1
|
Zhao Y, Haworth A, Reynolds HM, Williams SG, Finnegan R, Rowshanfarzad P, Ebert MA. Towards optimal heterogeneous prostate radiotherapy dose prescriptions based on patient-specific or population-based biological features. Med Phys 2024; 51:3766-3781. [PMID: 38224317 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16936] [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: 06/11/2023] [Revised: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 12/22/2023] [Indexed: 01/16/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Escalation of prescribed dose in prostate cancer (PCa) radiotherapy enables improvement in tumor control at the expense of increased toxicity. Opportunities for reduction of treatment toxicity may emerge if more efficient dose escalation can be achieved by redistributing the prescribed dose distribution according to the known heterogeneous, spatially-varying characteristics of the disease. PURPOSE To examine the potential benefits, limitations and characteristics of heterogeneous boost dose redistribution in PCa radiotherapy based on patient-specific and population-based spatial maps of tumor biological features. METHOD High-resolution prostate histology images, from a cohort of 63 patients, annotated with tumor location and grade, provided patient-specific "maps" and a population-based "atlas" of cell density and tumor probability. Dose prescriptions were derived for each patient based on a heterogeneous redistribution of the boost dose to the intraprostatic lesions, with the prescription maximizing patient tumor control probability (TCP). The impact on TCP was assessed under scenarios where the distribution of population-based biological data was ignored, partially included, or fully included in prescription generation. Heterogeneous dose prescriptions were generated for three combinations of maps and atlas, and for conventional fractionation (CF), extreme hypo-fractionation (EH), moderate hypo-fractionation (MH), and whole Pelvic RT + SBRT Boost (WPRT + SBRT). The predicted efficacy of the heterogeneous prescriptions was compared with equivalent homogeneous dose prescriptions. RESULTS TCPs for heterogeneous dose prescriptions were generally higher than those for homogeneous dose prescriptions. TCP escalation by heterogeneous dose prescription was the largest for CF. When only using population-based atlas data, the generated heterogeneous dose prescriptions of 55 to 58 patients (out of 63) had a higher TCP than for the corresponding homogeneous dose prescriptions. The TCPs of the heterogeneous dose prescriptions generated with the population-based atlas and tumor probability maps did not differ significantly from those using patient-specific biological information. The generated heterogeneous dose prescriptions achieved significantly higher TCP than homogeneous dose prescriptions in the posterior section of the prostate. CONCLUSION Heterogeneous dose prescriptions generated via biologically-optimized dose redistribution can produce higher TCP than the homogeneous dose prescriptions for the majority of the patients in the studied cohort. For scenarios where patient-specific biological information was unavailable or partially available, the generated heterogeneous dose prescriptions can still achieve TCP improvement relative to homogeneous dose prescriptions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yutong Zhao
- School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Annette Haworth
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Hayley M Reynolds
- Auckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Scott G Williams
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Division of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Robert Finnegan
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Pejman Rowshanfarzad
- School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Martin A Ebert
- School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
- 5D Clinics, Claremont, Western Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gesztesi L, Kocsis ZS, Jorgo K, Fröhlich G, Polgár C, Ágoston P. Alterations of Sexual and Erectile Functions after Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer Based on Patient-Reported Questionnaires. Prostate Cancer 2024; 2024:5729185. [PMID: 38312318 PMCID: PMC10834089 DOI: 10.1155/2024/5729185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2023] [Revised: 11/16/2023] [Accepted: 01/08/2024] [Indexed: 02/06/2024] Open
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare the side effects of high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDRBT), with a particular focus on the effects on sexual functions and sexual well-being (PROMOBRA study, NCT02258087). Localized low-risk and low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients were treated with mono LDR (N = 123, 145 Gy dose) or mono HDR brachytherapy (N = 117, 19/21 Gy). Prior to the treatment and during follow-up (at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment, and then annually after two years), patients completed patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) questionnaires EORTC QLQ-PR-25, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and IIEF-5 (SHIM). We compared the patients in different group breakdowns (HDR vs. LDR, hormone naïve and hormone-receiving HDR vs. LDR, hormone naïve and hormone-receiving patients in general, and 19 Gy HDR vs. 21 Gy HDR). In the hormone-naive LDR group, erectile function, orgasm function, sexual desire, satisfaction with intercourse, and overall satisfaction functions significantly decreased compared to baseline throughout the whole follow-up period. However, there were significant decreases in function at a maximum of three time points after HDR therapy without hormone therapy. In hormone-receiving patients, the orgasm function was significantly better in the HDR group at multiple time points compared to the baseline, and sexual desire improved at four time points. According to our results, both LDRBT and HDRBT can be safely administered to patients with localized prostate cancer. In hormone-naive patients, the HDR group showed only recovering decreases in sexual functions, while the LDR group showed a lasting decline in multiple areas. Thus, HDR appears to be more advantageous to hormone-naive patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- László Gesztesi
- National Institute of Oncology, Centre of Radiotherapy, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Zsuzsa S. Kocsis
- National Institute of Oncology, Centre of Radiotherapy, Department of Radiobiology and Diagnostic Onco-Cytogenetics and National Tumorbiology Laboratory, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Kliton Jorgo
- National Institute of Oncology, Centre of Radiotherapy, Budapest, Hungary
- Semmelweis University, Department of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Georgina Fröhlich
- National Institute of Oncology, Centre of Radiotherapy, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Csaba Polgár
- National Institute of Oncology, Centre of Radiotherapy, Budapest, Hungary
- Semmelweis University, Department of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Péter Ágoston
- National Institute of Oncology, Centre of Radiotherapy, Budapest, Hungary
- Semmelweis University, Department of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kissel M, Créhange G, Graff P. Stereotactic Radiation Therapy versus Brachytherapy: Relative Strengths of Two Highly Efficient Options for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:2226. [PMID: 35565355 PMCID: PMC9105931 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14092226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Revised: 04/18/2022] [Accepted: 04/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a valid option for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In randomized trials, it was found not inferior to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). It also compares favorably to brachytherapy (BT) even if level 1 evidence is lacking. However, BT remains a strong competitor, especially for young patients, as series with 10-15 years of median follow-up have proven its efficacy over time. SBRT will thus have to confirm its effectiveness over the long-term as well. SBRT has the advantage over BT of less acute urinary toxicity and, more hypothetically, less sexual impairment. Data are limited regarding SBRT for high-risk disease while BT, as a boost after EBRT, has demonstrated superiority against EBRT alone in randomized trials. However, patients should be informed of significant urinary toxicity. SBRT is under investigation in strategies of treatment intensification such as combination of EBRT plus SBRT boost or focal dose escalation to the tumor site within the prostate. Our goal was to examine respective levels of evidence of SBRT and BT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicity and quality of life, and to discuss strategies of treatment intensification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Pierre Graff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, 26 Rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France; (M.K.); (G.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
The Journey of Radiotherapy Dose Escalation in High Risk Prostate Cancer; Conventional Dose Escalation to Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) Boost Treatments. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2021; 20:e25-e38. [PMID: 34740548 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2021.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2021] [Revised: 07/08/2021] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
High risk prostate cancer (HR-PrCa) is a subset of localized PrCa with significant potential for morbidity and mortality associated with disease recurrence and metastasis. Radiotherapy combined with Androgen Deprivation Therapy has been the standard of care for many years in HR-PrCa. In recent years, dose escalation, hypo-fractionation and high precision delivery with immobilization and image-guidance have substantially changed the face of modern PrCa radiotherapy, improving treatment convenience and outcomes. Ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy delivered with high precision in the form of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) combines delivery of high biologically equivalent dose radiotherapy with the convenience of a shorter treatment schedule, as well as the promise of similar efficacy and reduced toxicity compared to conventional radiotherapy. However, rigorous investigation of SBRT in HR-PrCa remains limited. Here, we review the changes in HR-PrCa radiotherapy through dose escalation, hypo- and ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy boost treatments, and the radiobiological basis of these treatments. We focus on completed and on-going trials in this disease utilizing SBRT as a sole radiation modality or as boost therapy following pelvic radiation.
Collapse
|
5
|
Graff P, Crehange G. [Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: Results, limits and prospects]. Cancer Radiother 2021; 25:684-691. [PMID: 34274223 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2021.06.028] [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: 06/17/2021] [Accepted: 06/21/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Still an emerging approach a few years ago, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has ranked as a valid option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Inherent properties of prostatic adenocarcinoma (low α/β) make it the perfect candidate. We propose a critical review of the literature trying to put results into perspective to identify their strengths, limits and axes of development. Technically sophisticated, the stereotactic irradiation of the prostate is well tolerated. Despite the fact that median follow-up of published data is still limited, ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy seems very efficient for the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancers. Data seem satisfying for high-risk cancers as well. New developments are being studied with a main interest in treatment intensification for unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk cancers. Advantage is taken of the sharp dose gradient of stereotactic radiotherapy to offer safe reirradiation to patients with local recurrence in a previously irradiated area.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Graff
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie, Institut Curie, 26, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France.
| | - G Crehange
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie, Institut Curie, 26, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Male sexual dysfunction and rehabilitation strategies in the settings of salvage prostate cancer treatment. Int J Impot Res 2021; 33:457-463. [PMID: 33854206 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-021-00437-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2020] [Revised: 03/30/2021] [Accepted: 03/31/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Male sexual dysfunction, a common sequela following primary prostate cancer (PC) treatment, is likely to be more significant following salvage PC therapy. In general, these impairments in sexual domains can be divided into three groups, namely (1) sexual desire, sexuality and masculinity; (2) erectile function (EF); and (3) ejaculation and orgasm. However, there is considerable overlap between these sexual domains and male sexual response cycle, and various factors such as cancer status, mental well-being, medical conditions and social circumstances can adversely impact on the male sexual function. While several preventive and treatment strategies for the preservation and recovery of sexual function are available, there is limited consensus guidelines exist regarding the optimal rehabilitation or treatment protocol for men with sexual dysfunction following salvage therapy. While penile rehabilitation may be effective to restore erectile function and the ability to have coital sex, there is lack of effective treatments in other domains of male sexual function, thereby underscoring the importance of psychological and sexual counselling in sexual rehabilitation. Indeed, a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach is necessary to better understand and optimally assist and manage the men and their respective partners for better sexual health and activity.
Collapse
|
7
|
Foerster R, Zwahlen DR, Buchali A, Tang H, Schroeder C, Windisch P, Vu E, Akbaba S, Bostel T, Sprave T, Zamboglou C, Zilli T, Stelmes JJ, Telkhade T, Murthy V. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13040759. [PMID: 33673077 PMCID: PMC7918664 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040759] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2020] [Revised: 02/04/2021] [Accepted: 02/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiotherapy (RT) is an established, potentially curative treatment option for all risk constellations of localized prostate cancer (PCA). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and dose-escalated RT can further improve outcome in high-risk (HR) PCA. In recent years, shorter RT schedules based on hypofractionated RT have shown equal outcome. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly conformal RT technique enabling ultra-hypofractionation which has been shown to be safe and efficient in patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCA. There is a paucity of data on the role of SBRT in HR PCA. In particular, the need for pelvic elective nodal irradiation (ENI) needs to be addressed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to analyze the available data on observed toxicities, ADT prescription practice, and oncological outcome to shed more light on the value of SBRT in HR PCA. METHODS We searched the PubMed and Embase electronic databases for the terms "prostate cancer" AND "stereotactic" AND "radiotherapy" in June 2020. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. RESULTS After a rigorous selection process, we identified 18 individual studies meeting all selection criteria for further analyses. Five additional studies were included because their content was judged as relevant. Three trials have reported on prostate SBRT including pelvic nodes; 2 with ENI and 1 with positive pelvic nodes only. The remaining studies investigated SBRT of the prostate only. Grade 2+ acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity was between 12% and 46.7% in the studies investigating pelvic nodes irradiation and ranged from 0% to 89% in the prostate only studies. Grade 2+ chronic GU toxicity was between 7% and 60% vs. 2% and 56.7%. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) grade 2+ toxicity was between 0% to 4% and 0% to 18% for studies with and without pelvic nodes irradiation, respectively. Chronic GI grade 2+ toxicity rates were between 4% and 50.1% vs. 0% and 40%. SBRT of prostate and positive pelvic nodes only showed similar toxicity rates as SBRT for the prostate only. Among the trials that reported on ADT use, the majority of HR PCA patients underwent ADT for at least 2 months; mostly neoadjuvant and concurrent. Biochemical control rates ranged from 82% to 100% after 2 years and 56% to 100% after 3 years. Only a few studies reported longer follow-up data. CONCLUSION At this point, SBRT with or without pelvic ENI cannot be considered the standard of care in HR PCA, due to missing level 1 evidence. Treatment may be offered to selected patients at specialized centers with access to high-precision RT. While concomitant ADT is the current standard of care, the necessary duration of ADT in combination with SBRT remains unclear. Ideally, all eligible patients should be enrolled in clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert Foerster
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
- Medical Faculty, University of Zurich (UZH), 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +41-52-266-31-40
| | - Daniel Rudolf Zwahlen
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
- Medical Faculty, University of Zurich (UZH), 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Andre Buchali
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruppiner Kliniken GmbH, Brandenburg Medical School (MHB), 16816 Neuruppin, Germany;
| | - Hongjian Tang
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
| | - Christina Schroeder
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruppiner Kliniken GmbH, Brandenburg Medical School (MHB), 16816 Neuruppin, Germany;
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), ETH Domain, 5232 Villingen, Switzerland
| | - Paul Windisch
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
| | - Erwin Vu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen (KSSG), 9007 St. Gallen, Switzerland;
| | - Sati Akbaba
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (S.A.); (T.B.)
| | - Tilman Bostel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (S.A.); (T.B.)
| | - Tanja Sprave
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany; (T.S.); (C.Z.)
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany; (T.S.); (C.Z.)
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Geneva (HUG), 1205 Geneva, Switzerland;
| | - Jean-Jacques Stelmes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncological Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), Cantonal Hospitals (EOC), 6500 Bellinzona, Switzerland;
| | - Tejshri Telkhade
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, India; (T.T.); (V.M.)
| | - Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, India; (T.T.); (V.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ricco A, Barbera G, Lanciano R, Feng J, Hanlon A, Lozano A, Good M, Arrigo S, Lamond J, Yang J. Favorable Biochemical Freedom From Recurrence With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Intermediate and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Single Institutional Experience With Long-Term Follow-Up. Front Oncol 2020; 10:1505. [PMID: 33102201 PMCID: PMC7545336 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01505] [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: 04/20/2020] [Accepted: 07/14/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose/Objective(s): The current study reports long-term overall survival (OS) and biochemical freedom from recurrence (BFFR) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer in a single community hospital setting with early adoption. Materials/Methods: Ninety-seven consecutive men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer treated with SBRT between 2007 and 2015 were retrospectively studied. Categorical variables for analysis included National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, race, Gleason grade group, T stage, use of androgen deprivation therapy, and planning target volume dose. Continuous variables for analysis included pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA), percent cores positive, age at diagnosis, PSA nadir, prostate volume, percent prostate that received 40 Gy, and minimum dose to 0.03 cc of prostate (Dmin). BFFR was assessed using the Phoenix nadir +2 definition. OS and BFFR were estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methodology with comparisons accomplished using log-rank statistics. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was accomplished with a backwards selection Cox proportional-hazards model with statistical significance taken at the p < 0.05 level. Results: Median FU is 78.4 months. Five- and ten-year OS KM estimates are 90.9 and 73.2%, respectively, with 19 deaths recorded. MVA reveals pretreatment PSA (p = 0.032), percent prostate 40 Gy (p = 0.003), and race (p = 0.031) were predictive of OS. Five- and nine-year BFFR KM estimates are 92.1 and 87.5%, respectively, with 10 biochemical failures recorded. MVA revealed PSA nadir (p < 0.001) was the only factor predictive of BFFR. Specifically, for every one-unit increase in PSA nadir, there was a 4.2-fold increased odds of biochemical failure (HR = 4.248). No significant differences in BFFR were found between favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk prostate cancer (p = 0.054) with 7-year KM estimates of 96.6, 81.0, and 85.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Favorable OS and BFFR can be expected after SBRT for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer with non-significant differences seen for BFFR between favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk groups. Our 5-year BFFR compares favorably with the HYPO-RT-PC trial of 84%. PSA nadir was predictive of biochemical failure. This study is ultimately limited by the small absolute number of high-risk patients included.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anthony Ricco
- Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Richmond, VA, United States
| | - Gabrielle Barbera
- College of Medicine, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Rachelle Lanciano
- Radiation Oncology, Crozer-Keystone Health System, Springfield, PA, United States
- Philadelphia CyberKnife Center, Havertown, PA, United States
| | - Jing Feng
- Philadelphia CyberKnife Center, Havertown, PA, United States
| | - Alexandra Hanlon
- Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, United States
| | - Alicia Lozano
- Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, United States
| | - Michael Good
- Philadelphia CyberKnife Center, Havertown, PA, United States
| | - Stephen Arrigo
- Radiation Oncology, Crozer-Keystone Health System, Springfield, PA, United States
- Philadelphia CyberKnife Center, Havertown, PA, United States
| | - John Lamond
- Radiation Oncology, Crozer-Keystone Health System, Springfield, PA, United States
- Philadelphia CyberKnife Center, Havertown, PA, United States
| | - Jun Yang
- Philadelphia CyberKnife Center, Havertown, PA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Royce TJ, Mavroidis P, Wang K, Falchook AD, Sheets NC, Fuller DB, Collins SP, El Naqa I, Song DY, Ding GX, Nahum AE, Jackson A, Grimm J, Yorke E, Chen RC. Tumor Control Probability Modeling and Systematic Review of the Literature of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 110:227-236. [PMID: 32900561 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2020] [Accepted: 08/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Dose escalation improves localized prostate cancer disease control, and moderately hypofractionated external beam radiation is noninferior to conventional fractionation. The evolving treatment approach of ultrahypofractionation with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allows possible further biological dose escalation (biologically equivalent dose [BED]) and shortened treatment time. METHODS AND MATERIALS The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Biological Effects of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy/SBRT included a subgroup to study the prostate tumor control probability (TCP) with SBRT. We performed a systematic review of the available literature and created a dose-response TCP model for the endpoint of freedom from biochemical relapse. Results were stratified by prostate cancer risk group. RESULTS Twenty-five published cohorts were identified for inclusion, with a total of 4821 patients (2235 with low-risk, 1894 with intermediate-risk, and 446 with high-risk disease, when reported) treated with a variety of dose/fractionation schemes, permitting dose-response modeling. Five studies had a median follow-up of more than 5 years. Dosing regimens ranged from 32 to 50 Gy in 4 to 5 fractions, with total BED (α/β = 1.5 Gy) between 183.1 and 383.3 Gy. At 5 years, we found that in patients with low-intermediate risk disease, an equivalent doses of 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) of 71 Gy (31.7 Gy in 5 fractions) achieved a TCP of 90% and an EQD2 of 90 Gy (36.1 Gy in 5 fractions) achieved a TCP of 95%. In patients with high-risk disease, an EQD2 of 97 Gy (37.6 Gy in 5 fractions) can achieve a TCP of 90% and an EQD2 of 102 Gy (38.7 Gy in 5 fractions) can achieve a TCP of 95%. CONCLUSIONS We found significant variation in the published literature on target delineation, margins used, dose/fractionation, and treatment schedule. Despite this variation, TCP was excellent. Most prescription doses range from 35 to 40 Gy, delivered in 4 to 5 fractions. The literature did not provide detailed dose-volume data, and our dosimetric analysis was constrained to prescription doses. There are many areas in need of continued research as SBRT continues to evolve as a treatment modality for prostate cancer, including the durability of local control with longer follow-up across risk groups, the efficacy and safety of SBRT as a boost to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and the impact of incorporating novel imaging techniques into treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trevor J Royce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
| | - Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Kyle Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | - Nathan C Sheets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Donald B Fuller
- Division of Genesis Healthcare Partners Inc, Genesis CyberKnife, San Diego, California
| | - Sean P Collins
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Issam El Naqa
- Machine Learning Department, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida
| | - Daniel Y Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - George X Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Alan E Nahum
- Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom and Henley-on-Thames, United Kingdom
| | - Andrew Jackson
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania; Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
| | - Ronald C Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
D'Agostino GR, Mancosu P, Di Brina L, Franzese C, Pasini L, Iftode C, Comito T, De Rose F, Guazzoni GF, Scorsetti M. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer With VMAT and Real-time Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phase II Study. Am J Clin Oncol 2020; 43:628-635. [PMID: 32889832 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Stereotactic body radiation treatment represents an intriguing therapeutic option for patients with early-stage prostate cancer. In this phase II study, stereotactic body radiation treatment was delivered by volumetric modulated arc therapy with flattening filter free beams and was gated using real-time electromagnetic transponder system to maximize precision of radiotherapy and, potentially, to reduce toxicities. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients affected by histologically proven prostate adenocarcinoma and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate class of risk were enrolled in this phase II study. Beacon transponders were positioned transrectally within the prostate parenchyma 7 to 10 days before simulation computed tomography scan. The radiotherapy schedule was 38 Gy in 4 fractions delivered every other day. Toxicity assessment was performed according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), v4.0. RESULTS Thirty-six patients were enrolled in this study. Median initial prostate-specific antigen was 7.0 ng/mL (range: 2.3 to 14.0 ng/mL). Median nadir-prostate-specific antigen after treatment was 0.2 ng/mL (range: 0.006 to 4.8 ng/mL). A genitourinary acute toxicity was observed in 21 patients (dysuria grade [G] 1: 41.7%, G2: 16.7%). Gastrointestinal acute toxicity was found in 9 patients (proctitis G1: 19.4%, G2: 5.6%). Late toxicity was mild (genitourinary toxicity G1: 30.6%; G2: 8.3%; gastrointestinal toxicity G1: 13.9%; G2: 19.4%). At a median follow-up time of 41 months, 3 biochemical recurrences were observed (2 local recurrences, 1 distant metastasis). Three-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was 89.8% (International Society of Urologic Pathology Grade Group 2: 100%, Grade Group 3: 77.1%, P=0.042). CONCLUSION Ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy, delivered with flattening filter free-volumetric modulated arc therapy and gated by electromagnetic transponders, is a valid option for intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Ciro Franzese
- Departments of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Rozzano-Milan, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | - Giorgio F Guazzoni
- Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Rozzano-Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Departments of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Rozzano-Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Post Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Urinary Function for Prostate Cancer; A Prospective Study. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER MANAGEMENT 2020. [DOI: 10.5812/ijcm.102170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Background: At present, there is a lack of evidence concerning urinary complications caused by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) used for the management of prostate cancer (PCa). Objectives: This study aimed at identifying the nature and severity of post-IMRT urinary symptoms in patients with PCa. Methods: This prospective study was performed with consecutive patients, who had clinically localized PCa (cT1c-cT2c) and had undergone IMRT treatment from 2016 to 2019. At 1, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, medical history, physical information, prostate-specific antigen values, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), medication use, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), acute and late toxicity, and Q max were collected. Results: A total of 127 patients with a mean age of 71.04 ± 7.1 years received IMRT and underwent 12 months of follow-up. The mean IPSSs at baseline versus those at 1, 6, and 12 months after IMRT was 14.5 ± 6.8 versus 13.3 ± 6.1, 12.3 ± 5.3, and 10.4 ± 4.2, respectively (P < 0.000). The mean prostate volume was 38.2 ± 12.1 cc. At the last follow-up, 31 patients (24.4%) took genitourinary (GU) medications. Conclusions: This study showed that the majority of GU side effects caused by primary IMRT for PCa treatment are transient. Treatment triggered an acute increase in obstructive urinary symptoms, which peaked during the first month after IMRT. In most patients, in the course of 6 months, symptoms returned to baseline.
Collapse
|
12
|
Loi M, Wortel RC, Francolini G, Incrocci L. Sexual Function in Patients Treated With Stereotactic Radiotherapy For Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Current Evidence. J Sex Med 2019; 16:1409-1420. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.05.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2019] [Revised: 05/20/2019] [Accepted: 05/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
|
13
|
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for high-risk prostate cancer: Where are we now? Pract Radiat Oncol 2018; 8:185-202. [DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2017.11.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2017] [Revised: 11/15/2017] [Accepted: 11/17/2017] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
14
|
Feng LR, Suy S, Collins SP, Lischalk JW, Yuan B, Saligan LN. Comparison of Late Urinary Symptoms Following SBRT and SBRT with IMRT Supplementation for Prostate Cancer. Curr Urol 2018; 11:218-224. [PMID: 29997466 DOI: 10.1159/000447222] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2017] [Accepted: 09/26/2017] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Prostate cancer survivors commonly experience late-onset lower urinary tract symptoms following radiotherapy. We aimed to compare lower urinary tract symptoms in patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to those treated with a combination of lower dose SBRT and supplemental intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SBRT + IMRT). Methods Subjects with localized prostate carcinoma scheduled to receive SBRT or a combination of SBRT and IMRT were enrolled and followed for up to 2 years after treatment completion. Participants treated with SBRT received 35-36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, while those treated with SBRT + IMRT received 19.5 Gy of SBRT in 3 fractions followed by 45-50.4 Gy of IMRT in 25-28 fractions. Urinary symptoms were measured using the American Urological Association (AUA) Symptom Score. Results Two hundred patients received SBRT (52% intermediate risk, 37.5% low risk according to D'Amico classification) and 145 patients received SBRT + IMRT (61.4% high risk, 35.2% intermediate risk). Both groups experienced a transient spike in urinary symptoms 1 month after treatment. More severe late urinary flare (increase in AUA scores ≥ 5 points from baseline to 1 year after treatment completion and an AUA score ≥ 15 at 1 year after treatment) was experienced by patients who received SBRT compared to those treated with SBRT + IMRT. Conclusion Participants who received SBRT and supplemental IMRT experienced less severe late urinary flare 1 year after treatment compared to those who received higher dose SBRT alone. This information can be used by clinicians to provide patients with anticipatory counseling to mitigate any psychological burden that comes with unanticipated late urinary toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Li Rebekah Feng
- National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Simeng Suy
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Sean P Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Jonathan W Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Berwin Yuan
- National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Leorey N Saligan
- National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Kishan AU, King CR. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol 2017; 27:268-278. [PMID: 28577834 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2017.02.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
With over a decade׳s worth of clinical experience to guide stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa), sufficient data exist for robust conclusions to be made regarding its efficacy and the toxicities associated with this treatment. We briefly review the fundamental radiobiological basis of SBRT for PCa and provide a comprehensive synthesis of the medical literature to date, focusing on clinical outcomes and toxicities. When possible, we draw comparisons to comparable data for conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Finally, a brief overview of technical considerations is presented. Although randomized clinical trials comparing SBRT with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy are underway, the current body of evidence supports the efficacy and safety of SBRT for PCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.
| | - Christopher R King
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Mahmood J, Shamah AA, Creed TM, Pavlovic R, Matsui H, Kimura M, Molitoris J, Shukla H, Jackson I, Vujaskovic Z. Radiation-induced erectile dysfunction: Recent advances and future directions. Adv Radiat Oncol 2016; 1:161-169. [PMID: 28740886 PMCID: PMC5514009 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2016.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2016] [Revised: 05/20/2016] [Accepted: 05/23/2016] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men in the United States. A large number of patients undergo radiation therapy (RT) as a standard care of treatment; however, RT causes erectile dysfunction (radiation-induced erectile dysfunction; RiED) because of late side effects after RT that significantly affects quality of life of prostate cancer patients. Within 5 years of RT, approximately 50% of patients could develop RiED. Based on the past and current research findings and number of publications from our group, the precise mechanism of RiED is under exploration in detail. Recent investigations have shown prostate RT induces significant morphologic arterial damage with aberrant alterations in internal pudendal arterial tone. Prostatic RT also reduces motor function in the cavernous nerve which may attribute to axonal degeneration may contributing to RiED. Furthermore, the advances in radiogenomics such as radiation induced somatic mutation identification, copy number variation and genome-wide association studies has significantly facilitated identification of biomarkers that could be used to monitoring radiation-induced late toxicity and damage to the nerves; thus, genomic- and proteomic-based biomarkers could greatly improve treatment and minimize arterial tissue and nerve damage. Further, advanced technologies such as proton beam therapy that precisely target tumor and significantly reduce off-target damage to vital organs and healthy tissues. In this review, we summarize recent advances in RiED research and novel treatment modalities for RiED. We also discuss the possible molecular mechanism involved in the development of RiED in prostate cancer patients. Further, we discuss various readily available methods as well as novel strategies such as stem cell therapies, shockwave therapy, nerve grafting with tissue engineering, and nutritional supplementations might be used to mitigate or cure sexual dysfunction following radiation treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Javed Mahmood
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Aksinija A Shamah
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - T Michael Creed
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Radmila Pavlovic
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Hotaka Matsui
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Masaki Kimura
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Teikyo University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Jason Molitoris
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Hem Shukla
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Isabel Jackson
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Zeljko Vujaskovic
- Division of Translational Radiation Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Repka MC, Guleria S, Cyr RA, Yung TM, Koneru H, Chen LN, Lei S, Collins BT, Krishnan P, Suy S, Dritschilo A, Lynch J, Collins SP. Acute Urinary Morbidity Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer with Prophylactic Alpha-Adrenergic Antagonist and Urethral Dose Reduction. Front Oncol 2016; 6:122. [PMID: 27242962 PMCID: PMC4870496 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2016.00122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2016] [Accepted: 05/02/2016] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivers high doses of radiation to the prostate while minimizing radiation to the adjacent critical organs. Large fraction sizes may increase urinary morbidity due to unavoidable treatment of the prostatic urethra. This study reports rates of acute urinary morbidity following SBRT for localized prostate cancer with prophylactic alpha-adrenergic antagonist utilization and urethral dose reduction (UDR). METHODS From April 2013 to September 2014, 102 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with robotic SBRT to a total dose of 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions. UDR was employed to limit the maximum point dose of the prostatic urethra to 40 Gy. Prophylactic alpha-adrenergic antagonists were initiated 5 days prior to SBRT and continued until resolution of urinary symptoms. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed before and after treatment using the American Urological Association Symptom Score (AUA) and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26). Clinical significance was assessed using a minimally important difference (MID) of one half SD change from baseline. RESULTS One hundred two patients underwent definitive prostate SBRT with UDR and were followed for 3 months. No patient experienced acute urinary retention requiring catheterization. A mean baseline AUA symptom score of 9.06 significantly increased to 11.83 1-week post-SBRT (p = 0.0024) and 11.84 1-month post-SBRT (p = 0.0023) but returned to baseline by 3 months. A mean baseline EPIC-26 irritative/obstructive score of 87.7 decreased to 74.1 1-week post-SBRT (p < 0.0001) and 77.8 1-month post-SBRT (p < 0.0001) but returned to baseline at 3 months. EPIC-26 irritative/obstructive score changes were clinically significant, exceeding the MID of 6.0. At baseline, 8.9% of men described their urinary function as a moderate to big problem, and that proportion increased to 37.6% 1 week following completion of SBRT before returning to baseline by 3 months. CONCLUSION Stereotactic body radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer with utilization of prophylactic alpha-adrenergic antagonist and UDR was well tolerated as determined by acute urinary function and bother, and symptoms were comparable to those observed following conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Longer follow-up is required to assess long-term toxicity and efficacy following SBRT with UDR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael C. Repka
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Shan Guleria
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Robyn A. Cyr
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Thomas M. Yung
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Harsha Koneru
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Leonard N. Chen
- Department of Pathology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Siyuan Lei
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Brian T. Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Pranay Krishnan
- Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Simeng Suy
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Anatoly Dritschilo
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - John Lynch
- Department of Urology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Sean P. Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Voznesensky M, Annam K, Kreder KJ. Understanding and Managing Erectile Dysfunction in Patients Treated for Cancer. J Oncol Pract 2016; 12:297-304. [PMID: 27072383 PMCID: PMC5015452 DOI: 10.1200/jop.2016.010678] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Cancer can cause sexual adverse effects by direct and indirect pathways. It can involve sexual organs, indirectly affect body image, or cause fatigue or depression with subsequent effects on libido. Erectile dysfunction (ED), the inability to obtain or maintain an erection firm enough for sexual intercourse, can also result from adverse effects of cancer treatment, such as fatigue, pain, or anxiety about therapy. In addition, depressed feelings about having cancer can affect sexuality, causing a range of signs and symptoms that can lead to ED. Chemotherapy, hormone therapy, surgery, and radiation can all cause sexual adverse effects. Additional factors that play a role include patient age and degree of ED before starting cancer treatment. In this article, we discuss how chemotherapy, hormone therapy, surgery, and radiation affect erectile function as well as possible treatment options for ED.
Collapse
|