Focal application of low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: a pilot study

The Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with Magnetic Resonance Imaging After Focal Therapy (TARGET): A Systematic Review and International Consensus Recommendations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can detect recurrences after focal therapy for prostate cancer but there is no robust guidance regarding its use. Our objective was to produce consensus recommendations on MRI acquisition, interpretation, and reporting after focal therapy.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in July 2022 to develop consensus statements. A two-round consensus exercise was then performed, with a consensus meeting in January 2023, during which 329 statements were scored by 23 panellists from Europe and North America spanning urology, radiology, and pathology with experience across eight focal therapy modalities. Using RAND Corporation/University of California-Los Angeles methodology, the Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with MRI after Focal Therapy (TARGET) were based on consensus for statements scored with agreement or disagreement.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

In total, 73 studies were included in the review. All 20 studies (100%) reporting suspicious imaging features cited focal contrast enhancement as suspicious for cancer recurrence. Of 31 studies reporting MRI assessment criteria, the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score was the scheme used most often (20 studies; 65%), followed by a 5-point Likert score (six studies; 19%). For the consensus exercise, consensus for statements scored with agreement or disagreement increased from 227 of 295 statements (76.9%) in round one to 270 of 329 statements (82.1%) in round two. Key recommendations include performing routine MRI at 12 mo using a multiparametric protocol compliant with PI-RADS version 2.1 standards. PI-RADS category scores for assessing recurrence within the ablation zone should be avoided. An alternative 5-point scoring system is presented that includes a major dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) sequence and joint minor diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted sequences. For the DCE sequence, focal nodular strong early enhancement was the most suspicious imaging finding. A structured minimum reporting data set and minimum reporting standards for studies detailing MRI data after focal therapy are presented.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The TARGET consensus recommendations may improve MRI acquisition, interpretation, and reporting after focal therapy for prostate cancer and provide minimum standards for study reporting.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans can detect recurrent of prostate cancer after focal treatments, but there is a lack of guidance on MRI use for this purpose. We report new expert recommendations that may improve practice.

Focal brachytherapy as definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we describe the oncologic and toxicity outcomes of definitive focal brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A PROSPERO registered study (CRD42023410170) was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies between 2000 and 2022. Two authors independently performed the initial search. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) was defined as the primary endpoint for the meta-analysis. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were conducted to calculate effect size and quantify heterogeneity. We also describe the side effects and local recurrence patterns of focal brachytherapy.

RESULTS

Ten studies were identified and included 315 patients treated using focal brachytherapy as a definitive treatment. Mean (SD) age was 67.65 (7.9) years and mean (SD) PSA was 7.15 (2.7) ng/mL. Most patients (n = 236, 75%) underwent LDR Brachytherapy and 25% received HDR brachytherapy. Among the participants, 147 (46.5%) had a Gleason score ≤6, and 169 (53.5%) had a Gleason score ≥7. Only 11 (3.5%) patients received ADT. Overall, bRFS rate at median follow-up 4 years (Range: 1-6.42 years) was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82-95%). Acute Grade ≤ 2 GU and GI toxicities were reported in 22 (7%) and 11 (3.5%) patients, respectively. Late Grade ≤ 2 GU and GI toxicity were reported in 6 (2%) and 14 (4.4%) patients, respectively. One case of prostate hemorrhage due to improper foley removal was noted but otherwise no acute or late Grade 3 or higher GI or GU toxicity related to radiotherapy was reported.

CONCLUSION

Overall, definitive focal brachytherapy has a favorable toxicity profile. Oncologic outcomes are yet to mature. The evidence is limited by the small number of studies with low patients' number, across study heterogeneity, and possibility of publication bias.

Multi-Frequency 3D Shear Wave Absolute Vibro-Elastography (S-WAVE) System for the Prostate

This article describes a novel system for quantitative and volumetric measurement of tissue elasticity in the prostate using simultaneous multi-frequency tissue excitation. Elasticity is computed by using a local frequency estimator to measure the three-dimensional local wavelengths of steady-state shear waves within the prostate gland. The shear wave is created using a mechanical voice coil shaker which transmits simultaneous multi-frequency vibrations transperineally. Radio frequency data is streamed directly from a BK Medical 8848 transrectal ultrasound transducer to an external computer where tissue displacement due to the excitation is measured using a speckle tracking algorithm. Bandpass sampling is used that eliminates the need for an ultra-fast frame rate to track the tissue motion and allows for accurate reconstruction at a sampling frequency that is below the Nyquist rate. A roll motor with computer control is used to rotate the transducer and obtain 3D data. Two commercially available phantoms were used to validate both the accuracy of the elasticity measurements as well as the functional feasibility of using the system for in vivo prostate imaging. The phantom measurements were compared with 3D Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE), where a high correlation of 96% was achieved. In addition, the system has been used in two separate clinical studies as a method for cancer identification. Qualitative and quantitative results of 11 patients from these clinical studies are presented here. Furthermore, an AUC of 0.87±0.12 was achieved for malignant vs. benign classification using a binary support vector machine classifier trained with data from the latest clinical study with leave one patient out cross-validation.

hSSB1 (NABP2/OBFC2B) modulates the DNA damage and androgen-induced transcriptional response in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Activation and regulation of androgen receptor (AR) signaling and the DNA damage response impact the prostate cancer (PCa) treatment modalities of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy. Here, we have evaluated a role for human single-strand binding protein 1 (hSSB1/NABP2) in modulation of the cellular response to androgens and ionizing radiation (IR). hSSB1 has defined roles in transcription and maintenance of genome stability, yet little is known about this protein in PCa.

METHODS

We correlated hSSB1 with measures of genomic instability across available PCa cases from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Microarray and subsequent pathway and transcription factor enrichment analysis were performed on LNCaP and DU145 prostate cancer cells.

RESULTS

Our data demonstrate that hSSB1 expression in PCa correlates with measures of genomic instability including multigene signatures and genomic scars that are reflective of defects in the repair of DNA double-strand breaks via homologous recombination. In response to IR-induced DNA damage, we demonstrate that hSSB1 regulates cellular pathways that control cell cycle progression and the associated checkpoints. In keeping with a role for hSSB1 in transcription, our analysis revealed that hSSB1 negatively modulates p53 and RNA polymerase II transcription in PCa. Of relevance to PCa pathology, our findings highlight a transcriptional role for hSSB1 in regulating the androgen response. We identified that AR function is predicted to be impacted by hSSB1 depletion, whereby this protein is required to modulate AR gene activity in PCa.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings point to a key role for hSSB1 in mediating the cellular response to androgen and DNA damage via modulation of transcription. Exploiting hSSB1 in PCa might yield benefits as a strategy to ensure a durable response to ADT and/or radiotherapy and improved patient outcomes.

ACR-ABS-ASTRO Practice Parameter for Transperineal Permanent Brachytherapy of Prostate Cancer

AIM/OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND

The American College of Radiology (ACR), American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) have jointly developed the following practice parameter for transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer. Transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer is the interstitial implantation of low-dose rate radioactive seeds into the prostate gland for the purpose of treating localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

This practice parameter was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters-Radiation Oncology of the Commission on Radiation Oncology, in collaboration with ABS and ASTRO.

RESULTS

This practice parameter provides a framework for the appropriate use of low-dose rate brachytherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer either as monotherapy or as part of a treatment regimen combined with external-beam radiation therapy. The practice parameter defines the qualifications and responsibilities of all involved radiation oncology personnel, including the radiation oncologist, medical physicist, dosimetrist, radiation therapist, and nursing staff. Patient selection criteria and the utilization of supplemental therapies such as external-beam radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy are discussed. The logistics of the implant procedure, postimplant dosimetry assessment, and best practices with regard to safety and quality control are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to established standards can help to ensure that permanent prostate brachytherapy is delivered in a safe and efficacious manner.

Registration of trans-perineal template mapping biopsy cores to volumetric ultrasound

PURPOSE

Pathology from trans-perineal template mapping biopsy (TTMB) can be used as labels to train prostate cancer classifiers. In this work, we propose a framework to register TTMB cores to advanced volumetric ultrasound data such as multi-parametric transrectal ultrasound (mpTRUS).

METHODS

The framework has mainly two steps. First, needle trajectories are calculated with respect to the needle guiding template-considering deflections in their paths. In standard TTMB, a sparsely sampled ultrasound volume is taken prior to the procedure which contains the template overlaid on top of it. The position of this template is detected automatically, and the cores are mapped following the calculated needle trajectories. Second, the TTMB volume is aligned to the mpTRUS volume by a two-step registration method. Using the same transformations from the registration step, the cores are registered from the TTMB volume to the mpTRUS volume.

RESULTS

TTMB and mpTRUS of 10 patients were available for this work. The target registration errors (TRE) of the volumes using landmarks picked by three research assistants (RA) and one radiation oncologist (RO) were on average 1.32 ± 0.7 mm and 1.03 ± 0.6 mm, respectively. Additionally, on average, our framework takes only 97 s to register the cores.

CONCLUSION

Our proposed framework allows a quick way to find the spatial location of the cores with respect to volumetric ultrasound. Furthermore, knowing the correct location of the pathology will facilitate focal treatment and will aid in training imaging-based cancer classifiers.

Focal low dose-rate brachytherapy for low to intermediate risk prostate cancer: preliminary experience at an Australian institution

Background

Focal treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a hybrid approach combining ablative treatment of the involved prostate gland and continued active surveillance (AS) of the unaffected gland. Low dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy can be used as a lesion-targeted focal therapy, however, further studies are required to support its use. The aim of this study is to evaluate the dosimetry, toxicity and oncological outcomes of men receiving lesion-targeted focal LDR brachytherapy for low to intermediate risk PCa.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of 26 men with unifocal, low to intermediate grade PCa diagnosed on a combination of multiparametric-magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and targeted plus template transperineal (TP) biopsy, who received focal LDR brachytherapy at a single institution. Brachytherapy involved a single monotherapy implant using iodine-125 seeds to deliver a prescribed dose of 145 Gy to the index lesion.

Results

The mean focal planning target volume (F-PTV) as a percentage of the prostate volume was 24.5%. The percentage of the focal gross tumour volume (F-GTV) receiving 100% of the prescription dose was 100% for 12 patients and ≥98% for 18 patients. The median follow-up for toxicity and biochemical control outcomes was 23.1 [interquartile range (IQR) 19.1–31.3] and 24.2 (IQR 17.9–30.0) months, respectively. Grade 2 urinary and erectile toxicities were reported by 29.2% and 45.8% of patients, respectively, with resolution of urinary symptoms to baseline by last follow-up. There were no grade ≥3 urinary or erectile toxicities or grade ≥2 rectal toxicity. All 21 patients who underwent a repeat mp-MRI and TP biopsy at 12–24 months post-treatment were negative for clinically significant disease and 25 (96.2%) patients were free from biochemical failure (FFBF).

Conclusions

Focal LDR brachytherapy is associated with a favourable toxicity profile and a high rate of control of significant PCa at 12–18 months post-treatment. We have commenced the LIBERATE prospective registry in focal LDR brachytherapy based on the highly encouraging outcomes of this initial experience.

An Updated Systematic Review on Focal Therapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: What Has Changed over the Past 5 Years?

CONTEXT

Focal therapy is a promising, minimally invasive strategy to selectively treat localized prostate cancer. A previous systematic review indicated that there is growing evidence for favorable functional outcomes, but that oncological effectiveness was yet to be defined.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of focal therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer in terms of functional and oncological outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies between October 2015 and December 31, 2020. In addition, the research stages were acquired according to the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study (IDEAL) recommendations. Ongoing studies were identified through clinical trial registries.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Seventy-two studies were identified exploring eight different sources of energy to deliver focal therapy in 5827 patients. Twenty-seven studies reported on high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), nine studies on irreversible electroporation, 11 on cryoablation, eight on focal laser ablation and focal brachytherapy, seven on photodynamic therapy (PDT), two on radiofrequency ablation, and one on prostatic artery embolization. The majority of studies were prospective development stage 2a studies (n = 35). PDT and HIFU, both in stage 3, showed promising results. Overall, HIFU studies reported a median of 95% pad-free patients and a median of 85% patients with no clinically significant cancer (CSC) in the treated area. For PDT, no changes in continence were reported and a median of 90% of patients were without CSC. Both treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 5 yr, focal therapy has been studied for eight different energy sources, mostly in single-arm stage 2 studies. Although a first randomized controlled trial in focal therapy has been performed, more high-quality evaluations are needed, preferably via multicenter randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up and predefined assessment of oncological and functional outcomes and health-related quality-of-life measures.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Focal treatment (FT) of prostate cancer has potential, considering that it has less impact on continence and potency than radical treatment. Our systematic review indicates that despite the method being studied extensively over the past half decade, the majority of studies remain in an early research stage. The techniques high-intensity focused ultrasound and photodynamic therapy have shown most progression toward advanced research stages and show favorable results. However, more high-quality evidence is required before FT can become available as a standard treatment.

Focal low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer

Purpose

To prospectively investigate the efficacy and feasibility of focal low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Material and methods

Between October 2014 and May 2019, nineteen low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients who presented with abnormality on both diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) underwent focal LDR brachytherapy at our institution. Focal gross tumor volume (F-GTV) was delineated on transrectal ultrasound, based on abnormality seen on fused T2-weighted MRI. F-GTV was expanded by 5 mm, as a safety margin, to create focal clinical target volume (F-CTV). Prescribed dose to F-CTV was 145 Gy. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was determined using Phoenix criterion (prostate specific antigen nadir + 2 ng/ml). Pre- and post-implant dosimetry data were compared using non-parametric Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated using common terminology criteria for adverse events.

Results

Mean F-CTV D_90% was significantly lower in the post-implant evaluation than in intraoperative planning (p = 0.004). On post-implant dosimetry, the mean D_90% for F-GTV and mean V_100% for the entire prostate were 222 Gy and 35%, respectively. Median follow-up time for all patients was 31 months. BCR occurred in one patient after 23 months. Kaplan-Meier 2-year BCR-free rate was 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.4-100%). No patients had grade 1 or greater gastrointestinal toxicity. Three patients who were taking α-blockers to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (present before brachytherapy), experienced no treatment-related genitourinary toxicities. Two patients suffered from temporary grade 2 urinary frequency. None of the remaining patients experienced grade 2 or higher genitourinary toxicity.

Conclusions

Focal LDR prostate brachytherapy appears acceptable for MRI-based index tumors, with a low cumulative incidence of BCR. Such brachytherapy might offer a feasible minimally invasive therapeutic option for localized prostate cancer.

Feasibility and early toxicity of focal or partial brachytherapy in prostate cancer patients

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare short-term oncologic outcomes and toxicity of focal or partial low-dose-rate brachytherapy (focal/partial LDR-BT) with whole gland low-dose-rate brachytherapy (whole LDR-BT) in localized prostate cancer patients.

Material and methods

Medical records of eligible patients who underwent focal/partial LDR-BT and whole LDR-BT between 2015 and 2017 at our institution were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical characteristics and pathologic outcomes were compared between focal/partial LDR-BT group and whole LDR-BT group. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and difference between two groups was assessed with log-rank test. Genitourinary and rectal toxicity were also evaluated between the two groups.

Results

Of the 60 patients analyzed, 30 focal/partial LDR-BT patients and 30 whole LDR-BT brachytherapy patients were included. Relative to the whole LDR-BT group, the focal/partial LDR-BT group had significantly higher initial PSA level (p = 0.002), smaller number of implanted seeds (p < 0.001), and shorter follow-up duration (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to prostate volume, biopsy Gleason score, and risk group stratification. The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival estimates for focal/partial LDR-BT group and whole LDR-BT group were 91.8% and 89.6%, respectively, which was not significantly different (p = 0.554). Genitourinary symptoms were significantly worse in whole LDR-BT group than in focal/partial LDR-BT group. The incidence of rectal toxicity was similar between two groups.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that the focal/partial LDR-BT is comparable to the whole LDR-BT with respect to short-term biochemical recurrence and toxicities.

Focal high-dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: toxicity and preliminary biochemical results

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes and the toxicity of focal high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy in selected localized prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

Fifty patients were treated with focal high-dose-rate brachytherapy between March 2013 and November 2017, representing 5% of the cases treated by our group during this period. Only patients with very limited and localized tumors, according to strict criteria, were selected for the procedure. The prescribed dose for the focal volume was 24 Gy.

RESULTS

The treated volume corresponded to a mean value of 32% of the total prostatic volume. The mean focal D₉₀ in our series was 23 Gy (range 16-26 Gy). The mean initial IPSS was 8.2 (range 0-26), at 6 months 7.5 (range 0-23), and at 24 months 6.7 (range 0-18). No acute or late urinary retention was seen. When the ICIQ-SF score was 0 at the end of treatment, it remained nil thereafter at 1 and 2 years for all patients. No intraoperative or perioperative complications occurred. No rectal toxicity was reported after treatment. Of the total patients identified as potent, only three patients had a very slight decrease of the mean IIEF5. The mean initial PSA was 6.9 ng/mL (range 1.9-13.4). At the last follow-up visit, the mean PSA was 3 ng/ml (range 0.48-8.11).

CONCLUSION

HDR focal brachytherapy in selected patients with low intermediate-risk prostate cancer could achieve the same satisfactory results in terms of relapse-free survival as conventional whole prostate brachytherapy with less toxicity.

Quality of life outcomes after low dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: Current status and future perspectives

The present review summarizes data from studies reporting on health-related quality of life after brachytherapy and competing modalities. There are various therapeutic modalities for localized prostate cancer, including radical surgery, external beam radiotherapy and active surveillance. Advances in surgical and radiation treatment have entered clinical practice in the form of robot-assisted surgery or intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Brachytherapy remains the main treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer, with 10-year survival data showing favorable outcomes. Because each treatment modality has achieved favorable survival outcomes, focus in determining appropriate treatment has shifted toward health-related quality of life, where each treatment has a different profile and/or adverse symptoms. The development of health-related quality of life assessment tools has allowed the creation of a pool of specific health-related quality of life data across many studies. The present article reviews the impact of brachytherapy and other modalities on quality of life, as well as future directions.

Low dose rate prostate brachytherapy

Low dose rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy is an evidence based radiation technique with excellent oncologic outcomes. By utilizing direct image guidance for radioactive source placement, LDR brachytherapy provides superior radiation dose escalation and conformality compared to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). With this level of precision, late grade 3 or 4 genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity rates are typically between 1% and 4%. Furthermore, when performed as a same day surgical procedure, this technique provides a cost effective and convenient strategy. A large body of literature with robust follow-up has led multiple expert consensus groups to endorse the use of LDR brachytherapy as an appropriate management option for all risk groups of non-metastatic prostate cancer. LDR brachytherapy is often effective when delivered as a monotherapy, although for some patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, optimal outcome are achieved in combination with supplemental EBRT and/or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In addition to reviewing technical aspects and reported clinical outcomes of LDR prostate brachytherapy, this article will focus on the considerations related to appropriate patient selection and other aspects of its use in the treatment of prostate cancer.

The prostate cancer focal therapy

Despite prostate cancer (PCa) is the leading form of non-cutaneous cancer in men, most patients with PCa die with disease rather than of the disease. Therefore, the risk of overtreatment should be considered by clinicians who have to distinguish between patients with high risk PCa (who would benefit from radical treatment) and patients who may be managed more conservatively, such as through active surveillance or emerging focal therapy (FT). The aim of FT is to eradicate clinically significant disease while protecting key genito-urinary structures and function from injury. While effectiveness studies comparing FT with conventional care options are still lacking, the rationale supporting FT relies on evidence-based advances such as the understanding of the index lesion's central role in the natural history of the PCa and the improvement of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the detection and risk stratification of PCa. In this literature review, we want to highlight the rationale for FT in PCa management and the current evidence on patient eligibility. Furthermore, we summarize the best imaging modalities to localize the target lesion, describe the current FT techniques in PCa, provide an update on their oncological outcomes and highlight trends for future research.

Focal Therapy in Primary Localised Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018

Radical treatment of localised prostate cancer is recognised to be an unnecessary intervention or overtreatment in many men. Consequently, there has been a rapid uptake in the use of focal ablative therapies. However, there are several biological and practical concerns about such approaches as they have yet to be proved as robust treatment options. In particular, the multifocal nature of prostate cancer argues against unifocal treatment, while limitations in imaging can preclude the accurate identification of the number, location, and extent of prostate cancer foci. To date, a number of ablative options have reported results on mainly low-risk disease. Most series are relatively immature, with a lack of consistent follow-up, and the morbidity of retreatment is often not considered. The authors consider focal therapy to be an investigational modality, and encourage prospective recording of outcomes and recruitment of suitable patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Focal therapy of prostate cancer is the targeted destruction of cancer within a specific part of the prostate gland, sparing the rest of the prostate and nearby tissue. This procedure could potentially reduce side effects when compared with established standard treatments, such as surgery or radiotherapy, which treat the entire prostate. Studies show that for most men with low-risk cancer, active surveillance is the preferred treatment option. However, the available data regarding all forms of focal therapy are still poor and inconclusive. Consequently, due to both the lack of clear results associated with focal therapy and the difficulties in detecting all cancerous areas of the prostate, focal therapy should be considered an investigational modality only.