M. Ghilezan

American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE A well-established body of literature supports the use of high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy as definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer. Most of the articles describe HDR as a boost with adjuvant external beam radiation, but there is a growing experience with HDR monotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS The American Brachytherapy Society has convened a group of expert practitioners and physicists to develop guidelines for the use of HDR in the management of prostate cancer. This involved an extensive literature review and input from an expert panel. RESULTS Despite a wide variation in doses and fractionation reported, HDR brachytherapy provides biochemical control rates of 85-100%, 81-100%, and 43-93% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk prostate cancers, respectively. Severe toxicity is rare, with most authors reporting less than 5% Grade 3 or higher toxicity. Careful attention to patient evaluation for appropriate patient selection, meticulous technique, treatment planning, and delivery are essential for successful treatment. CONCLUSION The clinical outcomes for HDR are excellent, with high rates of biochemical control, even for high-risk disease, with low morbidity. HDR monotherapy, both for primary treatment and salvage, are promising treatment modalities.

Twelve-year clinical outcomes and patterns of failure with accelerated partial breast irradiation versus whole-breast irradiation: Results of a matched-pair analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To compare 12-year outcomes of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) versus whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in patients treated with breast conservation. MATERIALS AND METHODS A matched-pair analysis was performed using 199 patients receiving WBI and 199 patients receiving interstitial APBI. Match criteria included tumor size, age, nodal status, ER status, and the use of adjuvant hormonal therapy. Patterns of failure and efficacy of salvage treatments were examined. RESULTS No differences were seen in the 12-year rates of local recurrence (3.8% vs. 5.0%, p=0.40), regional recurrence (0% vs. 1.1%, p=0.15), disease free survival (DFS) (87% vs. 91%, p=0.30), cause-specific survival (CSS) (93% vs. 95%, p=0.28), or overall survival (OS) (78% vs. 71%, p=0.06) between the WBI and APBI groups, respectively. The rate of distant metastases was lower in the APBI group (10.1% vs. 4.5%, p=.05). Following LR, no difference in outcome was seen between the two groups with 5year post-LR rates of DFS (80% vs. 86%, p=0.55), CSS (88% vs. 75%, p=0.77), and OS (88% vs. 75%, p=0.77), respectively. CONCLUSIONS With 12-year follow-up, APBI produced outcomes equivalent to WBI. Following LR, patients treated with APBI also had similar failure patterns to those managed with WBI.

Dose Escalation Improves Cancer-Related Events at 10 Years for Intermediate- and High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Hypofractionated High-Dose-Rate Boost and External Beam Radiotherapy

PURPOSE To evaluate the 10-year outcomes of intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with a prospective dose escalation hypofractionated trial of pelvic external beam radiation therapy (P-EBRT) with a high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost. METHODS AND MATERIALS From 1992 to 2007, 472 patients were treated with a HDR boost at William Beaumont Hospital. They had at least one of the following: a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of >10 ng/ml, a Gleason score of ≥7, or clinical stage ≥T2b. Patients received 46-Gy P-EBRT and an HDR boost. The HDR dose fractionation was divided into two dose levels. The prostate biologically equivalent dose (BED) low-dose-level group received <268 Gy, and the high-dose group received >268 Gy . Phoenix biochemical failure (BF) definition was used. RESULTS Median follow-up was 8.2 years (range, 0.4-17 years). The 10-year biochemical failure rate of 43.1% vs. 18.9%, (p < 0.001), the clinical failure rate of 23.4% vs. 7.7%, (p < 0.001), and the distant metastasis of 12.4% vs. 5.7%, (p = 0.028) were all significantly better for the high-dose level group. On Cox multivariate analysis, higher BED levels (p = 0.017; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.586), pretreatment PSA assays (p < 0.001, HR = 1.022), and Gleason scores (p = 0.004) were significant variables for reduced biochemical failure. Higher dose levels (p, 0.002; HR, 0.397) and Gleason scores (p < 0.001) were significant for clinical failure. Grade 3 genitourinary complications were 2% and 3%, respectively, and grade 3 gastrointestinal complication was <0.5%. CONCLUSIONS This prospective trial using P-EBRT with HDR boost and hypofractionated dose escalation demonstrates a strong dose-response relationship for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients. The improvement at 10 years for locoregional control with higher radiation doses (BED, > 268 Gy) has significantly decreased biochemical and clinical failures as well as distant metastasis.

Comparison of acute and late toxicities for three modern high-dose radiation treatment techniques for localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE We compared acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities in prostate cancer patients treated with three different high-dose radiation techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 1,903 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with definitive RT at William Beaumont Hospital from 1992 to 2006: 22% with brachytherapy alone (BT), 55% with image-guided external beam (EB-IGRT), and 23% external beam with high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (EBRT+HDR). Median dose with BT was 120 Gy for LDR and 38 Gy for HDR (9.5 Gy × 4). Median dose with EB-IGRT was 75.6 Gy (PTV) to prostate with or without seminal vesicles. For EBRT+HDR, the pelvis was treated to 46 Gy with an additional 19 Gy (9.5 Gy × 2) delivered via HDR. GI and GU toxicity was evaluated utilizing the NCI-CTC criteria (v.3.0). Median follow-up was 4.8 years. RESULTS The incidences of any acute ≥ Grade 2 GI or GU toxicities were 35%, 49%, and 55% for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR (p < 0.001). Any late GU toxicities ≥ Grade 2 were present in 22%, 21%, and 28% for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR (p = 0.01), respectively. Patients receiving EBRT+HDR had a higher incidence of urethral stricture and retention, whereas dysuria was most common in patients receiving BT. Any Grade ≥ 2 late GI toxicities were 2%, 20%, and 9% for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR (p < 0.001). Differences were most pronounced for rectal bleeding, with 3-year rates of 0.9%, 20%, and 6% (p < 0.001) for BT, EB-IGRT, and EBRT+HDR respectively. CONCLUSIONS Each of the three modern high-dose radiation techniques for localized prostate cancer offers a different toxicity profile. These data can help patients and physicians to make informed decisions regarding radiotherapy for prostate andenocarcinoma.

Percentage of Positive Biopsy Cores: A Better Risk Stratification Model for Prostate Cancer?

PURPOSE To assess the prognostic value of the percentage of positive biopsy cores (PPC) and perineural invasion in predicting the clinical outcomes after radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer and to explore the possibilities to improve on existing risk-stratification models. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between 1993 and 2004, 1,056 patients with clinical Stage T1c-T3N0M0 prostate cancer, who had four or more biopsy cores sampled and complete biopsy core data available, were treated with external beam RT, with or without a high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost at William Beaumont Hospital. The median follow-up was 7.6 years. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed with PPC, Gleason score, pretreatment prostate-specific antigen, T stage, PNI, radiation dose, androgen deprivation, age, prostate-specific antigen frequency, and follow-up duration. A new risk stratification (PPC classification) was empirically devised to incorporate PPC and replace the T stage. RESULTS On multivariate Cox regression analysis, the PPC was an independent predictor of distant metastasis, cause-specific survival, and overall survival (all p < .05). A PPC >50% was associated with significantly greater distant metastasis (hazard ratio, 4.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.86-8.61), and its independent predictive value remained significant with or without androgen deprivation therapy (all p < .05). In contrast, PNI and T stage were only predictive for locoregional recurrence. Combining the PPC (≤50% vs. >50%) with National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk stratification demonstrated added prognostic value of distant metastasis for the intermediate-risk (hazard ratio, 5.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-16.6) and high-risk (hazard ratio, 4.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.70-11.3) groups, regardless of the use of androgen deprivation and high-dose RT (all p < .05). The proposed PPC classification appears to provide improved stratification of the clinical outcomes relative to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network classification. CONCLUSIONS The PPC is an independent and powerful predictor of clinical outcomes of prostate cancer after RT. A risk model replacing T stage with the PPC to reduce subjectivity demonstrated potentially improved stratification.

Impact of a prostate multidisciplinary clinic program on patient treatment decisions and on adherence to NCCN guidelines: the William Beaumont Hospital experience.

Objectives:In order to demonstrate the impact of multidisciplinary care in the community oncology setting, we evaluated treatment decisions after the initiation of a dedicated prostate and genitourinary (GU) multidisciplinary clinic (MDC). Methods:In March 2010, a GU MDC was created at William Beaumont Hospital with the goal of providing patients with a comprehensive multidisciplinary evaluation and consensus treatment recommendations in a single visit. Urologists, radiation, and medical oncologists along with ancillary support staff participated in this comprehensive initial evaluation. The impact of this experience on patient treatment decisions was analyzed. Results:During the first year, a total of 182 patients were seen. Compared with previous years, low-risk MDC patients more frequently chose external beam radiation therapy (41.1% vs. 26.6%, P=0.02), and active surveillance (14.3% vs. 6.1%, P=0.02) and less frequently prostatectomy (30.4% vs. 44.0%, P=0.03). Similar increases in external beam were seen in intermediate and high-risk patients. Increased use of hormonal therapy was found in high-risk patients compared with the years before the initiation of the MDC (76.2% vs. 51.1%, P=0.03). Increased adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines was seen with intermediate-risk patients (89.8% vs. 75.9%, P=0.01), whereas nonsignificant increases were seen in low-risk (100% vs. 98.9%, P=0.43) and high-risk patients (100% vs. 94.2%, P=0.26). Conclusions:The establishment of a GU MDC improved the quality of care for cancer patients as demonstrated by improved adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, and a broadening of treatment choices made available.

Phase I/II Study Evaluating Early Tolerance in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation Treated With the MammoSite Balloon Breast Brachytherapy Catheter Using a 2-Day Dose Schedule

PURPOSE Initial Phase I/II results using balloon brachytherapy to deliver accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) in 2 days in patients with early-stage breast cancer are presented. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between March 2004 and August 2007, 45 patients received adjuvant radiation therapy after lumpectomy with balloon brachytherapy in a Phase I/II trial delivering 2800 cGy in four fractions of 700 cGy. Toxicities were evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 scale and cosmesis was documented at >or=6 months. RESULTS The median age was 66 years (range, 48-83) and median skin spacing was 12 mm (range, 8-24). The median follow-up was 11.4 months (5.4-48 months) with 21 patients (47%) followed >or=1 year, 11 (24%) >or=2 years, and 7 (16%) >or=3 years. At <6 months (n = 45), Grade II toxicity rates were 9% radiation dermatitis, 13% breast pain, 2% edema, and 2% hyperpigmentation. Grade III breast pain was reported in 13% (n = 6). At >or=6 months (n = 43), Grade II toxicity rates were: 2% radiation dermatitis, 2% induration, and 2% hypopigmentation. Grade III breast pain was reported in 2%. Infection was 13% (n = 6) at <6 months and 5% (n = 2) at >or=6 months. Persistent seroma >or=6 months was 30% (n = 13). Fat necrosis developed in 4 cases (2 symptomatic). Rib fractures were seen in 4% (n = 2). Cosmesis was good/excellent in 96% of cases. CONCLUSIONS Treatment with balloon brachytherapy using a 2-day dose schedule resulted acceptable rates of Grade II/III chronic toxicity rates and similar cosmetic results observed with a standard 5-day accelerated partial breast irradiation schedule.

Identifying Differences Between Biochemical Failure and Cure: Incidence Rates and Predictors

BACKGROUND Patients treated with radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer were evaluated to estimate the length of time required to document biochemical cure (BC) after treatment and the variables associated with long-term treatment efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS 2,100 patients received RT alone for localized prostate carcinoma (external-beam RT, n = 1,504; brachytherapy alone, n = 241; or brachytherapy + pelvic radiation, n = 355). The median external-beam dose was 68.4 Gy, and the median follow-up time was 8.6 years. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined according to the Phoenix definition. RESULTS Biochemical failure was experienced by 685 patients (32.6%). The median times to BF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 6.0, 5.6, and 4.5 years respectively (p < 0.001). The average annual incidence rates of BF for years 1-5, 5-10,11-15, and 16-20 in low-risk patients were 2.0%, 2.0%, 0.3%, and 0.06% (p < 0.001); for intermediate-risk patients, 4%, 3%, 0.3%, and 0% (p < 0.001); and for high-risk patients, 10.0%, 5.0%, 0.3%, and 0.3% (p < 0.001). After 5 years of treatment, 36.9% of all patients experienced BF. The percentage of total failures occurring during years 1-5, 5-10, 11-15, and 16-20 were 48.7%, 43.5%, 6.5%, and 1.3% for low-risk patients; 64.0%, 32.2%, 3.8%, and 0% for intermediate-risk patients; and 71.9%, 25.9%, 1.1%, and 1.1% for high-risk patients, respectively. Increasing time to nadir was associated with increased time to BF. On multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with 10-year BC included prostate-specific antigen nadir and time to nadir. CONCLUSIONS The incidence rates for BF did not plateau until later than 10 years after treatment, suggesting that extended follow-up time is required to monitor patients after treatment. Prostate-specific antigen nadir and time to nadir have the strongest association with long-term BC.

High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy for the Treatment of Low-, Intermediate-, and High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Brachytherapy is a type of radiation therapy that allows for the delivery of highly conformal radiation for prostate cancer in the setting of monotherapy for low-risk disease and as a boost for intermediate- to high-risk patients. There are two types of brachytherapy, high-dose-rate (HDR) and low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy, both of which may be used as monotherapy or boost. HDR brachytherapy may offer advantages over LDR including improved accuracy of treatment, toxicities, and radiation safety issues. Brachytherapy has been shown to have similar biochemical control (BC) compared to radical prostatectomy (RP) or external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and therefore is a good therapeutic option for appropriately selected patients. We have reviewed the results of 474 patients treated with HDR monotherapy at William Beaumont Hospital, and the results show that BC rates are similar to that of RP or EBRT with low rates of high-grade chronic genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicities.