive unplanned procedures after combination therapy (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Complications requiring unplanned procedures may occur after brachytherapy, and may be increased significantly after brachytherapy combined with EBRT. These data reinforce the concept that quality assurance and technique are important in prostate brachytherapy, but, even when these are in place, complications can occur, especially when EBRT is added to brachytherapy.

[Curative radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer. Treatment methods and results]

Radiation oncology has undergone rapid technical development during the last few years. The further development of treatment planning systems and treatment machines had a major impact on the improvement of radiation therapy results in prostate cancer. This paper presents different treatment modalities and results. Currently available are three-dimensional conformal radiation, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), high dose rate brachytherapy, and low dose rate brachytherapy (seed implantation). All modalities offer the possibility for dose escalation, which is essential for curative treatment. Dose escalation using these techniques makes it possible to reduce the dose for the surrounding organs at risk. Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy can be delivered with doses up to 78 Gy. The biochemical control rate is up to 90% depending on the risk factors T stage, initial PSA, and Gleason score. The incidence of late side effects is <10%. IMRT is a newer modality for percutaneous radiotherapy. By individual dose modification in the treatment fields, doses >80 Gy can be delivered in small treatment volumes. Treatment has to be highly precise to avoid dose peaks in the organs at risk, i.e., rectum and bladder. The preliminary data for remission and toxicity rates are promising, but it is too early for final conclusions. For cases with high-risk factors such as PSA >10 ng/ml, Gleason score >6, and stage T3, percutaneous radiation can be combined with neoadjuvant or adjuvant hormonal treatment. Randomized trials showed an improvement of the results in favor of combined treatment. HDR brachytherapy in combination with external radiation is a good option for dose escalation in patients with locally advanced tumors and/or other high-risk factors. The biochemical control rates are between 60 and 84%, late effects occur in less than 10%. Seed implantation (LDR brachytherapy) as sole treatment is indicated for prognostically favorable situations (PSA <10 ng/ml, Gleason score < or =6, and T1c or T2a tumors). The biochemical control rates are between 80 and 90%. Toxicity consists of urine retention and proctitis, occurring in 10-20% of the patients.

Late rectal function after prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

Using a patient-administered quality of life instrument, to evaluate the effect of permanent prostate brachytherapy on late rectal function.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred eighty-nine prostate brachytherapy patients were mailed the Rectal Function Assessment Score (R-FAS), with a prestamped return envelope. The R-FAS consists of nine questions and a scoring range of 0-27, with higher scores indicative of poorer bowel function. One hundred eighty-seven (98.4%) surveys were returned. The median follow-up was 66.3 months (range 54-92 months). Clinical, treatment, and dosimetric parameters evaluated for bowel dysfunction included patient age, diabetes, hypertension, tobacco consumption, clinical T-stage, elapsed time since implant, prostate ultrasound volume, planning target volume, hormonal status, supplemental external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), isotope, average, median and maximum rectal doses, total implanted seed strength, values of the minimum dose received by 90% of the prostate gland (D(90)), and the percent prostate volume receiving 100%, 150%, and 200% of the minimum prescribed dose (V(100/150/200)).

RESULTS

The R-FAS score for the evaluated cohort was 3.92, which represented a slight improvement from the 1999 survey score of 4.15 (p = 0.29). Of the evaluated clinical, treatment, and dosimetric parameters, the number of preimplant bowel movements, a history of tobacco consumption, and the median rectal dose correlated with the R-FAS. Although lower rectal doses were noted with Pd-103, isotope did not predict for bowel function. Only 12% (23/187) of patients reported their bowel function to be worse after implantation. Patient perception of overall rectal quality of life was inversely related to the use of supplemental EBRT (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Minor bowel changes are noted following prostate brachytherapy. The vast majority of patients did not report any deterioration in bowel function. In addition, the R-FAS continue to improve with time.

Practical considerations in permanent brachytherapy for localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate

Prostate brachytherapy has become an accepted treatment modality for localized prostate cancer. Long-term biochemical and biopsy data confirm the early positive impressions that brachytherapy is as valid a treatment option as radical prostatectomy or EBRT. Quality-of-life data also look promising, but more follow-up data are needed. Is brachytherapy as good as or perhaps better than radical prostatectomy? This question cannot be answered yet. Well-controlled, randomized studies are needed. In the meantime, the clinician will have to rely on the available published data.