Case series illustrating the synergistic use of hydrogel spacer and MR-guidance to increase the radiotherapeutic index for localized prostate cancer.

MRI-guided brachytherapy Polyethylene glycol hydrogel spacer Prostate cancer Rectal toxicity

Journal

Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology
ISSN: 2405-6324
Titre abrégé: Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101762366

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Historique:
received: 05 02 2019
revised: 24 07 2019
accepted: 30 08 2019
entrez: 26 2 2020
pubmed: 26 2 2020
medline: 26 2 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The risk of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity may limit the use of curative-intent radical radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PCa) in circumstances where morbidity of treatment may exceed an acceptable threshold. Rectal spacers are used to expand the distance between the anterior rectal wall and the prostate, consequently sparing the rectum from the high-dose region. We report three clinical scenarios of PCa patients treated at our institution, where risk of RT-associated rectal toxicity may be increased: inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), salvage brachytherapy (BT) after previous external beam RT (EBRT), and tailored dose-escalation with focal BT to the gross tumor volume followed by stereotactic body RT. Prior to RT, a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel spacer was successfully placed in all cases. Treatment comprised magnetic resonance (MR) guided high dose-rate BT ± EBRT. All patients completed treatment uneventfully, without any significant GI toxicity at last follow-up. These cases illustrate the utility of PEG hydrogel spacer, where concerns of radiation induced toxicity may have previously limited the application of radiotherapy. The synergistic use of these novel devices together with MR-guided BT may expand the indications and therapeutic index of curative-intent RT-based treatments, while minimizing the risks of GI toxicity.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The risk of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity may limit the use of curative-intent radical radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PCa) in circumstances where morbidity of treatment may exceed an acceptable threshold. Rectal spacers are used to expand the distance between the anterior rectal wall and the prostate, consequently sparing the rectum from the high-dose region.
CASE PRESENTATIONS METHODS
We report three clinical scenarios of PCa patients treated at our institution, where risk of RT-associated rectal toxicity may be increased: inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), salvage brachytherapy (BT) after previous external beam RT (EBRT), and tailored dose-escalation with focal BT to the gross tumor volume followed by stereotactic body RT. Prior to RT, a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel spacer was successfully placed in all cases. Treatment comprised magnetic resonance (MR) guided high dose-rate BT ± EBRT. All patients completed treatment uneventfully, without any significant GI toxicity at last follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
These cases illustrate the utility of PEG hydrogel spacer, where concerns of radiation induced toxicity may have previously limited the application of radiotherapy. The synergistic use of these novel devices together with MR-guided BT may expand the indications and therapeutic index of curative-intent RT-based treatments, while minimizing the risks of GI toxicity.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32095546
doi: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2019.08.002
pii: S2405-6324(19)30003-4
pmc: PMC7033779
doi:

Types de publication

Case Reports

Langues

eng

Pagination

22-25

Informations de copyright

© 2019 The Authors.

Références

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Aug 1;92(5):971-977
pubmed: 26054865
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2015 Sep;27(9):536-41
pubmed: 26021592
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Nov 1;102(3):561-567
pubmed: 30244878
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Apr;111(1):126-31
pubmed: 24746567
Eur Radiol. 2012 Apr;22(4):746-57
pubmed: 22322308
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Nov;11(11):1066-73
pubmed: 20933466
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Oct;121(1):118-123
pubmed: 27647458
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Mar 1;73(3):665-71
pubmed: 18760545
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Sep 1;69(1):95-102
pubmed: 17707267
Radiother Oncol. 2013 Feb;106(2):155-6
pubmed: 23474285
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2017 Jul;29(7):412-420
pubmed: 28190638
Radiother Oncol. 2012 May;103(2):217-22
pubmed: 22341794
Cancer. 2008 Jan 15;112(2):307-14
pubmed: 18050294
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Mar 1;46(4):995-8
pubmed: 10705022
Brachytherapy. 2013 Jan-Feb;12(1):44-9
pubmed: 22831750
Front Oncol. 2012 May 23;2:48
pubmed: 22655274
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Apr 1;97(5):976-985
pubmed: 28209443
J Urol. 2003 Aug;170(2 Pt 1):459-63
pubmed: 12853799
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Oct 1;51(2):455-9
pubmed: 11567821
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Jun 1;98(2):286-295
pubmed: 28433432

Auteurs

Noelia Sanmamed (N)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Canada.

Rachel M Glicksman (RM)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.

Joelle Helou (J)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Canada.

Peter Chung (P)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Canada.

Alejandro Berlin (A)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Canada.
Techna Institute, University Health Network, Canada.

Classifications MeSH