1
|
Shoji S, Naruse J, Ohno S, Aoki M, Takahashi K, Yuzuriha S, Kuroda S, Umemoto T, Nakajima N, Hasegawa M, Kawamura Y, Kajiwara H, Hashida K, Uemura K, Hasebe T, Tajiri T. Focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound with intraoperative prostate compression for patients with localized prostate cancer: a multi-center prospective study with 7 year experience. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00921-0. [PMID: 39580599 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00921-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2024] [Revised: 10/29/2024] [Accepted: 11/01/2024] [Indexed: 11/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To evaluate clinical outcomes of focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) with intraoperative prostate compression for patients with localized prostate cancer (PC). METHODS Patients were included if they had prostate specific antigen levels of ≤20 ng/mL and clinically significant PC (CSPC) within the left or right half, or upper or lower half of the prostate. CSPC was detected using magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided target biopsy and a 12-core systematic biopsy. Focal therapy using HIFU with intraoperative prostate compression was administered to lesions visible on the magnetic resonance imaging. Biochemical failure was defined by the Phoenix ASTRO definition. Pathological failure was defined as having CSPC in the biopsy at the time of biochemical failure. RESULTS The patients (n = 240; median age, 69 years old; median prostate specific antigen level, 6.42 ng/mL) were divided according to the D'Amico risk classification into: 'low' (n = 51), 'intermediate' (n = 107), and 'high' (n = 82) groups. The biochemical and the pathological disease-free survival rates after a single treatment for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 93.7% and 92.2%, 88.5% and 91.6%, and 84.8% and 86.6%, respectively. The radical or systematic treatment-free survival rates were 96.1%, 94.4%, and 95.1%, respectively. Median follow-up period was 48 months (range 24-84). The urinary and sexual function at 1 month post-treatment had deteriorated but returned to preoperative levels at 3 or 6 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS Focal therapy using HIFU with intraoperative prostate compression would improve medium-term oncological outcomes without the risk of functional deterioration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sunao Shoji
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan.
| | - Jun Naruse
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Sena Ohno
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Meiko Aoki
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Kumpei Takahashi
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Soichiro Yuzuriha
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Satoshi Kuroda
- Department of Urology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Umemoto
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Nobuyuki Nakajima
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Masanori Hasegawa
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Yoshiaki Kawamura
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Hiroshi Kajiwara
- Department of Pathology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Kazunobu Hashida
- Department of Radiology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kohei Uemura
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Terumitsu Hasebe
- Department of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takuma Tajiri
- Department of Pathology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Santoro G, Lombardo R, De Nunzio C. Letter to the Editor on "Major Complications and Adverse Events Related to Use of SpaceOAR Hydrogel for Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy". Urology 2024; 192:196-197. [PMID: 38908560 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2024.06.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2024] [Accepted: 06/13/2024] [Indexed: 06/24/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Santoro
- Sant'Andrea Hospital of Rome, Department of Urology, Sapienza, University of Rome, Italy
| | - Riccardo Lombardo
- Sant'Andrea Hospital of Rome, Department of Urology, Sapienza, University of Rome, Italy.
| | - Cosimo De Nunzio
- Sant'Andrea Hospital of Rome, Department of Urology, Sapienza, University of Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Khanam A, Singh G, Narwal S, Chopra B, Dhingra AK. A Review on Novel Applications of Nanotechnology in the Management of Prostate Cancer. Curr Drug Deliv 2024; 21:1161-1179. [PMID: 37888818 DOI: 10.2174/0115672018180695230925113521] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2023] [Revised: 07/09/2023] [Accepted: 07/26/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prostate cancer continues to be a serious danger to men's health, despite advances in the field of cancer nanotechnology. Although different types of cancer have been studied using nanomaterials and theranostic systems derived from nanomaterials, they have not yet reached their full potential for prostate cancer due to issues with in vivo biologic compatibility, immune reaction responses, accurate targetability, as well as a therapeutic outcome related to the nano-structured mechanism. METHOD The ultimate motive of this article is to understand the theranostic nanotechnology-based scheme for treating prostate cancer. The categorization of diverse nanomaterials in accordance with biofunctionalization tactics and biomolecule sources has been emphasized in this review so that they might potentially be used in clinical contexts and future advances. These opportunities can enhance the direct visualization of prostate tumors, early identification of prostate cancer-associated biomarkers at extremely low detection limits, and finally, the therapy for prostate cancer. RESULT In December 2022, a thorough examination of the scientific literature was carried out utilizing the Web of Science, PubMed, and Medline databases. The goal was to analyze novel applications of nanotechnology in the treatment of prostate cancer, together with their structural layouts and functionalities. CONCLUSION The various treatments and the reported revolutionary nanotechnology-based systems appear to be precise, safe, and generally successful; as a result, this might open up a new avenue for the detection and eradication of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arshi Khanam
- Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra-136119, Haryana, India
| | - Gurvirender Singh
- Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra-136119, Haryana, India
| | - Smita Narwal
- Global Research Institute of Pharmacy, Radaur, Yamunanagar-135133, Haryana, India
| | - Bhawna Chopra
- Guru Gobind Singh College of Pharmacy, Yamuna Nagar-135001, Haryana, India
| | - Ashwani K Dhingra
- Guru Gobind Singh College of Pharmacy, Yamuna Nagar-135001, Haryana, India
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shoji S, Naruse J, Oda K, Kuroda S, Umemoto T, Nakajima N, Hasegawa M, Mukasa A, Koizumi N, Miyajima A. Current status and future outlook of ultrasound treatment for prostate cancer. J Med Ultrason (2001) 2023:10.1007/s10396-023-01368-x. [PMID: 37787881 DOI: 10.1007/s10396-023-01368-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Accepted: 08/17/2023] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
Radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy are the standard treatment options for localized prostate cancer (PC). However, radical prostatectomy may cause the deterioration of urinary and sexual function, and radiation-induced hemorrhagic cystitis and severe rectal bleeding are risk factors for fatal conditions in patients after radiation therapy. With the recent development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the localization of clinically significant PC (csPC) and treatment modalities, "focal therapy", which cures csPC while preserving anatomical structures related to urinary and sexual functions, has become a minimally invasive treatment for localized PC. Based on the clinical results of transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for localized PC in the whole gland and focal therapy, HIFU is considered an attractive treatment option for focal therapy. Recently, the short-term clinical results of transurethral high-intensity directional ultrasound (HIDU) have been reported. With the resolution of some issues, HIDU may be commonly used for PC treatment similar to HIFU. Because HIFU and HIDU have limitations regarding the treatment of patients with large prostate calcifications and large prostate volumes, the proper use of these modalities will enable the treatment of any target area in the prostate. To establish a standard treatment strategy for localized PC, pair-matched and historically controlled studies are required to verify the oncological and functional outcomes of ultrasound treatment for patients with localized PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sunao Shoji
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan.
| | - Jun Naruse
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan
| | - Kazuya Oda
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan
| | - Satoshi Kuroda
- Department of Urology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Hachioji, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Umemoto
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan
| | - Nobuyuki Nakajima
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan
| | - Masanori Hasegawa
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan
| | - Anju Mukasa
- Department of Mechanical and Intelligent Systems Engineering, Graduate School of Informatics and Engineering, The University of Electro-Communications, Chofu, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Norihiro Koizumi
- Department of Mechanical and Intelligent Systems Engineering, Graduate School of Informatics and Engineering, The University of Electro-Communications, Chofu, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Akira Miyajima
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Williams J, Millan KM, Bolton D, Tan A, Cham CW, Pham T, Pan D, Liu M, Chan Y, Manohar P, Thomas J, Koufogiannis G, Ho H, Guerrieri M, Ng M, Boike T, Macleod C, Joon DL, Foroudi F, Chao M. Hyaluronic acid rectal spacer in EBRT: Usability, safety and symmetry related to user experience. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2022; 53:640-647. [PMID: 36202722 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmir.2022.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2022] [Revised: 09/02/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To report on the usability, safety, symmetry, and effectiveness of hyaluronic acid (HA) injected between the prostate and the rectum for patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and present a novel definition of rectal spacer symmetry that is reproducible and independent of patient anatomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS 102 consecutive patients with clinical stage of T1c-3b prostate cancer underwent general anaesthesia for fiducial marker insertion and injection of HA into the perirectal space before EBRT. HA safety, symmetry, separation, and usability based on user experience were assessed. RESULTS HA insertion was completed with a 100% success rate independent of user experience, rated as 'easy' or 'very easy' in all cases. There were no postoperative complications reported. The mean (SD) recto-prostatic separation for all patients at the base, midgland and apex were 12 (±2) mm, 11 (±2) mm, and 9 (±1) mm respectively. The mean sagittal length of the implant was 43 (±5) mm. The implant was rated as symmetrical in 98% of cases. The mean rV70Gy was 1.6% (IQR 0.8-3.3%) for patients receiving 78-80Gy. The mean rV53Gy was 2.8% (IQR 1.2-4.8%) for patients receiving 60-62Gy. The median prostate size was 43.5 cc (IQR 32-57). CONCLUSION Injection of HA was able to achieve highly symmetrical recto-prostatic separation, with new users able to produce excellent separation, particularly at the apex, achieving similar dosimetry outcomes as competent and experienced users. HA is safe, easy to use, and significantly reduced mean rV70Gy and rV53Gy compared to non-spacer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack Williams
- Albury Wodonga Health, 201 Borella Rd, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia; Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Kevin Mc Millan
- Eastern Health, 5 Arnold Street, Box Hill, VIC 3128, Australia
| | - Damien Bolton
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Alwin Tan
- The Bays Hospital, 262 Main St, Mornington, VIC 3931, Australia
| | - Chee Wee Cham
- The Bays Hospital, 262 Main St, Mornington, VIC 3931, Australia
| | - Trung Pham
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - David Pan
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Madalena Liu
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Yee Chan
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Paul Manohar
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Joe Thomas
- Eastern Health, 5 Arnold Street, Box Hill, VIC 3128, Australia
| | - George Koufogiannis
- Ringwood Private Hospital, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Huong Ho
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Mario Guerrieri
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Michael Ng
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Thomas Boike
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia; Michigan Health Professionals Radiation Oncology, 4550 Investment Dr, Suite B111, Troy, MI 8098, US
| | - Craig Macleod
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Daryl Lim Joon
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Farshad Foroudi
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Michael Chao
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia; Ringwood Private Hospital, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia; Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sanders JW, Kudchadker RJ, Tang C, Mok H, Venkatesan AM, Thames HD, Frank SJ. Prospective Evaluation of Prostate and Organs at Risk Segmentation Software for MRI-based Prostate Radiation Therapy. Radiol Artif Intell 2022; 4:e210151. [PMID: 35391775 PMCID: PMC8980936 DOI: 10.1148/ryai.210151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2021] [Revised: 12/20/2021] [Accepted: 01/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
The segmentation of the prostate and surrounding organs at risk (OARs) is a necessary workflow step for performing dose-volume histogram analyses of prostate radiation therapy procedures. Low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDRPBT) is a curative prostate radiation therapy treatment that delivers a single fraction of radiation over a period of days. Prior studies have demonstrated the feasibility of fully convolutional networks to segment the prostate and surrounding OARs for LDRPBT dose-volume histogram analyses. However, performance evaluations have been limited to measures of global similarity between algorithm predictions and a reference. To date, the clinical use of automatic segmentation algorithms for LDRPBT has not been evaluated, to the authors' knowledge. The purpose of this work was to assess the performance of fully convolutional networks for prostate and OAR delineation on a prospectively identified cohort of patients who underwent LDRPBT by using clinically relevant metrics. Thirty patients underwent LDRPBT and were imaged with fully balanced steady-state free precession MRI after implantation. Custom automatic segmentation software was used to segment the prostate and four OARs. Dose-volume histogram analyses were performed by using both the original automatically generated contours and the physician-refined contours. Dosimetry parameters of the prostate, external urinary sphincter, and rectum were compared without and with the physician refinements. This study observed that physician refinements to the automatic contours did not significantly affect dosimetry parameters. Keywords: MRI, Neural Networks, Radiation Therapy, Radiation Therapy/Oncology, Genital/Reproductive, Prostate, Segmentation, Dosimetry Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2022.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeremiah W. Sanders
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Rajat J. Kudchadker
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Chad Tang
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Henry Mok
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Aradhana M. Venkatesan
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Howard D. Thames
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| | - Steven J. Frank
- From the Departments of Imaging Physics (J.W.S.), Radiation Physics
(R.J.K.), Radiation Oncology (C.T., H.M., S.J.F.), Diagnostic Radiology
(A.M.V.), and Biostatistics (H.D.T.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Sanders JW, Mok H, Hanania AN, Venkatesan AM, Tang C, Bruno TL, Thames HD, Kudchadker RJ, Frank SJ. Computer-aided segmentation on MRI for prostate radiotherapy, Part I: Quantifying human interobserver variability of the prostate and organs at risk and its impact on radiation dosimetry. Radiother Oncol 2021; 169:124-131. [PMID: 34921895 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.12.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2021] [Revised: 11/13/2021] [Accepted: 12/08/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Quantifying the interobserver variability (IoV) of prostate and periprostatic anatomy delineation on prostate MRI is necessary to inform its use for treatment planning, treatment delivery, and treatment quality assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty five prostate cancer patients underwent MRI-based low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDRPBT). The patients were scanned with a 3D T2-weighted sequence for treatment planning and a 3D T2/T1-weighted sequence for quality assessment. Seven observers involved with the LDRPBT workflow delineated the prostate, external urinary sphincter (EUS), seminal vesicles, rectum, and bladder on all 50 MRIs. IoV was assessed by measuring contour similarity metrics, differences in organ volumes, and differences in dosimetry parameters between unique observer pairs. Measurements from a group of 3 radiation oncologists (G1) were compared against those from a group consisting of the other 4 clinical observers (G2). RESULTS IoV of the prostate was lower for G1 than G2 (Matthew's correlation coefficient [MCC], G1 vs. G2: planning-0.906 vs. 0.870, p < 0.001; postimplant-0.899 vs. 0.861, p < 0.001). IoV of the EUS was highest of all the organs for both groups, but was lower for G1 (MCC, G1 vs. G2: planning-0.659 vs. 0.402, p < 0.001; postimplant-0.684 vs. 0.398, p < 0.001). Large differences in prostate dosimetry parameters were observed (G1 maximum absolute prostate ΔD90: planning-76.223 Gy, postimplant-36.545 Gy; G1 maximum absolute prostate ΔV100: planning-13.927%, postimplant-8.860%). CONCLUSIONS While MRI is optimal in the management of prostate cancer with radiation therapy, significant interobserver variability of the prostate and external urinary sphincter still exist.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeremiah W Sanders
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
| | - Henry Mok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | | | - Aradhana M Venkatesan
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Chad Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Teresa L Bruno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Howard D Thames
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
| | - Rajat J Kudchadker
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Hydrogel spacers and prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2021; 21:75-78. [PMID: 34711449 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2021] [Revised: 08/02/2021] [Accepted: 08/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
|
9
|
Helou J, Charas T. Acute and late side-effects after low dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer; incidence, management and technical considerations. Brachytherapy 2021; 20:956-965. [PMID: 33972182 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.03.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Revised: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/21/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To review common reported side effects and complications after primary LDR-BT (monotherapy) and discuss some of the technical aspects that could impact the treatment outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS A literature search was undertaken using medical subject headings (MeSH) complemented by the authors' personal and institutional expertise. RESULTS The reported incidence of acute and late grade 2 or above urinary, bowel and sexual side effects is very variable across the literature. The learning curve and the implant quality have a clear impact on the toxicity outcomes. Being aware of some of the technical challenges encountered during the procedure and ways to mitigate them could decrease the incidence of side effects. Careful planning of seed placement and seed deposition allow sparing of the organs at risk and a lower incidence of urinary and gastro-intestinal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS Low dose-rate brachytherapy remains a standard monotherapy treatment in the setting of favorable-risk prostate cancer. High disease control and low long-term toxicities are achievable in expert hands with a good technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joelle Helou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Tomer Charas
- Radiotherapy Unit, Oncology Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pasalic D, Barocas DA, Huang LC, Zhao Z, Koyama T, Tang C, Conwill R, Goodman M, Hamilton AS, Wu XC, Paddock LE, Stroup AM, Cooperberg MR, Hashibe M, O'Neil BB, Kaplan SH, Greenfield S, Penson DF, Hoffman KE. Five-year outcomes from a prospective comparative effectiveness study evaluating external-beam radiotherapy with or without low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 2021; 127:1912-1925. [PMID: 33595853 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33388] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2020] [Revised: 10/14/2020] [Accepted: 11/30/2020] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To inform patients who are in the process of selecting prostate cancer treatment, the authors compared disease-specific function after external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) alone versus EBRT plus a low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy boost (EBRT-LDR). METHODS For this prospective study, men who had localized prostate cancer in 2011 and 2012 were enrolled. Assessments at baseline, 0.5, 1, 3, and 5 years included the patient-reported Expanded Prostate Index Composite, the 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey, and treatment-related regret. Regression models were adjusted for baseline function and for patient and treatment characteristics. The minimum clinically important difference in scores on the Expanded Prostate Index Composite 26-item instrument was from 5 to 7 for urinary irritation and from 4 to 6 for bowel function. RESULTS Six-hundred ninety-five men met inclusion criteria and received either EBRT (n = 583) or EBRT-LDR (n = 112). Patients in the EBRT-LDR group were younger (median age, 66 years [interquartile range [IQR], 60-71 years] vs 69 years [IQR, 64-74 years]; P < .001), were less likely to receive pelvic radiotherapy (10% vs 18%; P = .040), and had higher baseline 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey physical function scores (median score, 95 [IQR, 86-100] vs 90 [IQR, 70-100]; P < .001). Over a 3-year period, compared with EBRT, EBRT-LDR was associated with worse urinary irritative scores (adjusted mean difference at 3 years, -5.4; 95% CI, -9.3, -1.6) and bowel function scores (-4.1; 95% CI, -7.6, -0.5). The differences were no longer clinically meaningful at 5 years (difference in urinary irritative scores: -4.5; 95% CI, -8.4, -0.5; difference in bowel function scores: -2.1; 95% CI, -5.7, -1.4). However, men who received EBRT-LDR were more likely to report moderate or big problems with urinary function bother (adjusted odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.5-8.2) and frequent urination (adjusted odds ratio, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.6) through 5 years. There were no differences in survival or treatment-related regret between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS Compared with EBRT alone, EBRT-LDR was associated with clinically meaningful worse urinary irritative and bowel function over 3 years after treatment and more urinary bother at 5 years. LAY SUMMARY In men with prostate cancer who received external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with or without a brachytherapy boost (EBRT-LDR), EBRT-LDR was associated with clinically worse urinary irritation and bowel function through 3 years but resolved after 5 years. Men who received EBRT-LDR continued to report moderate-to-big problems with urinary function bother and frequent urination through 5 years. There was no difference in treatment-related regret or survival between patients who received EBRT and those who received EBRT-LDR. These intermediate-term estimates of function may facilitate counseling for men who are selecting treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dario Pasalic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Daniel A Barocas
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Li-Ching Huang
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Zhiguo Zhao
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Tatsuki Koyama
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Chad Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ralph Conwill
- Patient Advocacy Program, Office of Patient and Community Education, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Michael Goodman
- Department of Epidemiology, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Ann S Hamilton
- Department of Preventative Medicine, Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Xiao-Cheng Wu
- Department of Epidemiology, Louisiana State University New Orleans School of Public Health, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Lisa E Paddock
- Department of Epidemiology, Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Antoinette M Stroup
- Department of Epidemiology, Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Matthew R Cooperberg
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Mia Hashibe
- Department of Family and Preventative Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Brock B O'Neil
- Department of Urology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Sherrie H Kaplan
- Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California
| | - Sheldon Greenfield
- Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California
| | - David F Penson
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Karen E Hoffman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Rectal spacing, prostate coverage, and periprocedural outcomes after hydrogel spacer injection during low-dose-rate brachytherapy implantation. Brachytherapy 2020; 19:228-233. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2019.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2019] [Revised: 11/05/2019] [Accepted: 11/08/2019] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
|
12
|
Dalwadi S, Suri A, Kamat A, Butler EB, Farach AM. Laparoscopic Allograft Spacer Placement to Minimize Bowel Dose During Re-irradiation with Interstitial Brachytherapy. Cureus 2019; 11:e5958. [PMID: 31799096 PMCID: PMC6863581 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.5958] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
In primary or re-irradiation of gynecologic malignancies, achieving optimal dosimetry with adjacent normal tissue becomes challenging. Surgical spacers are tissue-equivalent materials placed within the patient to protect organs at risk from long-term radiation effects and are commonly used in prostate cancer. We report the use of an allograft mesh to protect adhesed bowel from high-dose radiation for definitive treatment of recurrent endometrial cancer. An 88-year-old female was diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage II endometrial cancer after she developed urinary frequency, hesitancy, and hematuria. She underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation, followed by laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and adjuvant vaginal cuff brachytherapy. She developed 1.8 cm bilateral vaginal cuff recurrence and was dispositioned for interstitial brachytherapy. An allograft mesh spacer was placed laparoscopically before repeat, high dose rate brachytherapy to protect nearby structures. Dose-escalation was achieved without compromising normal tissue constraints. The patient tolerated the procedure without evidence of long-term toxicity at one year. Multidisciplinary discussion may help identify patients who would benefit from spacer placement before select dose-escalated radiation therapy. Laparoscopic allograft mesh is one of many types of surgical spacers available for such patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Anuj Suri
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, USA
| | - Aparna Kamat
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, USA
| | - E Brian Butler
- Radiation Oncology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, USA
| | - Andrew M Farach
- Radiation Oncology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Parsai EI, Jahadakbar A, Lavvafi H, Elahinia M. A novel and innovative device to retract rectum during radiation therapy of pelvic tumors. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2019; 20:194-199. [PMID: 30586477 PMCID: PMC6333141 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2017] [Revised: 10/26/2018] [Accepted: 11/13/2018] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
An effective radiotherapy treatment entails maximizing radiation dose to the tumor while sparing the surrounding and normal tissues. With the advent of SBRT with extreme hypo-fractionation in treating tumors including prostate where ablative dose is delivered in smaller number of fractions, rectum remains a dose-limiting organ and at the risk of rectal toxicity or secondary cancer. The same limitation of rectal toxicity exists for high-dose rate (HDR) treatments of cervical, endometrial, or prostate cancer when creating even a short distance between the anterior rectal wall and field of radiation is ideal in delivering ablative dose to the target. An effective solution to such problem is to physically displace rectum as the organ at risk. This research presents an organ retractor device that is designed to displace the rectum away from the path of radiation beam employing a Nitinol shape memory alloy that is designed for displacing the rectum upon actuation. A control system regulates the motion in a reproducible and safe manner by creating the desirable shape in moving the anterior rectal wall. The study finds the novel organ retractor device to be a promising tool that can be applied in a clinical setting for minimizing dose to the rectum during treatment of pelvic tumors, and creating the potential to deliver an ablative dose to tumor volume or to escalate the dose when needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E. Ishmael Parsai
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of Toledo Medical CenterToledoOHUSA
| | - Ahmadreza Jahadakbar
- Department of MechanicalIndustrial and Manufacturing EngineeringUniversity of ToledoToledoOHUSA
| | - Hossein Lavvafi
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of Toledo Medical CenterToledoOHUSA
| | - Mohammad Elahinia
- Department of MechanicalIndustrial and Manufacturing EngineeringUniversity of ToledoToledoOHUSA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Predictive factors of long-term rectal toxicity following permanent iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy with or without supplemental external beam radiation therapy in 2216 patients. Brachytherapy 2018; 17:799-807. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2018.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2018] [Revised: 05/04/2018] [Accepted: 05/11/2018] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
|
15
|
Gupta S, Gupta PK, Dharanivasan G, Verma RS. Current prospects and challenges of nanomedicine delivery in prostate cancer therapy. Nanomedicine (Lond) 2017; 12:2675-2692. [DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2017-0236] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Management of prostate cancer is currently being pursued by systemic delivery of anticancer drugs, but it has drawbacks like nonspecific distribution, decreased bioavailability, coupled with adverse side effects. These problems have been resolved using nanomedicine-based anticancer drug delivery to improve the therapeutic index with higher drug dose and reduced nonspecific distribution. Targeting prostate tumor by delivering nanomedicine through locoregional route is more effective, than the systemic delivery, which can decrease systemic exposure of the therapeutics significantly. Therefore, in this article, we have reviewed the current prospects and challenges of prostate cancer therapy using nanomedicine, by providing a comprehensive description of advantages and limitations of the systemic route and locoregional route. Eventually, we have emphasized on the need for localized prostate cancer therapy developments using nanomedicines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Santosh Gupta
- Department of Biotechnology, Bhupat & Jyoti Mehta School of Biosciences, Indian Institute of Technology-Madras, Chennai-600036, Tamilnadu, India
| | - Piyush Kumar Gupta
- Department of Biotechnology, Bhupat & Jyoti Mehta School of Biosciences, Indian Institute of Technology-Madras, Chennai-600036, Tamilnadu, India
| | - Gunasekaren Dharanivasan
- Department of Biotechnology, Bhupat & Jyoti Mehta School of Biosciences, Indian Institute of Technology-Madras, Chennai-600036, Tamilnadu, India
| | - Rama Shanker Verma
- Department of Biotechnology, Bhupat & Jyoti Mehta School of Biosciences, Indian Institute of Technology-Madras, Chennai-600036, Tamilnadu, India
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Helou J, Torres S, Musunuru HB, Raphael J, Cheung P, Vesprini D, Chung HT, D'Alimonte L, Krahn M, Morton G, Loblaw A. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy versus Low Dose Rate Brachytherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: a Cost-Utility Analysis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2017; 29:718-731. [PMID: 28916284 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2017.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2017] [Revised: 07/23/2017] [Accepted: 07/24/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) for localised prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS A decision-analytic Markov model was developed from the healthcare payer perspective to simulate the history of a 66-year-old man with low-risk PCa. The model followed patients yearly over their remaining lifetimes. Health states included 'recurrence-free', 'biochemical recurrence' (BR), 'metastatic' and 'death'. Transition probabilities were based on a retrospective cohort analysis undertaken at our institution. Utilities were derived from the literature. Costs were assigned in 2015 Canadian dollars ($) and reflected Ontario's health system and departmental costs. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY was used. RESULTS SBRT was the dominant strategy with 0.008LYs and 0.029QALYs gained and a reduction in cost of $2615. Under base case conditions, our results were sensitive to the BR probability associated with both strategies. LDR-BT becomes the preferred strategy if the BR with SBRT is 1.3*[baseline BR_SBRT] or if the BR with LDR-BT is 0.76*[baseline BR_LDR-BT]. When assuming the same BR for both strategies, LDR-BT becomes marginally more effective with 0.009QALYs gained at a cost of $272 848/QALY. CONCLUSIONS SBRT represents an economically attractive radiation strategy. Further research should be carried out to provide longer-term follow-up and high-quality evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Helou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Measurement and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
| | - S Torres
- Institute of Health Policy, Measurement and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - H B Musunuru
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - J Raphael
- Institute of Health Policy, Measurement and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - P Cheung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - D Vesprini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - H T Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - L D'Alimonte
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - M Krahn
- Institute of Health Policy, Measurement and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, Toronto, Canada
| | - G Morton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - A Loblaw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Measurement and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Serrano NA, Kalman NS, Anscher MS. Reducing rectal injury in men receiving prostate cancer radiation therapy: current perspectives. Cancer Manag Res 2017; 9:339-350. [PMID: 28814898 PMCID: PMC5546182 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s118781] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Dose escalation is now the standard of care for the treatment of prostate cancer with radiation therapy. However, the rectum tends to be the dose-limiting structure when treating prostate cancer, given its close proximity. Early and late toxicities can occur when the rectum receives large doses of radiation therapy. New technologies allow for prevention of these toxicities. In this review, we examine the evidence that supports various dose constraints employed to prevent these rectal injuries from occurring. We also examine the use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and how this compares to older radiation therapy techniques that allow for further sparing of the rectum during a radiation therapy course. We then review the literature on endorectal balloons and the effects of their daily use throughout a radiation therapy course. Tissue spacers are now being investigated in greater detail; these devices are injected into the rectoprostatic fascia to physically increase the distance between the prostate and the anterior rectal wall. Last, we review the use of systemic drugs, specifically statin medications and antihypertensives, as well as their impact on rectal toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas A Serrano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University - Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, VA
| | - Noah S Kalman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University - Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, VA
| | - Mitchell S Anscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Comparative study of late rectal toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated with low-dose-rate brachytherapy: With or without supplemental external beam radiotherapy. Brachytherapy 2016; 15:435-441. [PMID: 27180124 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2016.04.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2016] [Revised: 03/14/2016] [Accepted: 04/05/2016] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Supplemental external beam radiation therapy (sEBRT) is often prescribed in men undergoing low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy. A population of patients was analyzed to assess the effect of sEBRT on late rectal toxicity. It was hypothesized that sEBRT + LDR would be associated with a higher risk of late rectal toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS This retrospective cohort study examined LDR brachytherapy patients, treated with or without sEBRT, with a minimum of 5-year followup. Longitudinal assessments were evaluated using the computerized patient record system. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for analysis. RESULTS Median followup was 7.5 years for 245 patients from 2004 to 2007. sEBRT was administered to 33.5%. Followup beyond 5 years was available for 89%. Overall rates of Grade ≥2 and ≥3 rectal toxicities were 6.9% and 2.9%, respectively. The risk of Grade ≥2 rectal toxicity was 2.8-fold higher for patients receiving sEBRT (95% confidence interval: 1.1-7.2; p = 0.02). The risk of Grade ≥3 rectal toxicity was 11.9-fold higher for patients who received sEBRT (1.5-97.4, 95% confidence interval; p = 0.003). Six of seven patients with a Grade ≥3 rectal toxicity received sEBRT, including one who required an abdominoperineal resection. Median post-LDR D90, V150, V200, and R100 values were 103.3%, 59.4%, 30.1%, and 0.5 cc. CONCLUSIONS In a cohort of LDR brachytherapy patients with high rates of followup, sEBRT + LDR was associated with significantly higher risk of Grade ≥2 and ≥3 late rectal toxicity. This analysis supports previous findings and maintains concern about the supplemental use of external beam radiation therapy with LDR brachytherapy while its benefit for tumor control has yet to be prospectively validated.
Collapse
|
19
|
Vanneste BGL, Van De Voorde L, de Ridder RJ, Van Limbergen EJ, Lambin P, van Lin EN. Chronic radiation proctitis: tricks to prevent and treat. Int J Colorectal Dis 2015; 30:1293-303. [PMID: 26198994 PMCID: PMC4575375 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-015-2289-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 70] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/13/2015] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to give an overview of the measures used to prevent chronic radiation proctitis (CRP) and to provide an algorithm for the treatment of CRP. METHODS Medical literature databases including PubMed and Medline were screened and critically analyzed for relevance in the scope of our purpose. RESULTS CRP is a relatively frequent late side effect (5-20%) and mainly dependent on the dose and volume of irradiated rectum. Radiation treatment (RT) techniques to prevent CRP are constantly improving thanks to image-guided RT and intensity-modulated RT. Also, newer techniques like protons and new devices such as rectum spacers and balloons have been developed to spare rectal structures. Biopsies do not contribute to diagnosing CRP and should be avoided because of the risk of severe rectal wall damage, such as necrosis and fistulas. There is no consensus on the optimal treatment of CRP. A variety of possibilities is available and includes topical and oral agents, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and endoscopic interventions. CONCLUSIONS CRP has a natural history of improving over time, even without treatment. This is important to take into account when considering these treatments: first be conservative (topical and oral agents) and be aware that invasive treatments can be very toxic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ben G L Vanneste
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 3035, 6202 NA, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Lien Van De Voorde
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 3035, 6202 NA, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Rogier J de Ridder
- Department of Gastroenterology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Evert J Van Limbergen
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 3035, 6202 NA, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Philippe Lambin
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 3035, 6202 NA, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Emile N van Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 3035, 6202 NA, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|