Evaluation of dosimetry and excess seeds in permanent brachytherapy using a modified hybrid method: a single-institution experience

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

BACKGROUND

To compare the outcome of high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy (HDR-BT) monotherapy and low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) with or without external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We compared 352 patients treated with HDR-BT as monotherapy (median follow-up time 84 months, NCCN risk classification; low: intermediate: high = 28:145:179) and 486 patients with LDR-BT with or without EBRT (90 months, 194:254:38). HDR-BT treated advanced disease with more hormonal therapy than LDR-BT. LDR-BT excluded patients with T3b-T4 tumor and initial PSA >50 ng/ml. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) involving propensity scores was used to reduce background selection bias.

RESULTS

The actuarial 5-year biochemical failure-free survival rates (bNED) were 92.9% and 95.6% (p = 0.25) in the HDR-BT and LDR-BT groups, respectively, and it was 100% and 97.3% (p = 0.99) in the low-risk, 95.6% and 94.3% (p = 0.19) in the intermediate, 89.6% and 94.9% (p = 0.26) in the high-risk groups, and 93.1% and 94.9% (p = 0.98) in selected high-risk group excluding T3b-4 and initial PSA ≥50. IPTW correction also indicated no difference in bNED between LDR-BT and HDR-BT groups. LDR-BT showed a higher incidence of genitourinary (GU) toxicity grade ≥2 than that of HDR-BT in the acute phase and grade 1 toxicity in late phase. Acute GU toxicity grade ≥1 predicted late GU toxicity grade ≥2. External beam radiotherapy plus LDR-BT elevated GI toxicity than LDR-BT only group. Accumulated incidence of late grade ≥2 GU and GU toxicity was equivalent between HDR-BT and LDR-BT. No grade 4 or 5 toxicities were detected in either modality.

CONCLUSION

HDR-BT monotherapy showed an equivalent outcome to that of LDR-BT with or without EBRT for low-, intermediate- and selected high-risk patients. LDR-BT showed equivalent incidence of grade ≥2 late GI and GU toxicities and higher grade ≥2 acute GU toxicity as that of HDR-BT as a monotherapy.

Comparison of Image-Guided Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Low-dose Rate Brachytherapy with or without External Beam Radiotherapy in Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer

To compare the outcome of low-dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) for localized prostate cancer, we examined 488 LDR-BT and 269 IG-IMRT patients. IG-IMRT treated older and advanced disease with more hormonal therapy than LDR-BT, which excluded T3b–T4 tumor and initial PSA > 50 ng/ml. The actuarial five-year biochemical failure-free survival rate was 88.7% and 96.7% (p = 0.0003) in IG-IMRT and LDR-BT, respectively; it was 88.2% (85.1% for IG-IMRT and 94.9% for LDR-BT, p = 0.0578) for the high-risk group, 95.2% (91.6% and 97.0%, p = 0.3361) for the intermediate IG-IMRT and 96.8% (95.7% and 97%, p = 0.8625) for the low-risk group. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) involving propensity scores was used to reduce background selection bias. IPTW showed a statistically significant difference between LDR-BT and IG-IMRT in high risk (p = 0.0009) and high risk excluding T3-4/initial PSA > 50 ng/ml group (p = 0.0073). IG-IMRT showed more gastrointestinal toxicity (p = 0.0023) and less genitourinary toxicity (p < 0.0001) than LDR-BT. LDR-BT and IG-IMRT showed equivocal outcome in low- and intermediate-risk groups. For selected high-risk patients, LDR-BT showed more potential to improve PSA control rate than IG-IMRT.

Permanent prostate brachytherapy and short-term androgen deprivation for intermediate-risk prostate cancer in Japanese men: outcome and toxicity

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the interim outcomes of low-dose-rate permanent brachytherapy (PB) combined with short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in Japanese men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer excluding those with a Gleason score of 4+3.

METHODS

The Protocol-intermediate-risk group (Protocol-IRG) was defined as clinical stage T1c-T2c, Gleason score of 3+4, or lower and prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) level lower than 20 ng/mL. A total of 308 patients underwent brachytherapy in the protocol-IRG group (n=152) or in the low-risk group (n=156). Patients in Protocol-IRG had received at least 6 months of ADT before and after PB. Supplemental external beam radiotherapy was not used. Planned followup by PSA was carried out every 3 months for the first 2 years and every 6 months thereafter. The PSA failure was defined as nadir+2 ng/mL. Patients' Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite was recorded before and 3 years after treatment.

RESULTS

The median followup was 68 and 68 months for the protocol-IRG and the low-risk groups, respectively. The 5-year biological disease-free survival rates in the low-risk and protocol-IRG groups were 94.8 and 94.6%, respectively. As far as survival rates were concerned, there were no significant differences between the two groups. Overall satisfaction and sexual function at 3 years after PB had significantly improved compared with pretreatment (p=0.01 and p=0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In intermediate-risk prostate patients, excluding those with a biopsy Gleason score of 4+3, brachytherapy with short-term ADT can be an effective treatment option for Japanese men.