Author:
Takai Kenji,Watanabe Ryota,Hyogo Ken-ichi,Ito Yuri,Minagawa Nobuko,Sato Yusuke,Matsuda Yoshikazu,Nemoto Kenji
Abstract
Abstract
Background
We report the results of a retrospective analysis of localized prostate cancer (LPCa) treated with transperineal ultrasound image-guided radiotherapy (TPUS-IGRT).
Methods
A total of 124 patients (median age: 74 y, 46–84 y) with LPCa who underwent TPUS-IGRT (Clarity Autoscan system; CAS, Elekta; Stockholm, Sweden) between April 2016 and October 2021 for curative/after hormone induction were enrolled. The number of patients by risk (National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2019) was 7, 25, 42, and 50 for low (LR), good intermediate (good IR), poor intermediate (poor IR), and high (HR)/very high (VHR), respectively. Ninety-five patients were given neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. The planning target volume margin setting was 3 mm for rectal in most cases, 5–7 mm for superior/inferior, and 5 mm for anterior/right/left. The principle prescribed dose is 74 Gy (LR), 76 Gy (good IR), and 76–78 Gy (poor IR or above). CAS was equipped with a real-time prostate intrafraction monitoring (RTPIFM) system. When a displacement of 2–3 mm or more was detected, irradiation was paused, and the patients were placed on standby for prostate reinstatement/recorrection. Of the 3135 fractions in 85 patients for whom RTPIFM was performed, 1008 fractions (32.1%) were recorrected at least once after starting irradiation.
Results
A total of 123 patients completed the radiotherapy course. The 5-year overall survival rate was 95.9%. The 5-year biological prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival rate (bPFS) was 100% for LR, 92.9% for intermediate IR, and 93.2% for HR/VHR (Phoenix method). The 5-year late toxicity rate of Grade 2+ was 7.4% for genitourinary (GU) and 6.5% for gastrointestinal (GI) organs. Comparing the ≤ 76 Gy group to the 78 Gy group for both GU and GI organs, the incidence was higher in the 78 Gy group for both groups.
Conclusion
These results suggest that TPUS-IGRT is well tolerated, as the bPFS and incidence of late toxicity are almost comparable to those reported by other sources of image-guided radiotherapy.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference38 articles.
1. Andic F, Izol V, Gokcay S, Arslantas HS, Bayazit Y, Coskun H, Sertdemir Y. Definitive external-beam radiotherapy versus radical prostatectomy in clinically localized high-risk prostate cancer: a retrospective study. BMC Urol. 2019;19:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-018-0432-6.
2. Cheng X, Wang ZH, Peng M, Huang ZC, Yi L, Li YJ, Yi L, Luo WZ, Chen JW, Wang YH. The role of radical prostatectomy and definitive external beam radiotherapy in combined treatment for high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Androl. 2020;22(4):383–9.
3. Stuk J, Vanasek J, Odrazka K, Dolezel M, Kolarova I, Hlavka A, Vitkova M, Sinkorova Z. Image-guided radiation therapy produces lower acute and chronic gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity in prostate cancer patients. J BUON. 2021;26(3):940–8.
4. Becker-Schiebe M, Abaci A, Ahmad T, Hoffmann W. Reducing radiation-associated toxicity using online image guidance (IGRT) in prostate cancer patients undergoing dose-escalated radiation therapy. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2016;21(3):188–94.
5. Soete G, Verellen D, Storme G. Image guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Bull Cancer. 2008;95(3):374–80.