Rectum-spacer related acute toxicity - endoscopy results of 403 prostate cancer patients after implantation of gel or balloon spacers

Overview of Radiation Therapy in the Management of Localized and Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal is to describe the evolution of radiation therapy (RT) utilization in the management of localized and metastatic prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Long term data for a variety of hypofractionated definitive RT dose-fractionation schemes has matured, allowing patients and providers many standard-of-care options to choose from. Post-prostatectomy, adjuvant RT has largely been replaced by an early salvage approach. Multiparametric MRI and PSMA PET have enabled increasingly targeted RT delivery to the prostate and oligometastatic tumors. Areas of active investigation include determining the value of proton beam therapy and perirectal spacers, and optimally incorporate genomic tumor profiling and next generation hormonal therapies with RT in the curative setting. The use of radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer is rapidly evolving. In the coming years, there will be continued improvements in a variety of areas to enhance the value of RT in multidisciplinary prostate cancer management.

Use of rectal balloon spacer in patients with localized prostate cancer receiving external beam radiotherapy

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of the balloon spacer when used to reduce the radiation dose delivered to the rectum in prostate cancer patients undergoing external beam radiotherapy.

Method

A single center retrospective analysis including 75 PC patients with localized T1-T3a disease who received balloon spacer followed by EBRT. Pre- and post-implantation computed tomography (CT) scans were utilized for treatment planning for standard EBRT (78-81 Gy in 1.8-2 Gy fractions). Rectal dosimetry was assessed using DVHs, and toxicities were graded with CTCAE v.4.

Results

A median (IQR) prostate-rectum separation resulted in 1.6 cm (1.4-2.0) post balloon spacer implantation. Overall, 90.6 % (68/75) of patients had a clinically significant 25 % relative reduction in the rectal with a median relative reduction of 91.8 % (71.2-98.6 %) at rV70. Three (4.0 %) patients reported mild procedural adverse events, anal discomfort and dysuria. Within 90 days post-implantation, five patients (6.67 %) and 1 patient (1.33 %) reported grade 1 and grade 2 rectal toxicities (anal pain, constipation, diarrhea and hemorrhoids). Genitourinary (GU) grade 1 toxicity was reported in 37 patients (49.33 %), with only one patient (1.33 %) experiencing grade 2 GU toxicity. No grade ≥ 3 toxicity was reported.

Conclusion

Balloon spacer implantation effectively increased prostate-rectum separation and associated with dosimetric gains EBRT for PC stage T1-T3a. Further controlled studies are required to ascertain whether this spacer allows for radiotherapy dose escalation and minimizes gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity.

Noninvasive inter- and intrafractional motion control in ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy of prostate cancer using RayPilot HypoCath™-a substitute for gold fiducial-based IGRT?

PURPOSE

In ultrahypofractionated radiation concepts, managing of intrafractional motion is mandatory because tighter margins are used and random errors resulting from prostate movement are not averaged out over a large number of fractions. Noninvasive live monitoring of prostate movement is a desirable asset for LINAC-based prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

METHODS

We prospectively analyzed a novel live tracking device (RayPilot HypoCath™; Micropos Medical AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) where a transmitter is noninvasively positioned in the prostatic urethra using a Foley catheter in 12 patients undergoing ultrahypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of the prostate. Gold fiducials (Innovative Technology Völp, Innsbruck, Austria) were implanted to allow comparison of accuracy and positional stability of the HypoCath system and its ability to be used as a standalone IGRT method. Spatial stability of the transponder was assessed by analyzing transmitter movement in relation to gold markers (GM) in superimposed kV image pairs. Inter- and intrafractional prostate movement and the impact of its correction were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 64 fractions were analyzed. The average resulting deviation vector compared to the GM-based position was 1.2 mm and 0.7 mm for inter- and intrafractional motion, respectively. The mean intrafractional displacement vector of the prostate was 1.9 mm. Table readjustment due to exceeding the threshold of 3 mm was required in 18.8% of fractions. Repositioning reduced the time spent outside the 3‑mm margin from 7.9% to 3.8% of beam-on time. However, for individual patients, the time spent outside the 3‑mm margin was reduced from to 49% to 19%.

CONCLUSION

the HypoCath system allows highly accurate and robust intrafractional motion monitoring. In conjunction with cone beam CT (CBCT) for initial patient setup, it could be used as a standalone image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) system.

Validation of a Quality Metric Score to Assess the Placement of Hydrogel Rectal Spacer in Patients Treated With Prostate Stereotactic Radiation Therapy

Purpose

To evaluate the quality of the interspace between the prostate and rectum and assess the effect on the dose to the rectum by measuring the spacer quality score (SQS) before and after implanting a hydrogel rectal spacer.

Methods and Materials

Thirty patients with prostate cancer were treated with stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy as part of the SPORT clinical trial. Each patient had a 10 mL polyethylene glycol hydrogel spacer inserted transperineally. Computed tomography scans were acquired before and after spacer insertion, 10MV flattening filter free (FFF) stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy (SABR) treatment plans were generated using each image set. To calculate the SQS, the prostate-rectal interspace (PRI) was measured in the anterior-posterior orientation, parallel to the anatomic midline at the prostate base, apex, and midgland on the prespacer and postspacer computed tomography. Measurements were taken in 3 transverse positions between the prostate and the rectum, and PRI scores of 0, 1, and 2 were assigned if the interspace between prostate and rectum was <0.3, 0.3 to 0.9, or ≥1 cm, respectively. The overall SQS was the lowest of the PRI scores. Differences between prespacer and postspacer PRIs and SQS were investigated by performing Fisher's exact test and differences between doses to the rectum were investigated by performing the paired samples Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Student t test.

Results

Statistically significant differences between prespacer versus postspacer patients were found when grouping patients according to their overall SQS. The PRI summary score did not reach statistical significance between prespacer and postspacer at the base but was significantly higher for the prostate midline and apex. Statistically significant differences in some rectum dose-volume metrics were found when grouping patients according to their PRIs and SQS.

Conclusions

SQS before and after the spacer insertion was evaluated and was found to be correlated with pre- and postspacer rectal dosimetry. Sources of improvement of the SQS scoring metric and limitations are discussed.

Risk Modeling for Individualization of the FLAME Focal Boost Approach in External Beam Radiation Therapy for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

The FLAME trial (NCT01168479) showed that isotoxic focal boosting to the intraprostatic lesion(s) in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer improves 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). Although the near-minimum dose to the gross tumor volume (D98%) was associated with improved outcomes, a closer look suggested that this might not be the same for all patients. Therefore, we investigated whether risk factors that are associated with a benefit of focal boosting can be identified.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We described the distribution of clinical characteristics and the number of high-risk factors with respect to the D98% in 526 FLAME trial patients. We used penalized Cox regression to develop a prediction model. To investigate a potential benefit in patient subgroups, we compared the model-based predictions of 5-year DFS assuming standard whole-gland radiation therapy of 77 Gy to the predictions assuming an additional focal boost with D98% of 95 Gy.

RESULTS

Patients with high-risk factors were well represented in the group of 120 patients that received D98% > 85 Gy and showed fewer recurrences compared with the group that received 77 Gy. Applying the model simulating a standard dose of 77 Gy, we predicted a high DFS for grade group (GG) 1 patients, whereas patients with high-risk characteristics appeared to show a low DFS. All risk groups showed a high level of DFS when simulating D98% of 95 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that GG 1 patients already show a low level of failure at a standard dose of 77 Gy, limiting the additional benefit of focal boosting. In contrast, patients with high-risk characteristics, especially GG 4 or 5, show a low 5-year DFS, while focal boosting might improve this substantially. This suggests that reaching a high focal boost dose may be particularly beneficial for these patients.

Assessment of Bioprotect's Biodegradable Balloon System as a Rectal Spacer in Radiotherapy: An Animal Study on Tissue Response and Biocompatibility

Prostate cancer is a significant health concern for men, emphasizing the need for effective treatment strategies. Dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy shows promise in improving outcomes but presents challenges due to radiation effects on nearby structures, such as the rectum. Innovative techniques, including rectal spacers, have emerged to mitigate these effects. This study comprehensively assessed tissue responses following the implantation of the Bioprotect biodegradable fillable balloon as a rectal spacer in a rat model. Evaluation occurred at multiple time points (4, 26, and 52 weeks) post-implantation. Results revealed localized tissue responses consistent with the expected reaction to biodegradable materials, characterized by mild to moderate fibrotic reactions and encapsulation, underscoring the safety and biocompatibility of the balloon. Importantly, no other adverse events occurred, and the animals remained healthy throughout the study. These findings support its potential clinical utility in radiotherapy treatments to enhance patient outcomes and minimize long-term implant-related complications, serving as a benchmark for future similar studies and offering valuable insights for researchers in the field. In conclusion, the findings from this study highlight the safety, biocompatibility, and potential clinical applicability of the Bioprotect biodegradable fillable balloon as a promising rectal spacer in mitigating radiation-induced complications during prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Comprehensive review of the use of hydrogel spacers prior to radiation therapy for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive narrative review of the published data on the impact of hydrogel spacers on rectal dosimetry and toxicity and to outline the practicalities of inserting hydrogel spacers.

RESULTS

A growing body of evidence suggests that the administration of hydrogel spacers is safe and is associated with limited peri-operative morbidity. The impact on rectal dosimetry has been clearly established and use of hydrogel spacers is associated with reduced rectal morbidity. These results have been corroborated by several Phase II and III clinical trials and subsequent meta-analysis. There are several areas for future research, including the role of hydrogel spacers in prostate stereotactic beam radiotherapy and post-radiotherapy local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrogel spacers provide a low-morbidity method to potential reduce rectal toxicity after radiation therapy in men with prostate cancer. Data outlining sexual function and oncological outcomes are limited to date. Future studies, currently being conducted, may provide further clarification of the role of hydrogel spacers in prostate cancer management.

Polyethylene glycol-based gels for treatment of prostate cancer: pictorial review of normal placement and complications

Rectal spacers are commonly used in the radiotherapy for prostate cancers, serving as a means to protect the rectum and surrounding structures from radiation toxicity. Polyethylene Glycol-Based Gels (SpaceOAR ™ and Space-OAR Vue™, Boston Scientific) are the most commonly used rectal spacers. Given their increasingly widespread use and the relative paucity of radiology literature on this topic, it is imperative for the radiologist to recognize both the normal and abnormal placement of these polyethylene glycol-based rectal spacers, particularly as the latter may be associated with suboptimal therapy and/or complications.

Case Report: Reversal of Hyaluronic Acid Rectal Wall Infiltration with Hyaluronidase

Peri-rectal spacers provide protection to the rectum for patients receiving radiation therapy treating prostate cancers. Commonly used hydrogel spacers hold the disadvantage that they cannot be readily reversed should inadvertent injection outside of the target area occurs, potentially leading to ischemia of the rectal mucosa leading to severe pain and ulceration, which can then lead to superinfection and pelvic abscess formation, and subsequently recto-prostatic fistulas. This could require major surgical intervention. New hyaluronic acid spacers are readily reversible with hyaluronidase and provide a valuable means to correct any misinjected spacer. We present a patient with prostate cancer who was planned for radiation therapy and required a rectal spacer. The hyaluronic acid rectal spacer was injected in part into the rectal wall. The patient was asymptomatic, and a sigmoidoscopy confirms healthy bowel mucosa only. The misinjected hyaluronic acid was successfully treated with targeted injection of hyaluronidase into only the rectal wall portion. Serial follow-up imaging demonstrated rapid dissolution of the misinjected hyaluronic acid with the well-positioned hyaluronic acid remaining. The patient did not experience any side effects of the hyaluronidase.

Radiation therapy for prostate cancer: What's the best in 2021

Radiotherapy is highly involved in the management of prostate cancer. Its features and potential applications experienced a radical evolution over last decades, as they are associated to the continuous evolution of available technology and current oncological innovations. Some application of radiotherapy like brachytherapy have been recently enriched by innovative features and multidisciplinary dedications. In this report we aim to put some questions regarding the following issues regarding multiple aspects of modern application of radiation oncology: the current application of radiation oncology; the modern role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for both the management of primary lesions and for lymph-nodal recurrence; the management of the oligometastatic presentations; the role of brachytherapy; the aid played by the application of the organ at risk spacer (spacer OAR), fiducial markers, electromagnetic tracking systems and on-line Magnetic Resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT), and the role of the new opportunity represented by radiomic analysis.

Evaluation of hyaluronic acid gel dissolution with hyaluronidase in an in-vitro prostate cancer model

•

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is an implantable rectum spacer used to decrease rectal radiation dose in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

•

Hyaluronidase (HAS) is an enzyme that degrades HA, when wrongly positioned.

•

A ratio of HA:HAS of 1:2 has already a decrease of half of volume on the 2nd day.

Aim

To determine a dose response relationship of disintegration of a hyaluronic acid (HA) and hyaluronidase (HAS) used in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Materials and methods

Five in-vitro models are applicated with 3 ml (ml) HA. For dissolution varying doses of HAS were used: 6 ml, 3 ml, 1.5 ml, and 0 ml. One ml contains 150 International Units (IU). Each HAS was added with saline till the complementary amount of 6 ml. One phantom was solely implanted with a HA 3 ml acting as a control. Length, width and height were measured on different time points: 1st day 4 times, 2nd day 3 times, third day 2 times, and then once daily during one week, with a final measurement 2 weeks after implantation. The experiments were performed in duplicate to exclude variations and confirm the results.

Results

The fastest dissolution was observed with the highest concentration of HAS, already observed at the first time point 2 h after implantation, with volume decrease of 50% on the second day, and less than 1 ml residue (33%) on day 4. The 2 other concentrations of HAS also showed a volume decrease, with less than 2 ml (66%) on day 4. All the applied quantities of HAS are observed with a residue of less than 1 ml after 7 days. After 14 days the control phantom and the saline filled one remains on steady state volume (3 ml).

Conclusions

A dose response was observed by HAS injection: highest volumes of HAS dissolute most swiftly. Using a ratio of HA:HAS of 1:2 results in a decrease to half of initial volume within 24 h. This is of special interest when used in clinical practice following erroneous positioning, and dissolution is urgently needed.

Rectal Perforation by a Balloon Spacer: A Rare Cause of Rectal Perforation Addressed Endoscopically

Prostate cancer is the second most frequent cancer in men worldwide. Dose escalation is currently 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 proximity. The injection of biodegradable spacers between the prostate and the rectum may optimize radiotherapy treatment delivery for patients with localized disease. Nevertheless, although the overall complication rate of spacers is marginal, the benefits of spacer technologies need to be evaluated against the complication risks such as rectum perforation/necrosis. We report a case of a 59-year-old man with a diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma for whom hormonal treatment followed by intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was proposed. A biodegradable and expandable balloon (BioProtect®) was injected into the perirectal space without detectable immediate complications. One month later, the patient presented with a 3-day persistent rectal bleeding. The investigation confirmed a rectal perforation by the balloon spacer system.

Use of a Biodegradable, Contrast-Filled Rectal Spacer Balloon in Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients: Dosimetric Gains in the BioPro-RCMI-1505 Study

Background/purpose

Dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (RT) is effective in the control of prostate cancer but is associated with a greater incidence of rectal adverse events. We assessed the dosimetric gain and safety profile associated with implantation of a new biodegradable rectal spacer balloon.

Materials/methods

Patients scheduled for image-guided, intensity-modulated RT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer were prospectively included in the French multicenter BioPro-RCMI-1505 study (NCT02478112). We evaluated the dosimetric gain, implantation feasibility, adverse events (AEs), and prostate-cancer-specific quality of life associated with use of the balloon spacer.

Results

After a scheduled review of the initial recruitment target of 50 patients by the study's independent data monitoring committee (IDMC), a total of 24 patients (including 22 with dosimetry data) were included by a single center between November 2016 and May 2018. The interventional radiologist who implanted the balloons considered that 86% of the procedures were easy. 20 of the 24 patients (83.3%) received IMRT and 4 (16.7%) received volumetric modulated arc therapy (78-80 Gy delivered in 39 fractions). The dosimetric gains associated with spacer implantation were highly significant (p<0.001) for most variables. For the rectum, the median (range) relative gain ranged from 15.4% (-9.2-47.5) for D20cc to 91.4% (36.8-100.0) for V70 Gy (%). 15 patients (62%) experienced an acute grade 1 AE, 8 (33%) experienced a late grade 1 AE, 1 (4.2%) experienced an acute grade 2 AE, and 3 experienced a late grade 2 AE. No grade 3 AEs were reported. Quality of life was good at baseline (except for sexual activity) and did not markedly worsen during RT and up to 24 months afterwards.

Conclusion

The use of a biodegradable rectal spacer balloon is safe, effective and associated with dosimetric gains in modern RT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing of CT-Guided vs MR-Guided Prostate SBRT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a standard-of-care option for localized prostate cancer. While prostate SBRT has traditionally been delivered using computed-tomography-guided radiation therapy (CTgRT), MR-imaging-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) is now available. MRgRT offers real-time soft-tissue visualization and ease of adaptive planning, obviating the need for fiducial markers, and potentially allowing for smaller planning target volume (PTV) margins. Although prior studies have focused on evaluating the cost-effectiveness of MRgRT vs CTgRT from a payor perspective, the difference in provider costs to deliver such treatments remains unknown. This study thus used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to determine the difference in provider resources consumed by delivering prostate SBRT via MRgRT vs CTgRT.

METHODS

Data was collected from a single academic institution where prostate SBRT is routinely performed using both CTgRT and MRgRT. Five-fraction SBRT (40 Gy total dose) was assumed to be delivered through volumetric-modulated arc therapy for CTgRT patients, and through step-and-shoot, fixed-gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy for MRgRT patients. Process maps were constructed for each portion of the radiation delivery process via interviews/surveys with departmental personnel and by measuring CTgRT and MRgRT treatment times. Prior to simulation, only CTgRT patients underwent placement of three gold fiducial markers. Personnel capacity cost rates were calculated by dividing total personnel costs by the annual minutes worked by a given personnel. Equipment costs included both an annualized purchase price and annual maintenance costs. Ultimately, the total costs of care encompassing personnel, space/equipment, and materials were aggregated across the entire chain of care for both CTgRT and MRgRT patients in a base case.

RESULTS

Direct costs associated with delivering a 5-fraction course of prostate SBRT were $1,497 higher with MRgRT than with CTgRT - comprised of personnel costs ($210 higher with MRgRT), space/equipment ($1,542 higher with MRgRT), and materials ($255 higher with CTgRT). Only CTgRT patients underwent fiducial placement, which accounted for $591. MRgRT patients were assumed to undergo both CT simulation (for electron density calculation) and MRI simulation, with the former accounting for $168. Mean time spent by patients in the treatment vault per fraction was 20 minutes (range 15-26 minutes) for CTgRT, and 31 minutes (range 30-34 minutes) for MRgRT. Patient time spent during fiducial placement (CTgRT only) was 60 minutes. Modifying the number of fractions treated would result in the cost difference of $1,497 (5 fractions) changing to $441 (1 fraction) or to $2,025 (7 fractions).

CONCLUSION

This study provides an approximate comparison of the direct resources required for a radiation oncology provider to deliver prostate SBRT with CTgRT vs MRgRT. We await findings from the currently accruing phase III MIRAGE trial, which is comparing these modalities, and will subsequently measure acute and late genitourinary/gastrointestinal (GU/GI) toxicities, temporal change in quality-of-life outcomes, and 5-year biochemical, recurrence-free survival. Results from studies comparing the efficacy and safety of MRgRT vs CTgRT will ultimately allow us to put this cost difference into context.

Rectal spacers in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radiotherapy: A survey of UK uro-oncologists

AIM

To understand the awareness and use of rectal spacers for prostate cancer patients undergoing radical radiotherapy in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

An expert-devised online questionnaire was completed by members of the British Uro-oncology Group (BUG).

RESULTS

Sixty-three specialists completed the survey (50% of BUG members at that point in time). Only 37% had used rectal spacers, mostly for private patients or those with pre-existing bowel conditions. However, many (68%) would like to use these devices in future. More than 70% of the uro-oncologists felt that bowel toxicity was underreported, but 60% believed that the use of radiotherapy without bowel toxicity was achievable with the use of rectal spacers.

CONCLUSIONS

The current use of rectal spacers by UK uro-oncologists for patients with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy is low and largely restricted by resourcing issues.

Hydrogel Spacer Rectal Wall Infiltration Associated With Severe Rectal Injury and Related Complications After Dose Intensified Prostate Cancer Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy

The risk of rectal toxicity during and after prostate cancer radiation therapy is common to all treatment regimens. Hydrogel rectal spacers are increasingly being used to mitigate this risk and to facilitate dose-escalation, but also may infiltrate the rectal wall, with unclear clinical implication. We present a case of significant infiltration associated with severe late rectal injury (grade 4) and further grade 3 to 4 sequelae (recto-urethral fistula and associated osteomyelitis requiring exenteration) after high-dose stereotactic body radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. The injury's temporal pattern associated with the expected timing of gel dissolution and displacement of infiltrated rectal layers potentially toward high dose regions together suggest a contributing role of the infiltration to the injury. In light of the rapid increase of hydrogel rectal spacer utilization, we review the case's evolution, concerning imaging findings, and associated literature and make suggestions regarding treatment planning and endoscopic assessment in the setting of infiltration or expected injury.

Smart nanotheranostic hydrogels for on-demand cancer management

Theranostics is a revolution in cancer therapy. Hydrogels have many implications as a drug delivery vehicle and theranostics hydrogels could be a model nanotherapeutic for simultaneous cancer diagnosis and treatment.

An abdominal spacer that does not require surgical removal and allows drainage of abdominal fluids in patients undergoing carbon ion radiotherapy

Abdominal spacers are useful for maintaining the distance between the target tumors and surrounding tissues, such as the gastrointestinal tract, in patients treated with carbon ion radiotherapy. Surgical intervention to remove the spacers is sometimes necessary because of abdominal infections triggered by long-term spacer placement or intestinal perforation. Therefore, spacers that do not require surgical removal and provide effective drainage against abdominal infections are urgently needed. This study aimed to develop a spacer that could be removed non-surgically and one that provides the therapeutic effect of drainage in patients who receive carbon ion radiotherapy for abdominal tumors. A novel fan-shaped spacer was constructed from a film drain that was folded along the trigger line. Simple withdrawal of the trigger line caused the film drain to fold and the holding lines to become free. We performed laparoscopy-assisted insertion with pneumoperitoneum and blind removal of the spacer fourteen times using a porcine model. Saline in the abdominal cavity was effectively aspirated using the spacer. Our novel fan-shaped spacer could be removed safely without surgery and was able to drain fluid effectively from the abdominal cavity.

Proposed Hydrogel-Implant Quality Score and a Matched-Pair Study for Prostate Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

SpaceOAR hydrogel has been Food and Drug Administration approved to reduce rectal toxicity in prostate radiation therapy. Training and certification for this procedure is performed by the manufacturer, without independent quality measures. We propose a Hydrogel-Implant Quality Score (HIQS) as a surrogate to quantify hydrogel placement accuracy, to assist clinicians in tracking their implant proficiency, and to support quality improvement. A matched-pair study was designed to investigate the benefit of SpaceOAR in rectal dose reduction for low-dose-rate brachytherapy and to validate the principle of the proposed HIQS.

METHODS

Eighty-one prostate patients were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient had SpaceOAR implantation under manufacturer supervision. Postprocedure computed tomography and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging were acquired for radiation planning. A HIQS system was proposed to evaluate the hydrogel placement quality. Hydrogel implantation was performed immediately after LDR seed placement. For each LDR patient, a non-SpaceOAR patient was matched based upon intraoperative rectal dose and prostate coverage. Intraoperative and postoperative rectal dose reduction was compared between SpaceOAR and non-SpaceOAR groups.

RESULTS

The average HIQS was 77 ± 10.8 (range, 49-97). Rectal anatomic distortions were seen in 17 cases. Significant rectal dose reductions between intraoperative and postoperative plans were found for SpaceOAR patients compared with non-SpaceOAR patients (25.1 Gy vs -5.0 Gy for ΔD_2cc and 65.7 Gy vs 13.0 for ΔD_0.1cc). Additional rectal dose reductions (8.4 Gy for ΔD_2cc and 12.7 Gy for ΔD_0.1cc) were found for patients without rectal distortion when SpaceOAR was used.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed HIQS system measured the hydrogel placement quality and provided insights into clinician learning and DVH outcome. SpaceOAR was shown to be effective in reducing rectal dose for LDR patients.

Application of rectal retractor for postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy of prostate cancer: A case report and literature review

Using a rectal retractor (RR) during salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is a promising approach for reducing dose to the rectum. The patient well tolerated the daily RR insertion. This area of research encourages researchers for a comprehensive evaluation of the role of the RR in postprostatectomy radiotherapy.

Risk-adapted moderate hypofractionation of prostate cancer : A prospective analysis of acute toxicity, QOL and outcome in 221 patients

Purpose

Prostate cancer (PCA) is highly heterogeneous in terms of its oncologic outcome. We therefore aimed to tailor radiation treatment to the risk status by using three different hypofractionated radiation regimen differing in applied dose, use of rectum spacer, inclusion of pelvic lymph nodes (pLN) and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Here we report on acute toxicity, quality of life (QOL) and oncologic outcome at a median follow-up of 12 months.

Methods

A total of 221 consecutive PCA patients received hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Low-risk (LR) patients were planned to receive 60 Gy in 20 fractions (EQD2^α/β1.5 = 77.1 Gy), intermediate-risk (IR) patients 63 Gy in 21 fractions (EQD2^α/β1.5 = 81 Gy), and high-risk (HR) patients 67.5 Gy in 25 fractions (EQD2^α/β1.5 = 81 Gy) to the prostate and 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the pLN. Acute rectal toxicity was assessed by endoscopy. In addition, toxicity was scored using CTC-AE 4.0 and IPSS score, while QOL was assessed using QLQ-PR25 questionnaires.

Results

Acute CTC reactions were slightly higher in the HR regimen but reverted to baseline at 3 months. GI G2 toxicity was 4%, 0% and 12% for the LR, IR and HR regimen. Compared to IR patients, the increase in toxicity in HR patients was statistically significant (p = 0.002) and mainly caused by a higher incidence of diarrhea presumably due to pelvic EBRT. QOL scores of all domains were worse for the HR regimen (not significant).

Conclusion

Risk-adapted moderate hypofractionation is associated with low GI/GU toxicity. Given the higher rate of pelvic metastases in HR patients, slightly higher transient acute reactions should be outweighed by possible oncological benefits.