Three-dimensional conformal brachytherapy for prostate cancer

Current Urology Reports

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 173-178

  Zelefsky, Michael J ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Localize Prostate Cancer; Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Imaging; Needle Placement; Prostate Brachytherapy; Radiat Oncol Biol Phys

Indexed keywords

BRACHYTHERAPY; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOTHERAPY; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PROSTATE TUMOR; REVIEW;

BRACHYTHERAPY; HUMANS; MALE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, CONFORMAL;

EID: 4344584923     PISSN: 15272737     EISSN: 15346285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-004-0034-6     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Paschkis R, Tittinger W: Radiumbehandlung eines prostatasarkoms. Wein Klin Woschr 1910, 23:1715.
2. Carlton CE, Scardino PT: Long-term results after combined radioactive gold seed implantation and external beam radiotherapy for localized prostatic cancer. In A Multidisciplinary Analysis of Controversies in the Management of Prostate Cancer. Edited by Coffey DS, Resnick MI, Dorr FA, Karr JP. New York: Plenum Press; 1988:109.
3. Zelefsky MJ, Whitmore WF: Long-term results of retropubic permanent I-125 implantation of the prostate for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1997, 158:23–29. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199707000-00005
4. Schellhammer PF, Moriarty R, Bostwick D, et al.: Fifteen-year follow-up of a prostate brachytherapy series: comparing the past with the present. Urology 2000, 56:436–439. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00711-1
5. Holm HH, Juul N, Pedersen JF, et al.: Transperineal Iodine-125 seed implantation in prostatic cancer guided by transrectal ultrasonography. J Urol 1983, 130:283–286.
6. Grimm PD, Blasko JC, Ragde H, et al.: Does brachytherapy have a role in the treatment of prostate cancer? Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1996, 10:653–673. This review contains an excellent summary of the Seattle pre-plan brachytherapy experience. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-8588(05)70359-2
7. Shanahan TG, Nanavati PJ, Mueller PW, et al.: A comparison of permanent prostate brachytherapy techniques: pre-plan vs. hybrid interactive planning with postimplant analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 53:490–496. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02757-8
8. Merrick GS, Butler WM, Galbreath RW, et al.: Five-year biochemical outcome following permanent interstitial brachytherapy for clinical T1-T3 prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001, 51:41–48. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(01)01594-2
9. Lee N, Wuu CS, Brody R, et al.: Factors predicting for postimplantation retention after permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 48:1457–1460. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(00)00784-7
10. Beaulieu L, Aubin S, Taschereau R, et al.: Dosimetric impact of the variation of the prostate volume and shape between pre-treatment planning and treatment procedure. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 53:215–221. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02729-3
11. Stone NN, Roy J, Hong S, et al.: Prostate gland motion and deformation caused by needle placement during brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2002, 1:154. DOI: 10.1016/S1538-4721(02)00058-2
12. Stock RG, Stone NN, Wesson MF, et al.: A modified technique allowing ultrasound-guided three dimensional transperineal prostate implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995, 32:219–225. DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(95)00521-Y
13. Messing EM, Zhang JB, Rubens DJ, et al.: Intraoperative optimized inverse planning for prostate brachytherapy: early experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 44:801–808. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00088-7
14. Zelefsky MJ, Yamada Y, Cohen G, et al.: Postimplantation dosimetric analysis of permanent transperineal prostate implantation: improved dose distributions with an intraoperative computer-optimized conformal planning technique. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 48:601–608. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(00)00655-6
15. Yu Y, Zhang JBY, Brasacchio RA, et al.: Automated treatment planning engine for prostate seed implant brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 43:647–652. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00407-6
16. D’Amico AV, Cormack R, Tempany CM, et al.: Real time magnetic resonance image guided interstitial brachytherapy in the treatment of select patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42:507–515. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00271-5
17. Wilkinson DA, Lee EJ, Ciezki JP, et al.: Dosimetric comparison of pre-planned and OR-planned prostate seed brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 48:1241–1244. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(00)00734-3
18. Matzkin H, Kaver I, Bramante-Schreiber L, et al.: Comparison between two iodine-125 brachytherapy implant techniques: pre-planning and intraoperative by various dosimetry quality indicators. Radiother Oncol 2003, 68:289–294. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-8140(03)00242-1
19. Nag S, Bice W, DeWyngaert K, et al.: The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for permanent prostate brachytherapy post-implant dosimetric analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 46:221–230. This paper describes the various intraoperative planning techniques that are available and contains an interesting discussion of potential new directions in treatment planning for low-dose rate brachytherapy. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00351-X
20. Zelefsky MJ, Wallner KE, Ling CC, et al.: Comparison of the 5-year outcome and morbidity of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy versus transperineal permanent iodine-125 implantation for early-stage prostatic cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:517–522. This is a retrospective comparison of a pre-planned brachytherapy technique used at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center with a three-dimensional conformal external beam radiotherapy technique for which 70.2 Gy was the median dose. The report indicates that while comparable outcomes in PSA control are observed, more urinary morbidity is seen with the brachytherapy technique likely because higher urethral doses delivered with the latter intervention.
21. Zelefsky MJ, Yamada Y, Marion C, et al.: Improved conformality and decreased toxicity with intraoperative computer-optimized transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003, 55:956–963. This report demonstrates that in a large number of patients, conformal intraoperative planning can provide a consistent method of achieving lower urethral and rectal doses and this, in turn, was associated with a reduction in urinary toxicity after prostate brachytherapy. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)04142-1
22. D’Amico AV, Tempany CM, Schultz, et al.: Comparing PSA outcome after radical prostatectomy or magnetic resonance imaging-guided partial prostatic irradiation in select patients with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Urology 2003, 62:1063–1067. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00772-6
23. Albert M, Tempany CM, Schultz D, et al.: Late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity after magnetic resonance imageguided prostate brachytherapy with or without neoadjuvant external beam radiation therapy. Cancer 2003, 949–954. This is an important paper that reports the toxicity associated with MRI-guided brachytherapy as performed by these investigators. Urinary morbidity with this urethral sparing approach is minimal. Rectal toxicity was somewhat increased and more significantly among patients who were treated with a combination of external beam radiotherapy and seed implants.
24. Roach M III, Kurhanewicz J, Carroll P: Spectroscopy in prostate cancer: hope or hype? Oncology 2001, 15:1399–1410. This is an excellent discussion of the potential of MRI spectroscopy and how such information can be integrated into radiation-based planning for the treatment of prostate cancer.
25. Zelefsky MJ, Cohen G, Zakian KL, et al.: Intraoperative conformal optimization for transperineal prostate implantation using magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Cancer J 2000, 6:249–255.
26. Dibiase SJ, Hosseinzadeh K, Gullapalli RP, et al.: Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging guided brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 52:429–438. DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(01)02609-8