Evaluation of the effect of prostate volume change on tumor control probability in LDR brachytherapy

In vitro analysis of the effect of Flightless I on murine tenocyte cellular functions

BACKGROUND

Healing of tendons after injury involves the proliferation of tenocytes and the production of extracellular matrix; however, their capacity to heal is limited by poor cell density and limited growth factor activity. Flightless I (Flii) has previously been identified as an important regulator of cellular proliferation and migration, and the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of differential Flii gene expression on tenocyte function in vitro.

METHODS

The role of Flii on tenocyte proliferation, migration, and contraction was assessed using established assays. Tenocytes from Flii^+/-, wild-type, and Flii overexpressing mice were obtained and the effect of differential Flii expression on migration, proliferation, contraction, and collagen synthesis determined in vitro. Statistical differences were determined using unpaired Student's t test and statistical outliers were identified using the Grubbs' test.

RESULTS

Flii overexpressing tenocytes showed significantly improved migration and proliferation as well as increased collagen I secretion. Explanted tendons from Flii overexpressing mice also showed significantly elevated tenocyte outgrowth compared to Flii^+/- mice. In contrast to its role in dermal wound repair, Flii positively affects cellular processes in tendons.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that Flii could be a novel target for modulating tenocyte activity and improving tendon repair. This could have significant clinical implications as novel therapeutic targets for improved healing of tendon injuries are urgently needed.

Maximum RBE change in 192Ir, 125I, and 169Yb brachytherapy and the corresponding effect on treatment planning

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine RBE variation as a function of distance from the radioactive source, and the potential impact of this variation on a realistic prostate brachytherapy treatment plan.

METHODS

Three brachytherapy sources (¹²⁵I, ¹⁹²Ir, and ¹⁶⁹Yb) were modelled in Geant4 Monte Carlo code, and the resulting electron energy spectrum in water in 3D space around these sources was scored (voxel size of 2 mm³). With this energy spectrum, microdosimetric techniques were used to calculate the maximum RBE, RBE_M, as a function of distance from the source. RBE_M of ¹²⁵I relative to ¹⁹²Ir was calculated in order to validate simulations against literature; all other RBE_M calculations were done by normalizing electron fluence at various distances to the source position. In order to examine the impact of RBE_M variation in treatment planning, a realistic ¹⁹²Ir prostate plan was re-evaluated in terms of RBE instead of absorbed dose.

RESULTS

The RBE_M of ¹²⁵I, ¹⁹²Ir, and ¹⁶⁹Yb at 8 cm away from the source was 0.994 (+/-0.002), 1.030 (+/-0.003), and 1.066 (+/-0.008), respectively. RBE_M in the HDR prostate treatment plan exhibited several hot (+3.6% in RBE_M) spots.

CONCLUSIONS

The large increase RBE_M observed in ¹⁶⁹Yb has not yet been described in the literature. Despite the presence of radiobiological hotspots in the HDR treatment, these variations are likely nominal and clinically insignificant.

Brachytherapy in the therapy of prostate cancer - an interesting choice

Brachytherapy is a curative alternative to radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation [i.e. 3D conformal external beam radiation therapy (CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)] with comparable long-term survival and biochemical control and the most favorable toxicity. HDR brachytherapy (HDR-BT) in treatment of prostate cancer is most frequently used together with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) as a boost (increasing the treatment dose precisely to the tumor). In the early stages of the disease (low, sometimes intermediate risk group), HDR-BT is more often used as monotherapy. There are no significant differences in treatment results (overall survival rate – OS, local recurrence rate – LC) between radical prostatectomy, EBRT and HDR-BT. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) is a radiation method that has been known for several years in treatment of localized prostate cancer. The LDR-BT is applied as a monotherapy and also used along with EBRT as a boost. It is used as a sole radical treatment modality, but not as a palliative treatment. The use of brachytherapy as monotherapy in treatment of prostate cancer enables many patients to keep their sexual functions in order and causes a lower rate of urinary incontinence. Due to progress in medical and technical knowledge in brachytherapy (“real-time” computer planning systems, new radioisotopes and remote afterloading systems), it has been possible to make treatment time significantly shorter in comparison with other methods. This also enables better protection of healthy organs in the pelvis. The aim of this publication is to describe both brachytherapy methods.

Permanent prostate brachytherapy extracapsular radiation dose distributions: analysis of a multi-institutional database

Purpose

Periprostatic brachytherapy doses impact biochemical control. In this study, we evaluate extracapsular volumetric dosimetry following permanent prostate brachytherapy in patients entered in a multi-institutional community database.

Material and methods

In the database, 4547 patients underwent brachytherapy (3094 – ¹²⁵I, 1437 – ¹⁰³Pd and 16 – ¹³¹Cs). Using the originally determined prostate volume, a 5 mm, 3-dimensional peri-prostatic anulus was constructed around the prostate (except for a 2 mm posterior margin), and evaluated in its entirety and in 90° segments. Prostate dosimetric parameters consisted of a V₁₀₀ and D₉₀ while the annular dosimetry was reported as a V₁₀₀.

Results

The intraprostatic V₁₀₀ and D₉₀ for ¹⁰³Pd, and ¹²⁵I were statistically comparable when stratified by isotope and/or monotherapy vs. boost. The overall mean V₁₀₀ for the periprostatic annulus was 62.8%. The mean V₁₀₀ at the base (51.6%) was substantially less than the apex (73.5%) and midgland (65.9%). In addition, for all patients, the anterior V₁₀₀ (45.7%) was less than the lateral (68.8%) and the posterior (75.0%). The geometric V₁₀₀ annular differences were consistent when evaluated by isotope. Overall, the V₁₀₀ was higher in the ¹²⁵I cohort.

Conclusions

The optimal extracapsular brachytherapy dose and radial extent remains unknown, but will prove increasingly important with reductions and/or elimination of supplemental external beam radiation therapy. The large multi-institutional community database demonstrates periprostatic annular doses that are not as robust as those in selected high volume brachytherapy centers, and may be inadequate for optimal biochemical control following monotherapeutic brachytherapy, especially in higher risk patients.

Case series analysis of post-brachytherapy prostate edema and its relevance to post-implant dosimetry. Post-implant prostate edema and dosimetry

PURPOSE

We evaluated the post-operative pattern of prostate volume (PV) changes following prostate brachytherapy (PB) and analyzed variables which affect swelling.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-nine patients treated with brachytherapy (14) or combined brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy modality (15) underwent pre- and post-implant computed tomography (CT). Prostate volume measurements were done on post-operative days 1, 9, 30, and 60. An observer performed 139 prostate volume (PV) measurements. We analyzed the influence of pre-implant PV, number of needles and insertion attempts, number and activity of seeds, Gleason score, use of hormonal therapy and external beam radiation therapy on the extent of edema. We computed a volume correction factor (CF) to account for dosimetric changes between day 1 and day 30. Using the calculated CF, the dose received by 90% (D(90)) of the prostate on day 30 (D(90)Day30) was obtained by dividing day 1 (D(90)Day1) by the CF.

RESULTS

The mean PV recorded on post-operative day 1 was 67.7 cm(3), 18.8 cm(3) greater than average pre-op value (SD 15.6 cm(3)). Swelling returned to pre-implant volume by day 30. Seed activity, treatment modality, and Gleason score were significant variables. The calculated CF was 0.76. After assessment using the CF, the mean difference between estimated and actual D(90)Day30 was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed maximum prostate size on post-operative day 1, returning to pre-implant volume by day 30. This suggests that post-implant dosimetry should be obtained on or after post-operative day 30. If necessary, day 30 dosimetry can be estimated by dividing D(90)Day1 by a correction factor of 0.76.