A comparison of the impact of isotope (I-125 vs. Pd-103) on toxicity and biochemical outcome after interstitial brachytherapy and external beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Brachytherapy (Impact Factor: 1.99). 12/2011; 11(4):271-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2011.11.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare biochemical outcomes and morbidity associated with iodine-125 ((125)I) and palladium-103 ((103)Pd) brachytherapy as part of combined modality therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.
Between October 2002 and December 2008, 259 patients underwent prostate brachytherapy ((125)I prescription dose, 110Gy: n=199; (103)Pd prescription dose, 100Gy: n=60) followed by external beam radiotherapy (median dose, 50.4Gy). Eighty-seven patients also received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Toxicities were recorded with CTCAE v 3.0, International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS), and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires.
Overall, acute Grade ≥2 genitourinary toxicity occurred in 21% and 30% of patients treated with (125)I and (103)Pd, respectively (p=0.16). There were no significant differences in IPSS change or urinary quality-of-life scores between the isotopes at 4, 6, or 12 months (p=0.20, 0.21, and 1.0, respectively). IPSS resolution occurred at a median of 11 and 6 months for (125)I and (103)Pd patients, respectively (p=0.03). On multivariate analysis, only the use of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy was predictive of time to IPSS resolution (p=0.046). Late Grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity occurred in 7% of (125)I patients and 6% of patients treated with (103)Pd. Of 129 potent patients at baseline, there was better erectile function in patients who received (103)Pd (p=0.02); however, the followup was shorter for these patients. The 5-year prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival for (125)I and (103)Pd patients was 95.2% and 98.2% (p=0.73), respectively.
There were no differences in acute or long-term genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity between (125)I and (103)Pd in combined modality therapy for prostate cancer. There may be less erectile toxicity with the use of (103)Pd; however, additional followup of these patients is needed. There was no significant difference in 5-year prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival between (103)Pd and (125)I.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate the utility of endorectal coil magenetic resonance imaging (eMRI) in predicting biochemical relapse in prostate cancer patients treated with combination brachytherapy and external-beam radiotherapy. Between 2000 and 2008, 279 men with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer underwent eMRI of their prostate before receiving brachytherapy and supplemental intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Endorectal coil MRI was performed before treatment and retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists experienced in genitourinary MRI. Image-based variables, including tumor diameter, location, number of sextants involved, and the presence of extracapsular extension (ECE), were incorporated with other established clinical variables to predict biochemical control outcomes. The median follow-up was 49 months (range, 1-13 years). The 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival for the cohort was 92%. Clinical findings predicting recurrence on univariate analysis included Gleason score (hazard ratio [HR] 3.6, p = 0.001), PSA (HR 1.04, p = 0.005), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group (HR 4.1, p = 0.002). Clinical T stage and the use of androgen deprivation therapy were not correlated with biochemical failure. Imaging findings on univariate analysis associated with relapse included ECE on MRI (HR 3.79, p = 0.003), tumor size (HR 2.58, p = 0.04), and T stage (HR 1.71, p = 0.004). On multivariate analysis incorporating both clinical and imaging findings, only ECE on MRI and Gleason score were independent predictors of recurrence. Pretreatment eMRI findings predict for biochemical recurrence in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with combination brachytherapy and external-beam radiotherapy. Gleason score and the presence of ECE on MRI were the only significant predictors of biochemical relapse in this group of patients.
    International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 03/2012; 84(3):707-11. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.01.009
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To report prostate-specific antigen (PSA) relapse-free survival and treatment-related toxicity outcomes after combining high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1998 and 2009, 229 patients were treated with HDR brachytherapy followed 3 weeks later by supplemental EBRT. The HDR brachytherapy boost consisted of three fractions of (192)Ir (5.5-7.5Gy per fraction), and EBRT consisted of intensity-modulated radiotherapy delivering an additional 45.0-50.4Gy directed to the prostate gland and seminal vesicles. Median follow-up was 61 months. RESULTS: Seven-year PSA relapse-free survival for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients were 95%, 90%, and 57%, respectively (p<0.001). Among high-risk patients treated with biological equivalent doses in excess of 190Gy, 7-year PSA relapse-free survival was 81%. In multivariate analysis, Gleason scores of ≥8 predicted for increased risk of biochemical failure, whereas the use of short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy did not influence tumor-control outcomes even among intermediate- or high-risk patients. Seven-year incidence of distant metastases for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients were 5%, 3%, and 17%, respectively. Seven-year incidence of late Grade 2 and 3 genitourinary toxicities were 22.1% and 4.9%, respectively and the 7-year incidence of Grade 2 and 3 gastrointestinal toxicities were 1% and 0.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: HDR prostate brachytherapy in conjunction with supplemental EBRT results in excellent biochemical relapse-free survival rates with a low incidence of severe late genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicities. The use of short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation did not influence long-term biochemical tumor control in this cohort.
    Brachytherapy 07/2012; 12(1). DOI:10.1016/j.brachy.2012.05.003
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Brachytherapy was developed to treat prostate cancer 50 years ago. Current advanced techniques using transrectal ultrasonography were established 25 years ago. Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has enabled the prostate to be viewed with improved resolution with the use of modern ultrasound machines. Moreover, the development of software that can provide images captured in real time has improved treatment outcomes. Other new radiologic imaging technologies or a combination of magnetic resonance and TRUS could be applied to brachytherapy in the future. The therapeutic value of brachytherapy for early-stage prostate cancer is comparable to that of radical prostatectomy in long-term follow-up. Nevertheless, widespread application of brachytherapy cannot be achieved for several reasons. The treatment outcome of brachytherapy varies according to the skill of the operator and differences in patient selection. Currently, only three radioactive isotopes are available for use in low dose rate prostate brachytherapy: I-125, Pd-103, and Cs-131; therefore, more isotopes should be developed. High dose rate brachytherapy using Ir-192 combined with external beam radiation, which is needed to verify the long-term effects, has been widely applied in high-risk patient groups. Recently, tumor-selective therapy or focal therapy using brachytherapy, which is not possible by surgical extraction, has been developed to maintain the quality of life in selected cases. However, this new application for prostate cancer treatment should be performed cautiously because we do not know the oncological outcome, and it would be an interim treatment method. This technique might evolve into a hybrid of whole-gland treatment and focal therapy.
    Korean journal of urology 11/2012; 53(11):743-9. DOI:10.4111/kju.2012.53.11.743
Show more