Matched-pair analysis of conformal high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost versus external-beam radiation therapy alone for locally advanced prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: We performed a matched-pair analysis to compare our institution's experience in treating locally advanced prostate cancer with external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) alone to EBRT in combination with conformal interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy boosts (EBRT + HDR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1991 to 1998, 161 patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were prospectively treated with EBRT + HDR at William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan. Patients with any of the following characteristics were eligible for study entry: pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of >/= 10.0 ng/mL, Gleason score >/= 7, or clinical stage T2b to T3c. Pelvic EBRT (46.0 Gy) was supplemented with three (1991 through 1995) or two (1995 through 1998) ultrasound-guided transperineal interstitial iridium-192 HDR implants. The brachytherapy dose was escalated from 5.50 to 10.50 Gy per implant. Each of the 161 EBRT + HDR patients was randomly matched with a unique EBRT-alone patient. Patients were matched according to PSA level, Gleason score, T stage, and follow-up duration. The median PSA follow-up was 2.5 years for both EBRT + HDR and EBRT alone. RESULTS: EBRT + HDR patients demonstrated significantly lower PSA nadir levels (median, 0.4 ng/mL) compared with those receiving EBRT alone (median, 1.1 ng/mL). The 5-year biochemical control rates for EBRT + HDR versus EBRT-alone patients were 67% versus 44%, respectively (P <.001). On multivariate analyses, pretreatment PSA, Gleason score, T stage, and the use of EBRT alone were significantly associated with biochemical failure. Those patients in both treatment groups who experienced biochemical failure had a lower 5-year cause-specific survival rate than patients who were biochemically controlled (84% v 100%; P <.001). CONCLUSION: Locally advanced prostate cancer patients treated with EBRT + HDR demonstrate improved biochemical control compared with those who are treated with conventional doses of EBRT alone.

A comprehensive review of prostate cancer brachytherapy: defining an optimal technique.

PURPOSE: A comprehensive review of prostate cancer brachytherapy literature was performed to determine if an optimal method of implantation could be identified, and to compare and contrast techniques currently in use. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A MEDLINE search was conducted to obtain all articles in the English language on prostate cancer brachytherapy from 1985 through 1998. Articles were reviewed and grouped to determine the primary technique of implantation, the method or philosophy of source placement and/or dose specification, the technique to evaluate implant quality, overall treatment results (based upon pretreatment prostate specific antigen, (PSA), and biochemical control) and clinical, pathological or biochemical outcome based upon implant quality. RESULTS: A total of 178 articles were identified in the MEDLINE database. Of these, 53 studies discussed evaluable techniques of implantation and were used for this analysis. Of these studies, 52% used preoperative ultrasound to determine the target volume to be implanted, 16% used preoperative computerized tomography (CT) scans, and 18% placed seeds with an open surgical technique. An additional 11% of studies placed seeds or needles under ultrasound guidance using interactive real-time dosimetry. The number and distribution of radioactive sources to be implanted or the method used to prescribe dose was determined using nomograms in 27% of studies, a least squares optimization technique in 11%, or not stated in 35%. In the remaining 26%, sources were described as either uniformly, differentially, or peripherally placed in the gland. To evaluate implant quality, 28% of studies calculated some type of dose-volume histogram, 21% calculated the matched peripheral dose, 19% the minimum peripheral dose, 14% used some type of CT-based qualitative review and, in 18% of studies, no implant quality evaluation was mentioned. Six studies correlated outcome with implant dose. One study showed an association of implant dose with the achievement of a PSA nadir < or = 0.5. Two studies showed an improvement in biochemical control with a D90 (dose to 90% of the prostate volume) of 120 to 140 Gy or higher, and 2 additional studies found an association of clinical outcome with implant dose. One study correlated implant quality with biopsy results. Of the articles, 33 discussed evaluable treatment results, but only 16 reported findings based upon pretreatment PSA and biochemical control. Three- to 5-year biochemical control rates ranged from 48% to 100% for pretreatment PSAs < or = 4, 55% to 90% for PSAs between 4 and 10, 30% to 89% for PSAs > 10, < or = 20 and < 10% to 100% for PSAs > 20. Due to substantial differences in patient selection criteria (e.g., median Gleason score, clinical stage, pretreatment PSA), number of patients treated, median follow-up, definitions of biochemical control, and time points for analysis, no single technique consistently produced superior results. CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive review of prostate cancer brachytherapy literature failed to identify an optimal treatment approach when studies were analyzed for treatment outcome based upon pretreatment PSA and biochemical control. Although several well-designed studies showed an improvement in outcome with total dose or implant quality, the numerous techniques for implantation and the varied and inconsistent methods to specify dose or evaluate implant quality suggest that standardized protocols should be developed to objectively evaluate this treatment approach. These protocols have recently been suggested and, when implemented, should significantly improve the reporting of treatment data and, ultimately, the efficacy of prostate brachytherapy.

Long-term outcome with interstitial brachytherapy in the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy.

PURPOSE: We reviewed our institution's experience with interstitial implant boosts to determine their long-term impact on local control and cosmetic results. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between January 1, 1980 and December 31, 1987, 390 women with 400 cases of Stage I and II breast cancer were managed with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) at William Beaumont Hospital. All patients were treated with an excisional biopsy and 253 (63%) underwent reexcision. Radiation consisted of 45-50 Gy external beam irradiation to the whole breast followed by a boost to the tumor bed to at least 60 Gy using either electrons [108], photons [15], or an interstitial implant [277] with either 192Ir [190] or 125I [87]. Long-term local control and cosmetic outcome were assessed and contrasted between patients boosted with either interstitial implants, electrons, or photons. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 81 months, 25 patients have recurred in the treated breast for a 5- and 8-year actuarial rate of local recurrence of 4 and 8%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the 5- or 8-year actuarial rates of local recurrence using either electrons, photons, or an interstitial implant. Greater than 90% of patients obtained a good or excellent cosmetic result, and no statistically significant differences in cosmetic outcome were seen whether electrons, photons, or implants were used. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that patients with Stage I and II breast cancer undergoing BCT and judged to be candidates for boosts can be effectively managed with LDR interstitial brachytherapy. Long-term local control and cosmetic outcome are excellent and similar to patients boosted with either electrons or photons.

Interim report of image-guided conformal high-dose-rate brachytherapy for patients with unfavorable prostate cancer: the William Beaumont phase II dose-escalating trial.

PURPOSE: We analyzed our institution's experience treating patients with unfavorable prostate cancer in a prospective Phase II dose-escalating trial of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) integrated with conformal high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy boosts. This interim report discusses treatment outcome and prognostic factors using this treatment approach. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From November 1991 through February 1998, 142 patients with unfavorable prostate cancer were prospectively treated in a dose-escalating trial with pelvic EBRT in combination with outpatient HDR brachytherapy at William Beaumont Hospital. Patients with any of the following characteristics were eligible: pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >/= 10.0 ng/ml, Gleason score >/= 7, or clinical stage T2b or higher. All patients received pelvic EBRT to a median total dose of 46.0 Gy. Pelvic EBRT was integrated with ultrasound-guided transperineal conformal interstitial iridium-192 HDR implants. From 1991 to 1995, 58 patients underwent three conformal interstitial HDR implants during the first, second, and third weeks of pelvic EBRT. After October 1995, 84 patients received two interstitial implants during the first and third weeks of pelvic EBRT. The dose delivered via interstitial brachytherapy was escalated from 5.50 Gy to 6.50 Gy for each implant in those patients receiving three implants, and subsequently, from 8.25 Gy to 9.50 Gy per fraction in those patients receiving two implants. To improve implant quality and reduce operator dependency, an on-line, image-guided interactive dose optimization program was utilized during each HDR implant. No patient received hormonal therapy unless treatment failure was documented. The median follow-up was 2.1 years (range: 0.2-7.2 years). Biochemical failure was defined according to the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus Panel definition. RESULTS: The pretreatment PSA level was >/= 10.0 ng/ml in 51% of patients. The biopsy Gleason score was >/= 7 in 58% of cases, and 75% of cases were clinical stage T2b or higher. Despite the high frequency of these poor prognostic factors, the actuarial biochemical control rate was 89% at 2 years and 63% at 5 years. On multivariate analysis, a higher pretreatment PSA level, higher Gleason score, higher PSA nadir level, and shorter time to nadir were associated with biochemical failure. In the entire population, 14 patients (10%) experienced clinical failure at a median interval of 1.7 years (range: 0.2-4.5 years) after completing RT. The 5-year actuarial clinical failure rate was 22%. The 5-year actuarial rates of local failure and distant metastasis were 16% and 14%, respectively. For all patients, the 5-year disease-free survival, overall survival, and cause-specific survival rates were 89%, 95%, and 96%, respectively. The 5-year actuarial rate of RTOG Grade 3 late complications was 9% with no patient experiencing Grade 4 or 5 acute or late toxicity. CONCLUSION: Pelvic EBRT in combination with image-guided conformal HDR brachytherapy boosts appears to be an effective treatment for patients with unfavorable prostate cancer with minimal associated morbidity. Our dose-escalating trial will continue.

Iridium-192 transperineal interstitial brachytherapy for locally advanced or recurrent gynecological malignancies.

PURPOSE: To assess treatment outcome for patients with locally advanced or recurrent gynecological malignancies treated with continuous low-dose-rate (LDR) remote afterloading brachytherapy using the Martinez Universal Perineal Interstitial Template (MUPIT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 7/85 and 6/94, 69 patients with either locally advanced or recurrent malignancies of the cervix, endometrium, vagina, or female urethra were treated by 5 different physicians using the MUPIT with (24 patients) or without (45 patients) interstitial hyperthermia. Fifty-four patients had no prior treatment with radiation and received a combination of external beam irradiation (EBRT) and an interstitial implant. The combined median dose was 71 Gy (range 56-99 Gy), median EBRT dose was 39 Gy (range 30-74 Gy), and the median implant dose was 32 Gy (range 17-40 Gy). Fifteen patients with prior radiation treatment received an implant alone. The total median dose including previous EBRT was 91 Gy (range 70-130 Gy) and the median implant dose was 35 Gy (range 25-55 Gy). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 4.7 yr in survivors, the 3-yr actuarial local control (LC), disease-specific survival (DSS), and overall survival (OS) for all patients was 60%, 55%, and 41% respectively. The clinical complete response rate was 78% and in these patients the 3-year actuarial LC, DSS, and OS was 78%, 79%, and 63% respectively. On univariate analysis for local control, disease volume and hemoglobin were found to be statistically significant. On multivariate analysis, however, only disease volume remained significant (p = 0.011). There was no statistically significant difference in local control whether patients had received any prior treatment with radiation (p = 0.34), had recurrent disease (p = 0.13), or which physician performed the implant (p = 0.45). The grade 4 complication rate (small bowel obstruction requiring surgery, fistulas, soft tissue necrosis) for all patients was 14%. With a dose rate less than 70 cGy/hour, the grade 4 complication rate was 3% vs. 24% with dose rate > or = 70 cGy/hour (p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Patients with locally advanced or recurrent gynecological malignancies treated with the remote afterloader LDR MUPIT applicator can expect reasonable rates of local control that are not operator-dependent. Complication rates with this approach are acceptable and appear to be related to the dose rate.

The use of ultrasonography in the localization of the lumpectomy cavity for interstitial brachytherapy of the breast.

PURPOSE: To determine the value of breast ultrasonography (US) in defining the lumpectomy cavity for patients treated with interstitial brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In March 1993, a protocol of low dose rate (LDR) interstitial brachytherapy as the sole radiation modality in selected patients with early breast cancer was initiated at William Beaumont Hospital. To date, 60 patients have been entered in this protocol, and 38 have undergone US assisted placement of interstitial brachytherapy needles. The lumpectomy cavity was outlined in all dimensions and corresponding skin marks were placed for reference at time of implantation. These US dimensions were compared to the physician's clinical estimate of the location of the lumpectomy cavity, the patient's presurgical mammogram, and the position of the surgical scar. In the intraoperative setting, the dimensions of the lumpectomy cavity were also obtained and the placement of the deep plane of interstitial needles was verified by US. RESULTS: The full extent of the lumpectomy cavity was underestimated by clinical examination (physical exam, operative report, mammographic information and location of the surgical scar) in 33 of 38 patients (87%). The depth to the chest wall was also incorrectly estimated in 34 (90%) patients when compared to US examination. Intraoperatively, US was performed in nine patients and was useful in verifying the accurate placement of the deepest plane of interstitial brachytherapy needles. In 7 of 9 patients (75%), clinical placement of needles did not ensure adequate coverage of the posterior extent of the lumpectomy cavity as visualized by intraoperative US. CONCLUSIONS: In breast cancer patients considered for interstitial brachytherapy, US appears to be a more accurate means of identifying the full extent of the lumpectomy cavity when compared to clinical estimates. In addition, US allows real-time verification of needle placement in the intraoperative setting.

Ductal carcinoma in situ detected in the mammographic era: an analysis of clinical, pathologic, and treatment-related factors affecting outcome with breast-conserving therapy.

PURPOSE: We reviewed our institution's experience treating predominantly mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) to determine if any clinical, pathologic, or treatment-related factors affected outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From January 2, 1980 to January 6, 1992, 107 breasts in 105 patients were treated with BCT at William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI. All patients underwent at least an excisional biopsy and 70 patients (65%) were reexcised. All patients received whole-breast irradiation to a median dose of 50.4 Gy (range 43.1 to 56.0 Gy). Ninety-nine patients (93%) received a supplemental boost to the tumor bed for a median total dose of 60.4 Gy (range 59.1 to 71.8 Gy) using either photons (2 patients), electrons (69 patients), or an interstitial implant (28 patients). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 78 months, 10 patients have failed in the treated breast for a 5- and 10-year actuarial local control rate of 91.2 and 89.8%, respectively. Thirteen percent of the population have been followed for 10 years or more. Three recurrences were pure DCIS, and seven were invasive. All patients were salvaged with mastectomy. Nine patients remain without evidence of disease a median of 30.6 months after surgery. One patient failed distantly 36 months after local recurrence for an ultimate cause specific survival of 99%. Potential clinical (age, mammographic findings, method of detection, etc.), pathologic (nuclear grade, margins, etc.), and treatment-related factors (dose, boost technique, reexcision status, etc.) affecting outcome were analyzed. No variable was found to be associated with an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence. However, when only recurrences that occurred within or immediately adjacent to the lumpectomy cavity were analyzed, both margin status and the extent of cancerization of lobules (COL) near the surgical margin were associated with the development of a local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with BCT for predominantly mammographically detected DCIS achieve excellent rates of local control and overall survival. Both margin status and the extent of COL near the surgical margin appear to be associated with recurrences within or immediately adjacent to the lumpectomy cavity. These data suggest that careful attention to the completeness of surgical resection of DCIS is an important determinant of outcome.

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy as the sole radiation modality in the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: preliminary results of a pilot trial.

PURPOSE: We present the preliminary findings of our in-house protocol treating the tumor bed alone after lumpectomy with low-dose-rate (LDR) interstitial brachytherapy in selected patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Since March 1, 1993, 60 women with early-stage breast cancer were entered into a protocol of tumor bed irradiation only using an interstitial LDR implant with iodine-125. Patients were eligible if the tumor was < or = 3 cm, margins were > or = 2 mm, there was no extensive intraductal component, the axilla was surgically staged, and a postoperative mammogram was performed. Implants were placed using a standardized template either at the time of reexcision or shortly after lumpectomy. A total of 50 Gy was delivered at 0.52 Gy/h over a period of 96 h to the lumpectomy bed plus a 2-cm margin. Perioperative complications, cosmetic outcome, and local control were assessed. RESULTS: The median follow-up for all patients is 20 months. Three patients experienced minimal perioperative pain that required temporary nonnarcotic analgesics. There have been four postoperative infections which resolved with oral antibiotics. No significant skin reactions related to the implant were noted and no patient experienced impaired would healing. Early cosmetic results reveal minimal changes consisting of transient hyperpigmentation of the skin at the puncture sites and temporary induration in the tumor bed. Good to excellent cosmetic results were noted in all 19 patients followed up a minimum of 24 months posttherapy. To date, 51 women have obtained 6-12-month follow-up mammograms and no recurrences have been noted. All patients currently have no physical signs of recurrence, and no patient has failed regionally or distantly. CONCLUSION: Treatment of the tumor bed alone with LDR interstitial brachytherapy appears to be well tolerated, and early results are promising. Long-term follow-up of these patients is necessary to establish the equivalence of this treatment approach compared to standard BCT, however.

An analysis of clinical and treatment related prognostic factors on outcome using biochemical control as an end-point in patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam irradiation.

PURPOSE: We reviewed our institution's experience in treating patients with clinically localized prostate cancer with external beam irradiation (RT) to determine if previously analyzed clinical and treatment related prognostic factors affected outcome when biochemical control was used as an end-point to evaluate results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1 January 1987 and 31 December 1991, 470 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with external beam RT using localized prostate fields at William Beaumont Hospital. Biochemical control was defined as PSA nadir < or =1.5 ng/ml within 1 year of treatment. After achieving nadir, if two consecutive increases of PSA were noted, the patient was scored a failure at the time of the first increase. Prognostic factors, including the total number of days in treatment, the method of diagnosis, a history of any pretreatment transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and the type of boost were analyzed. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 48 months. No statistically significant difference in rates of biochemical control were noted for treatment time, overall time (date of biopsy to completion of RT), history of any pretreatment TURP, history of diagnosis by TURP, or boost techniques. Patients diagnosed by TURP had a significant improvement in the overall rate of biochemical control (P < 0.03) compared to transrectal/transperineal biopsy. The 5-year actuarial rates were 58 versus 39%, respectively. This improvement was not evident when pretreatment PSA, T stage, or Gleason score were controlled for. On multivariate analysis, no variable was associated with outcome. When analysis was limited to a more favorable group of patients (T1/T2 tumors, pretreatment PSA < or =20 ng/ml and Gleason score <7), none of these variables were significantly predictive of biochemical control when controlling for pretreatment PSA, T stage and Gleason score. CONCLUSIONS: No significant effect of treatment time, overall time, pretreatment TURP, or boost technique was noted on outcome in patients treated with conventional external beam irradiation when biochemical control was used as the end-point to evaluate results.

Conservative surgery and radiation therapy for infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. The role of preoperative mammograms in guiding treatment.

BACKGROUND: The authors have reviewed their institution's experience with conservative surgery and radiation therapy for early stage breast cancer with the goal of defining the impact of infiltrating lobular histology (ILC) on the local recurrence rate. Also, they have examined the preoperative mammograms of the ILC patients to determine if mammographic features could be used to predict treatment outcome. METHODS: Between January 1, 1980, and December 31, 1987, 402 cases of Stages I and II breast cancer were treated with conservative surgery and radiation therapy (BCT) at William Beaumont Hospital. Each patient had at least an excisional biopsy. Radiation consisted of 45-50 Gy to the entire breast followed by a supplemental boost dose, so that a minimum of 60 Gy was delivered to the tumor bed. Thirty cancers were classified histologically as infiltrating lobular carcinoma (ILC), 346 as infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC), and 26 as other. Median follow-up is 60 months. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in 5 year actuarial local recurrence rates between ILC and IDC, 3.3 versus 4.2%, respectively, (P = not significant). Preoperative mammograms were retrospectively reviewed for 29 of the 30 ILC patients. A spiculated opacity was the most common primary mammographic finding (63%), followed by architectural distortion (17%), poorly defined opacity (7%), and negative (7%). Of the patients who had a preoperative primary mammographic finding of a spiculated opacity, 55% underwent reexcision after the initial excisional biopsy, and residual invasive carcinoma was found in 18% of the reexcision specimens. In contrast, of the patients with a primary mammographic finding of an architectural distortion, poorly defined opacity, or negative, 89% underwent reexcision after an initial excisional biopsy, and residual invasive carcinoma was found in 100% of the reexcision specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Infiltrating lobular carcinoma does not have a worse local recurrence rate compared with IDC when each is treated with breast-conserving therapy. The primary finding on preoperative mammograms in patients with ILC may prove to be a useful tool for predicting the likelihood of residual carcinoma in the breast after initial excisional biopsy.

The impact of temporary iodine-125 interstitial implant boost in the primary management of squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx.

BACKGROUND: To define the impact of interstitial boost of the oropharynx on local control and complications using iodine-125 (I-125) brachytherapy. METHODS: Between October 1986 and September 1991, 19 patients with cancer of the oropharynx received treatment at William Beaumont Hospital. Primary tumors consisted of 13 base of tongue, 4 tonsillar, and 2 pharyngeal wall lesions. All patients received 45-66 Gy (median, 54 Gy) external beam irradiation to the primary and regional nodes, followed by an interstitial implant of 22-32 Gy (median, 25 Gy) with I-125. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 58 months (range, 12-89 months). Three patients failed within the tumor bed, for a 5-year actuarial rate of local control of 83% (T1/T2, 82%; T3/T4, 86%). Two of the three local failures were salvaged surgically, for an overall 5-year actuarial local control rate of 94%. The 5-year actuarial overall survival rate was 64%. Complications included one case of soft tissue ulceration and two cases of osteoradionecrosis, all managed conservatively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer of the oropharynx judged to be candidates for boosts with interstitial implants can be effectively treated with I-125. Local control was excellent, and complications were minimal.

Excellent functional outcome in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the base of tongue treated with external irradiation and interstitial iodine 125 boost.

BACKGROUND: Local control, functional outcome, and complications in patients with carcinoma of the base of tongue (BOT) were analyzed to assess the impact of interstitial implant boost with I-125 seeds. METHODS: Between December 1986 and May 1995, 16 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the BOT received treatment at the William Beaumont Hospital and 4 received treatment at the Northern Virginia Cancer Center. The primary tumor classification for this group consisted of T1/T2-11 patients, T3/T4-9 patients. All patients initially received 50.4-66.6 Gray (Gy) (median: 54 Gy) external beam irradiation to the primary site and regional lymph nodes followed by an interstitial implant boost 2 to 3 weeks later. Implant dose ranged from 20 to 32 Gy (median: 27 Gy). The implanted volume included the tumor and glossotonsillar sulcus in all patients and the pharyngeal wall or tonsil in select cases. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 47 months (range, 6-88 mos). Two patients have failed within the tumor bed (T2 and T4) for a 5-year actuarial local control rate of 88%. The T2 patient was salvaged surgically, for an overall 5-year actuarial local control rate of 93%. No patients have relapsed within the neck as the only or first site of failure. The 5-year actuarial overall survival rate was 72%. Complications included three cases of exposed bone and one case of cranial nerve XII palsy. All complications were managed conservatively. Excellent to good functional outcome, including speech and swallowing, was preserved in 18 of the 20 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer of the BOT can be treated effectively with an interstitial boost utilizing I-125 seeds. Overall, local control is excellent and complications are minimal. Of greatest significance, organ preservation with excellent understandability of speech and diet tolerance was achieved in 90% of the patients.

Conformal high dose rate iridium-192 boost brachytherapy in locally advanced prostate cancer: superior prostate-specific antigen response compared with external beam treatment.

PURPOSE: Prostate-specific antigen levels are used to judge disease control of prostate cancer. No published data attest to the greater ability of conformal brachytherapy to control disease compared with conventional radiation at a single institution. This report compares the biochemical response rates in patients with stages T2b to T3c prostate cancer treated with conformal brachytherapy boost and external beam radiation with the rates in patients treated with conventional external radiation alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 1991 through November 1995, 58 patients received 45.6 Gy pelvic external irradiation and three high dose rate iridium-192 conformal boost implants of 5.5 to 6.5 Gy each. They were compared with 278 similarly staged patients treated from January 1987 through December 1991 with external beam radiation to prostate-only fields (median dose 66.6 Gy). No patient received androgen deprivation. Patient outcome was analyzed for biochemical control. Biochemical failure was defined as a prostate-specific antigen level > 1.5 ng/mL and rising on two consecutive values. If serial posttreatment prostate-specific antigen levels were showing a continuous downward trend, failure was not scored. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 43 months for the conventionally treated group and 26 months for the brachytherapy boost group. The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level was 14.3 ng/mL for the external-beam-radiation-alone group and 14.0 ng/mL for the brachytherapy boost group. The median Gleason scores were 6 and 7, respectively, for the two groups. The biochemical control rate was significantly higher in the brachytherapy boost treatment group. Three-year actuarial biochemical control rates were 85% versus 52% for the conformally and conventionally treated patients, respectively. In a multivariate analysis, the use of conformal brachytherapy boost and pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level were significant prognostic determinants of biochemical control. The 3-year actuarial rates of biochemical control for conformally versus conventionally treated patients, respectively, were 83% versus 72% for a pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level of 4.1 to 10.0 ng/mL, 85% versus 47% for a prostate-specific antigen level of 10.1 to 20.0 ng/mL, and 89% versus 29% for prostate-specific antigen > 20 ng/mL. When the analysis was limited to patients in both groups with a minimum 12-month follow-up, the brachytherapy boost group continued to show a higher biochemical control rate compared with the conventional radiation group (3-year actuarial rates of 86% vs 53%). DISCUSSION: These preliminary results show a significant improvement in the biochemical response rate with conformal boost brachytherapy and pelvic external radiation compared with conventional radiation alone. These results, coupled with our previously reported acceptable toxicity rates, support the use of this technique.