Search

Purpose: Adding high-dose-rate brachytherapy (BT) boost to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) improves biochemical control but may affect patient-reported quality of life (QOL). We sought to determine long-term QOL outcomes for EBRT+BT versus EBRT alone., Methods and Materials: This was a post hoc analysis of the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 03.04 Randomized Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy (TROG 03.04 RADAR) trial. Only patients who received 74 Gy conventionally fractionated EBRT (n = 260) or 46 Gy conventionally fractionated EBRT plus 19.5 Gy in 3 fractions high-dose-rate BT boost (n = 237) were included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was patient-reported QOL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and prostate-specific QOL module (EORTC QLQ-PR25) questionnaires. We evaluated temporal changes in QOL scores, rates of symptom resolution, and the proportion of men who had decrements from baseline of >2 × the threshold for minimal clinically important change (2 × MCIC) for each domain., Results: At 5, 17, and 29 months after radiation therapy, the EBRT+BT group had 2.5 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-4.2; P < .001), 2.9 times (95% CI, 1.7-4.9; P < .001), and 2.6 times (95% CI, 1.4-4.6; P = .002) greater odds of reporting 2 × MCIC in urinary QOL score compared with EBRT. There were no differences beyond 29 months. EBRT+BT led to a slower rate of urinary QOL symptom score resolution up to 17 months after radiation therapy compared with EBRT (P < .001) but not at later intervals. In contrast, at the end of the radiation therapy period and at 53 months after radiation therapy, the EBRT+BT group had 0.65 times (95% CI, 0.44-0.96; P = .03) and 0.51 times (95% CI, 0.32-0.79; P = .003) the odds of reporting 2 × MCIC in bowel QOL symptom scores compared with EBRT. There were no significant differences in the rate of bowel QOL score resolution. There were no significant differences in global health status or sexual activity scores between the 2 groups., Conclusions: There were no persistent differences in patient-reported QOL measures between EBRT alone and EBRT+BT. BT boost does not appear to negatively affect long-term, patient-reported QOL., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Partial breast irradiation (PBI) and intraoperative radiation (IORT) represent alternatives to whole breast irradiation (WBI) following breast conserving surgery. However, data is mixed regarding outcomes. We therefore performed a pooled analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived patient data from randomized trials to evaluate the hypothesis that PBI and IORT have comparable long-term rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence as WBI., Methods: In February, 2023, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central were systematically searched for randomized phase 3 trials of early-stage breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with PBI or IORT as compared to WBI. Time-to-event outcomes of interest included ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), overall survival (OS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). Statistical analysis was performed with R Statistical Software., Results: Eleven randomized trials comprising 15,460 patients were included; 7,675 (49.6%) patients were treated with standard or moderately hypofractionated WBI, 5,413 (35%) with PBI and 2,372 (15.3%) with IORT. Median follow-up was 9 years. PBI demonstrated comparable IBTR risk compared with WBI (HR 1.20; 95% CI 0.95-1.52; p = 0.12) with no differences in OS (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.90-1.16; p = 0.70) or DDFS (HR 1.15; 95% CI 0.81-1.64; p = 0.43). In contrast, patients treated with IORT had a higher IBTR risk (HR 1.46; 95% CI 1.23-1.72; p < 0.01) compared with WBI with no difference in OS (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.84-1.14; p = 0.81) or DDFS (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.76-1.09; p = 0.31)., Conclusion: For patients with early-stage breast cancer following breast-conserving surgery, PBI demonstrated no difference in IBTR as compared to WBI while IORT was inferior to WBI with respect to IBTR., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background and Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) are ablative-intent radiotherapy options for prostate cancer (PCa). These vary considerably in dose delivery, which may impact post-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) patterns and biochemical control. We compared PSA kinetics between SBRT, HDR-BT, and LDR-BT, and assessed their relationships to biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS)., Methods and Materials: Retrospective PSA data were analyzed for 3502 men with low-risk (n = 2223; 63.5%), favorable intermediate-risk (n = 869; 24.8%), and unfavorable intermediate-risk (n = 410; 11.7%) PCa treated with SBRT (n = 1716; 49.0%), HDR-BT (n = 512; 14.6%), or LDR-BT (n = 1274; 36.4%) without upfront androgen deprivation therapy at 10 institutions from 1990 to 2017. We compared nadir PSA (nPSA), time to nPSA, achievement of nPSA <0.2 ng/mL and <0.5 ng/mL, rates of nPSA <0.4 ng/mL at 4 years, and BCRFS., Results: Median follow-up was 72 months. Median nPSA and nPSA <0.2 ng/mL were stratified by risk group (interaction p ≤ 0.001). Median nPSA and time to nPSA were 0.2 ng/mL at 44 months after SBRT, 0.1-0.2 ng/mL at 37 months after HDR-BT, and 0.01-0.2 ng/mL at 51 months after LDR-BT (mean log nPSA p ≤ 0.009 for LDR-BT vs. SBRT or HDR-BT for low/favorable intermediate-risk). There were no differences in nPSA <0.4 ng/mL at 4 years (p ≥ 0.51). BCRFS was similar for all three modalities (p ≥ 0.27). Continued PSA decay beyond 4 years was predictive of durable biochemical control., Conclusion: LDR-BT led to lower nPSAs with longer continued decay compared to SBRT and HDR-BT, but no differences in BCRFS., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: To compare cosmesis and local recurrence (LR) of definitive external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) vs brachytherapy (BT) for indolent basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin., Materials and Methods: Studies including patients with T1-2 N0 SCCs/BCCs treated with definitive EBRT/BT and ≥10 months follow-up were analyzed. The primary endpoint was post-treatment cosmesis, categorized as "good," "fair," or "poor." The secondary endpoint was LR. Mixed effects regression models were used to estimate weighted linear relationships between biologically equivalent doses with α/β = 3 (BED 3 ) and cosmetic outcomes., Results: A total of 9965 patients received EBRT and 553 received BT across 24 studies. Mean age was 73 years, median follow-up was 36 months, and median dose was 45 Gy/10 fractions at 4.4 Gy/fraction. At BED 3 of 100 Gy, "good" cosmesis was more frequently observed in patients receiving BT, 95% (95% CI: 88-100%) vs 79% (95% CI: 60-82%), p < 0.05. Similar results were found for "good" cosmesis at BED 3 >100 Gy. No difference in "poor" cosmesis was noted at any BED 3 . LR was <7% for both at one year., Conclusion: BT has favorable cosmesis over EBRT for skin SCCs/BCCs at common fractionation regimens. Prospective studies comparing EBRT vs BT are warranted., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Brachytherapy (BT), using low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent seed implantation or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary source implantation, is an acceptable treatment option for select patients with prostate cancer of any risk group. The benefits of HDR-BT over LDR-BT include the ability to use the same source for other cancers, lower operator dependence, and - typically - fewer acute irritative symptoms. By contrast, the benefits of LDR-BT include more favourable scheduling logistics, lower initial capital equipment costs, no need for a shielded room, completion in a single implant, and more robust data from clinical trials. Prospective reports comparing HDR-BT and LDR-BT to each other or to other treatment options (such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or surgery) suggest similar outcomes. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure rates for patients with low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease are >85%, 69-97%, and 63-80%, respectively. Brachytherapy with EBRT (versus brachytherapy alone) is an appropriate approach in select patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease. The 10-year rates of overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer-specific mortality are >85%, <10%, and <5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated with HDR-BT and LDR-BT are rare, at <4% in most series, and quality of life is improved in patients who receive brachytherapy compared with those who undergo surgery.

Purpose: Prostate volume greater than 50cc is traditionally a relative contraindication to prostate seed implantation (PSI), but there is little consensus regarding prostate size and clinical outcomes. We report biochemical control and toxicity after low-dose-rate PSI and compare outcomes according to the prostate size., Methods and Materials: A total of 429 men who underwent low-dose-rate PSI between 1998 and 2009 were evaluated. Median followup was 38.7 months. Patients were classified by prostate volume into small, medium, and large subgroups. Differences were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney and Pearson's χ(2) tests for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate effect of prostate size on outcomes., Results: Patient pretreatment factors were balanced between groups except for age (p=0.001). The 10-year actuarial freedom from biochemical failure for all patients treated with PSI was 96.3% with no statistically significant difference between large vs. small/medium prostate size (90% vs. 96.6%, p=0.47). In a multivariate analysis, plan type (hazard ratio [HR]=0.25, p=0.03), dose to 90% of the gland (D90: HR=0.98, p=0.02), volume receiving 200Gy (V200: HR=0.98, p=0.026), and biologic effective dose (HR=0.99, p=0.045), but not prostate size (HR=2.27, p=0.17) were significantly associated with freedom from biochemical failure. Prostate size was not significantly associated with time to maximum American Urologic Association score., Conclusion: In men with large prostates, the PSI provides biochemical control and temporal changes in genitourinary toxicity that are comparable with men having smaller glands. Accurate dose optimization and delivery of PSI provides the best clinical outcomes regardless of gland size., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Studies of dose-escalated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) have shown excellent rates of tumor control and cancer specific survival. Moreover, LDR-BT combined with EBRT (i.e. "LDR-BT boost") is hypothesized to improve local control. While phase II trials with LDR-BT boost have produced mature data of outcomes and toxicities, high dose rate (HDR)-BT has been growing in popularity as an alternative boost therapy. Boost from HDR-BT has theoretical advantages over LDR-BT, including improved cancer cell death and better dose distribution from customization of catheter dwell times, locations, and inverse dose optimization. Freedom from biochemical failure rates at five years for low-, intermediate-, high-risk, and locally advanced patients have generally been 85-100%, 80-98%, 59-96%, and 34-85%, respectively. Late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3-4 toxicities have also been encouraging with <6% of patients experiencing any toxicity. Limitations of current HDR-BT boost studies include reports of only single-institution experiences, and unrefined reports of toxicity or patient quality of life. Comparative effectiveness research will help guide clinicians in selecting the most appropriate treatment option for individual patients based on risk-stratification, expected outcomes, toxicities, quality of life, and cost., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Low-dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT), involving implantation of radioactive seeds into the prostate, is an established monotherapy for most low-risk and select intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients. High-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is an advanced technology theorized to be more advantageous than LDR-BT from a radiobiological and radiophysics perspective, to the patient himself, and in terms of resource allocation. Studies of HDR-BT monotherapy have encouraging results in terms of biochemical control, patient survival, treatment toxicity and erectile preservation. However, there are still certain limitations that preclude recommending HDR-BT monotherapy for prostate cancer outside the setting of a clinical trial. HDR-BT monotherapy should be considered experimental at present.

External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) combined with brachytherapy (BT) is an attractive treatment option for select patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Either low- or high-dose rate BT may be combined with EBRT ('LDR-BT boost,' 'HDR-BT boost,' respectively). HDR-BT boost has potential theoretical benefits over LDR-BT boost or external beam radiation therapy monotherapy in terms of radiobiology, radiophysics and patient convenience. Based on prospective studies in this review, freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates at 5 years for low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients have generally been 85-100%, 68-97%, 63-85%, respectively; late Radiotherapy and Oncology Group Grades 3 and 4 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities are seen in <8% of patients. HDR-BT boost is now a relatively well-established treatment modality for certain intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer patients, though limitations exist in drawing conclusions from the currently published studies.

ContextManagement of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive radiotherapy remains controversial due to the perceived high rates of severe genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity associated with any local salvage modality.ObjectiveTo quantitatively compare the efficacy and toxicity of salvage radical prostatectomy (RP), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy, and high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy.Evidence acquisitionWe performed a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. Two- and 5-yr recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates and crude incidences of severe GU and GI toxicity were extracted as endpoints of interest. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted to characterize summary effect sizes and quantify heterogeneity. Estimates for each modality were then compared with RP after adjusting for individual study-level covariates using mixed-effect regression models, while allowing for differences in between-study variance across treatment modalities.Evidence synthesisA total of 150 studies were included for analysis. There was significant heterogeneity between studies within each modality, and covariates differed between modalities, necessitating adjustment. Adjusted 5-yr RFS ranged from 50% after cryotherapy to 60% after HDR brachytherapy and SBRT, with no significant differences between any modality and RP. Severe GU toxicity was significantly lower with all three forms of radiotherapeutic salvage than with RP (adjusted rates of 20% after RP vs 5.6%, 9.6%, and 9.1% after SBRT, HDR brachytherapy, and LDR brachytherapy, respectively; p ≤ 0.001 for all). Severe GI toxicity was significantly lower with HDR salvage than with RP (adjusted rates 1.8% vs 0.0%, p

Background: The objective of this study was to compare the cosmesis and recurrence rates of conventional excision (CE), Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT), or brachytherapy (BT), for basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin.Methods: Population, Intervention, Control, Outcome, Study Design (PICOS), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) methods were used to identify studies on PubMed (from 1985 to 2018), including patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) T1-T2N0 basal cell carcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas and ≥10 months follow-up who received CE, MMS, EBRT, or BT. The primary endpoint was cosmesis, classified as "good," "fair," or "poor." The secondary endpoint was 1-year recurrence. Fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analyses were performed to evaluate primary and secondary outcomes with respect to treatment modality.Results: In total, 18,095 studies met initial search criteria. There were 24 CE, 13 MMS, 19 EBRT, and 7 BT studies included with a total of 21,371 patients. The summary effect size for "good" cosmesis was 81% (95% CI, 70.6%-89.6%), 74.6% (95% CI, 63%-84.6%), and 97.6% (95% CI, 91.3%-100%) for CE, EBRT, and BT, respectively. Good cosmesis was 96.0% in the only MMS study that reported cosmesis. BT had improved "good" cosmesis over EBRT (P = .0025) and was similar to CE and MMS. No significant differences were seen for "fair" or "poor" cosmesis. One-year recurrence rates were low throughout at 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3%-1.6%), 0.2% (95% CI, 0%-0.6%), 2% (95% CI, 1.3%-2.7%), and 0% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%) for CE, MMS, EBRT, and BT, respectively.Conclusions: For T1-T2N0 skin cancers, BT and MMS have improved cosmesis over EBRT and CE. It is unclear whether this is because of treatment superiority or selection and reporting bias. Local control is similar among all modalities at 1 year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]