1
|
Millot JC, Arenas-Gallo C, Silver E, Goldman M, Picciotto S, Jia AY, Zaorsky NG, Spratt DE, Fredman ET, Shoag JE. Major Complications and Adverse Events Related to Use of SpaceOAR Hydrogel for Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy. Urology 2024; 188:94-100. [PMID: 38458325 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.12.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2023] [Revised: 12/11/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 03/10/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the prevalence and severity of SpaceOAR-related adverse events using the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. METHODS We analyzed SpaceOAR-related adverse event reports in the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database from January 2015 to May 2023. For each report, the event type, associated device and patient problems, event description, event timing, and event severity stratified by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 (CTCAE) grading system were recorded. RESULTS From 2015 to 2022, 206,619 SpaceOAR devices were sold. From January 2015 to May 2023, we identified 981 reports describing 990 SpaceOAR-related adverse events. Malfunctions were the most common event type (N = 626), followed by patient injuries (N = 350) with few reported deaths (N = 5). Device positioning problems were the most frequent device issue (N = 686). Pain was the most reported patient problem (N = 216). Abscesses and fistulas related to the device were each reported in 91 events. A noteworthy portion of relevant adverse events occurred before the initiation of radiation (N = 35, 22.4%), suggesting the device, rather than the radiation, was responsible. In total, 470 (50.2%) and 344 (36.7%) of the adverse events were CTCAE grade 1 and 2, respectively. There were 123 (13.1%) events that were CTCAE grade ≥3. CONCLUSION We identified multiple reports of SpaceOAR-related adverse events, many of which are more serious than have been reported in clinical trials. While SpaceOAR use is common, suggesting these events are rare, these data highlight the need for continued postmarket surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack C Millot
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH
| | - Camilo Arenas-Gallo
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH
| | - Esther Silver
- Department of Neuroscience, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | | | - Shany Picciotto
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH
| | - Angela Y Jia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
| | - Nicholas G Zaorsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
| | - Elisha T Fredman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Davidoff Cancer Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva, Israel
| | - Jonathan E Shoag
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH; Department of Urology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sawayanagi S, Yamashita H, Ogita M, Kawai T, Sato Y, Kume H. In Curative Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer, There Is a High Possibility That 45 Gy in Five Fractions Will Not Be Tolerated without a Hydrogel Spacer. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1472. [PMID: 38672553 PMCID: PMC11048095 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16081472] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2024] [Revised: 04/07/2024] [Accepted: 04/10/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the treatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer. This study was a phase 1 dose escalation trial conducted in Japan. Patients with histologically proven prostate cancer without lymph nodes or distant metastases were enrolled. The prescribed doses were 42.5, 45, or 47.5 Gy in five fractions. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade (G) 3+ gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity within 180 days after SBRT completion, and a 6 plus 6 design was used as the method of dose escalation. A total of 16 patients were enrolled, with 6 in the 42.5 Gy group and 10 in the 45 Gy group. No DLT was observed in the 42.5 Gy group. In the 45 Gy group, one patient experienced G3 rectal hemorrhage, and another had G4 rectal perforation, leading to the determination of 42.5 Gy as the MTD. None of the patients experienced biochemical recurrence or death during the follow-up period. We concluded that SBRT for non-metastatic prostate cancer at 42.5 Gy in five fractions could be safely performed, but a total dose of 45 Gy increased severe toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Subaru Sawayanagi
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan; (S.S.); (M.O.)
| | - Hideomi Yamashita
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan; (S.S.); (M.O.)
| | - Mami Ogita
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan; (S.S.); (M.O.)
| | - Taketo Kawai
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan; (T.K.); (Y.S.); (H.K.)
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Teikyo University, 2-11-1, Kaga, Itabashi-ku, Tokyo 173-8606, Japan
| | - Yusuke Sato
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan; (T.K.); (Y.S.); (H.K.)
- Department of Urology, Tokyo Metropolitan Tama Medical Center, 2-8-29, Musashidai, Fuchu 183-8524, Japan
| | - Haruki Kume
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan; (T.K.); (Y.S.); (H.K.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lee CT, Koleoso O, Deng M, Veltchev I, Lin T, Hallman MA, Horwitz EM, Wong JK. A dosimetric analysis of rectal hydrogel spacer use in patients with recurrent prostate cancer undergoing salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2023; 22:586-592. [PMID: 37393186 PMCID: PMC10527788 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2023.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2023] [Revised: 05/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/01/2023] [Indexed: 07/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We hypothesize rectal hydrogel spacer (RHS) improves rectal dosimetry in patients undergoing salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) for intact, recurrent prostate cancer (PC). METHODS AND MATERIALS A prospectively collected institutional database was queried for recurrent PC patients treated with salvage HDR-BT from September 2015 to November 2021. Patients were offered RHS beginning June 2019. Dosimetric variables were compared between RHS and no-RHS groups for the average of two fractions using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Primary outcomes were rectal volume receiving 75% of prescription dose (V75%) and prostate volume receiving 100% of prescription dose (V100%). Generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was used to evaluate the association between other planning variables and rectal V75%. RESULTS Forty-one PC patients received salvage HDR-BT, of whom 20 had RHS. All patients received 2400cGy in 2 fractions. Median RHS volume was 6.2cm3 (Standard deviation [SD]: ± 3.5cm3). Median follow-up was 4 months and 17 months in the RHS and no-RHS groups, respectively. Median rectal V75% with and without RHS were 0.0cm3 (IQR: 0.0-0.0cm3) and 0.06cm3 (IQR: 0.0-0.14cm3), respectively (p<0.001). Median prostate V100% with and without RHS were 98.55% (IQR: 97.86-99.22%) and 97.78% (IQR: 97.50-98.18%), respectively (p = 0.007). RHS, rectum, and prostate volumes did not significantly affect rectal V75% per GEE modeling. There was 10% G1-2 and 5% G3 rectal toxicity in RHS group. There was 9.5% G1-2 and no G3+ rectal toxicities in the no-RHS group. CONCLUSIONS Absolute improvement in rectal V75% and prostate V100% was significant with RHS in PC patients undergoing salvage HDR-BT, but clinical benefit is marginal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles T Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
| | - Olufela Koleoso
- Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine Program, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Mengying Deng
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Iavor Veltchev
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Teh Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Mark A Hallman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Eric M Horwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - J Karen Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lo Greco MC, Marletta G, Marano G, Fazio A, Buffettino E, Iudica A, Liardo RLE, Milazzotto R, Foti PV, Palmucci S, Basile A, Marletta F, Cuccia F, Ferrera G, Parisi S, Pontoriero A, Pergolizzi S, Spatola C. Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Localized, Low-Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Current and Future Prospectives. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2023; 59:1144. [PMID: 37374348 DOI: 10.3390/medicina59061144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2023] [Revised: 06/10/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023]
Abstract
At the time of diagnosis, the vast majority of prostate carcinoma patients have a clinically localized form of the disease, with most of them presenting with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In this setting, various curative-intent alternatives are available, including surgery, external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy can be considered as a valid alternative strategy for localized prostate cancer. High-dose-rate brachytherapy can be administered according to different schedules. Proton beam radiotherapy represents a promising strategy, but further studies are needed to make it more affordable and accessible. At the moment, new technologies such as MRI-guided radiotherapy remain in early stages, but their potential abilities are very promising.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Chiara Lo Greco
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Giulia Marletta
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Giorgia Marano
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Alessandro Fazio
- Radiology I Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| | - Emanuele Buffettino
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Arianna Iudica
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Rocco Luca Emanuele Liardo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| | - Roberto Milazzotto
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| | - Pietro Valerio Foti
- Radiology I Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| | - Stefano Palmucci
- Radiology I Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| | - Antonio Basile
- Radiology I Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Silvana Parisi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Antonio Pontoriero
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Stefano Pergolizzi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Dental and Morphological and Functional Imaging Sciences, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
| | - Corrado Spatola
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Labate C, Panunzio A, De Carlo F, Zacheo F, De Matteis S, Barba MC, Carbonara U, Rizzo FL, Leo S, Forte S, Ditonno P, Tafuri A, Pagliarulo V. Current Knowledge on Radiation-Therapy-Induced Erectile Dysfunction in Prostate-Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review. URO 2023. [DOI: 10.3390/uro3020013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/05/2023]
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in men in the United States. Among the different available treatment options, radiation therapy is recommended for localized or even advanced disease. Erectile dysfunction (ED) often occurs after radiation therapy due to neurological, vascular, and endocrine mechanisms resulting in arterial tone alteration, pudendal-nerve neuropraxia, and lastly fibrosis. Considering the influence of quality of life on patients’ treatment choice, radiation-therapy-induced ED prevention and treatment are major issues. In this narrative review, we briefly summarize and discuss the current state of the art on radiation-therapy-induced ED in PCa patients in terms of pathophysiology and available treatment options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Connie Labate
- Department of Urology, “Vito Fazzi” Hospital, 73100 Lecce, Italy
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Urology and Andrology Section, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy
| | - Andrea Panunzio
- Department of Urology, “Vito Fazzi” Hospital, 73100 Lecce, Italy
| | | | - Federico Zacheo
- Department of Urology, “Vito Fazzi” Hospital, 73100 Lecce, Italy
| | - Sara De Matteis
- Department of Radiation Therapy, “Vito Fazzi” Hospital, 73100 Lecce, Italy
| | | | - Umberto Carbonara
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Urology and Andrology Section, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy
- Department of Urology, Royal Surrey NHS Trust, London NW3 2PS, UK
| | | | - Silvana Leo
- Department of Oncology, “Vito Fazzi” Hospital, 73100 Lecce, Italy
| | - Saverio Forte
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Urology and Andrology Section, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy
| | - Pasquale Ditonno
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Urology and Andrology Section, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rectal retractor in prostate radiotherapy: pros and cons. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:204. [PMID: 36494732 PMCID: PMC9737745 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02176-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Dose escalation in prostate radiotherapy (RT) have led to improved biochemical controls and reduced the risk of distant metastases. Over the past three decades, despite technological advancements in RT planning and delivery, the rectum is a dose-limiting structure in prostate RT owing to the close anatomical proximity of the anterior rectal wall (ARW) to the prostate gland. RT-induced rectal toxicities remain a clinical challenge, limiting the prescribed dose during prostate RT. To address the spatial proximity challenge by physically increasing the distance between the posterior aspect of the prostate and the ARW, several physical devices such as endorectal balloons (ERBs), rectal hydrogel spacers, and rectal retractor (RR) have been developed. Previously, various aspects of ERBs and rectal hydrogel spacers have extensively been discussed. Over recent years, given the interest in the application of RR in prostate external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), this editorial will discuss opportunities and challenges of using RR during prostate EBRT and provide information regarding which aspects of this device need attention.
Collapse
|
7
|
Pepe P, Tamburo M, Panella P, Pepe L, Marletta G, Pennisi M, Marletta F. Erectile dysfunction following hydrogel injection and hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Our experience in 56 cases. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2022; 94:166-168. [PMID: 35775340 DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2022.2.166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2022] [Accepted: 04/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The incidence of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men with organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) submitted to hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) has been prospectively evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS From April 2018 to September 2020, 56 patients (median age 70 years) with cT1c PCa were treated by HRT directed to the prostate and seminal vesicle. Median PSA was 8.3 ng/ml; 20 patients (35.7%) vs. 28 (50%) vs. 8 (22.3%) had a PCa Grade Group 1 vs. 2 vs. 3, respectively. All patients underwent hydrogel injection of Space OAR and intraprostatic fiducials before HRT. The prescription dose was 60 Gy in 20 fractions 5 days/week over 4 weeks. During the follow up, PSA, genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were evaluated. The sexual function was evaluated by International Index of Erectile Function - 5 (IIEF-5) before, 6 and 18 months from HRT; 32/56 (57.1%) men referred a normal sexual activity before HRT (median IIEF-5 score: 22). RESULTS Median PSA level at median follow up of 18 months was 0.92 ng/ml and none used adjuvant therapy. One man (1.8%) referred a tardive grade 1 GU complication. At a median follow up of 6 and 18 months, 20/32 (62.5%) kept pretreatment sexual potency (median IIEF-5 score: 21). The 12/32 men who worsened the sexual function following HRT had a median age higher than patients without ED (78 vs. 67 years). CONCLUSIONS The use of hydrogel injection and intraprostatic fiducials followed by HRT allowed to kept pretreatment sexual potency in 62.5% of the cases.
Collapse
|
8
|
Sawayanagi S, Yamashita H, Ogita M, Takenaka R, Nozawa Y, Watanabe Y, Imae T, Abe O. Injection of hydrogel spacer increased maximal intrafractional prostate motion in anterior and superior directions during volumetric modulated arc therapy-stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:41. [PMID: 35197092 PMCID: PMC8867734 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02008-3] [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] [Received: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 02/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The aim of this study was to clarify the association between intrafractional prostate shift and hydrogel spacer. Methods Thirty-eight patients who received definitive volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)-stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer with prostate motion monitoring in our institution in 2018–2019 were retrospectively evaluated. In order to move the rectum away from the prostate, hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR system, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, the United States) injection was proposed to the patients as an option in case of meeting the indication of use. We monitored intrafractional prostate motion by using a 4-dimensional (4D) transperineal ultrasound device: the Clarity 4D ultrasound system (Elekta AB). The deviation of the prostate was monitored in each direction: superior-inferior, left–right, and anterior–posterior. We also calculated the vector length. The maximum intrafractional displacement (MID) per fraction for each direction was detected and mean of MIDs was calculated per patient. The MIDs in the non-spacer group and the spacer group were compared using the unpaired t-test. Results We reviewed 33 fractions in eight patients as the spacer group and 148 fractions in 30 patients as the non-spacer group. The superior MID was 0.47 ± 0.07 (mean ± SE) mm versus 0.97 ± 0.24 mm (P = 0.014), the inferior MID was 1.07 ± 0.11 mm versus 1.03 ± 0.25 mm (P = 0.88), the left MID was 0.74 ± 0.08 mm versus 0.87 ± 0.27 mm (P = 0.55), the right MID was 0.67 ± 0.08 mm versus 0.92 ± 0.21 mm (P = 0.17), the anterior MID was 0.45 ± 0.06 mm versus 1.16 ± 0.35 mm (P = 0.0023), and the posterior MID was 1.57 ± 0.17 mm versus 1.37 ± 0.22 mm (P = 0.56) in the non-spacer group and the spacer group, respectively. The max of VL was 2.24 ± 0.19 mm versus 2.89 ± 0.62 mm (P = 0.19), respectively. Conclusions Our findings suggest that maximum intrafractional prostate motion during VMAT-SBRT was larger in patients with hydrogel spacer injection in the superior and anterior directions. Since this difference seemed not to disturb the dosimetric advantage of the hydrogel spacer, we do not recommend routine avoidance of the hydrogel spacer use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Subaru Sawayanagi
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| | - Hideomi Yamashita
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
| | - Mami Ogita
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| | - Ryosuke Takenaka
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| | - Yuki Nozawa
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| | - Yuichi Watanabe
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| | - Toshikazu Imae
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| | - Osamu Abe
- Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pepe P, Tamburo M, Pennisi M, Marletta D, Marletta F. Clinical Outcomes of Hydrogel Spacer Injection Space OAR in Men Submitted to Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. In Vivo 2021; 35:3385-3389. [PMID: 34697173 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12637] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2021] [Revised: 07/25/2021] [Accepted: 07/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM To evaluate the clinical outcomes of men with prostate cancer (PCa) submitted to hydrogel spacer injection before hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS From April 2018 to April 2020, 32 patients with clinically localized PCa underwent hydrogel injection Space OAR before HRT to the prostate and seminal vesicle; the prescription dose was 60 Gy in 20 fractions, 5 days/week over 4 weeks. PSA levels, genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities, and sexual function were prospectively evaluated. RESULTS PSA levels at the median follow up of 15 months was 0.52 ng/ml; 28.1% vs. 78.1% patients had GI vs. GU Grade 0 acute toxicity and 93.7% vs. 0% had GI vs. GU Grade 0 late toxicity. Furthermore, 88.1% of patients kept pretreatment sexual potency. CONCLUSION The use of the hydrogel Spacer OAR before HRT is useful for reducing acute and late GU and GI toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pietro Pepe
- Urology Unit, Cannizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy
| | - Maria Tamburo
- Radiotherapy Unit, Cannizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|