Focal brachytherapy for selected low-risk prostate cancers: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and the early toxicity of focal brachytherapy in highly selected localized prostate cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-one patients underwent a focal brachytherapy between February 2010 and March 2012, representing 3.7% of the cases treated by our group during this period. Patient selection was based on (at least) two series of prostate biopsies and a high-resolution MRI. Only patients with very limited and localized tumors, according to strict criteria, were selected for the procedure. The technique used a real-time procedure with the implantation of free (125)I seeds and dynamic dose calculation. The prescribed dose for the focal volume was 145Gy. RESULTS: The treated volume corresponded to a mean value of 34% of the total prostatic volume (range, 20-48%). For the focal volume, the mean D90 and V100 was 183.2Gy (range, 176-188Gy) and 99.3% (range, 98.8-100%), respectively. The technique was performed in an hour and a half. When compared with a previous cohort treated by whole-prostate brachytherapy, urinary toxicity (International Prostate Symptom Score) was borderline reduced (p = 0.04) at 6 months only, whereas the recovery of the International Index of Erectile Function 5 was better (p = 0.014). The International Continence Score was nil in almost all cases as well as rectal toxicity. CONCLUSION: Focal treatment by brachytherapy is easily feasible with little acute toxicity. Further investigation is needed to assess the results in terms of tumor control and long-term toxicity.

The prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion on biopsy specimens in lung cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine prognostic factors for patients who have non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is treated with definitive chemoradiation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight patients has been treated with radiation therapy and concomitant or sequential chemotherapy between 2000 and 2005. Paraffin-embedded biopsy specimens were obtained before treatment from 73 patients and reviewed by two independent pathologists. Complete follow-up data were collected. The impact of clinical and pathological factors and treatment modality on survival was studied using the χ(2) and Fisher exact tests. A multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were evaluated, 58 men and 15 women. Median age was 62 years. Most had locally advanced disease (42 stage IIIB and 24 stage IIIA), whereas 7 were medically inoperable stage I-II patients. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was identified in 20 biopsy specimens (27.4 %). Radiotherapy delivered a median dose of 66 Gy (range, 60 to 70 Gy). The median overall survival was 20.5 months. Relapse-free and overall survival were significantly higher in the concomitant arm than in the sequential arm (P = .025 and P = .031, respectively). We found an independent association between the presence of LVI and both the risk of death with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 2.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-4.83) and the risk of metastatic progression (adjusted HR = 3.01; 95% CI 1.58-5.72). CONCLUSION: The presence of LVI on stage III NSCLC biopsy specimens was the only independent prognostic factor for poor outcome and may, therefore, be helpful in identifying patients at high risk of metastatic disease.

Implant breast reconstruction followed by radiotherapy: can helical tomotherapy become a standard irradiation treatment?

To evaluate the benefits and limitations of helical tomotherapy (HT) for loco-regional irradiation of patients after a mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction. Ten breast cancer patients with retropectoral implants were randomly selected for this comparative study. Planning target volumes (PTVs) 1 (the volume between the skin and the implant, plus margin) and 2 (supraclavicular, infraclavicular, and internal mammary nodes, plus margin) were 50 Gy in 25 fractions using a standard technique and HT. The extracted dosimetric data were compared using a 2-tailed Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test. Doses for PTV1 and PTV2 were significantly higher with HT (V95 of 98.91 and 97.91%, respectively) compared with the standard technique (77.46 and 72.91%, respectively). Similarly, the indexes of homogeneity were significantly greater with HT (p = 0.002). HT reduced ipsilateral lung volume that received ≥20 Gy (16.7 vs. 35%), and bilateral lungs (p = 0.01) and neighboring organs received doses that remained well below tolerance levels. The heart volume, which received 25 Gy, was negligible with both techniques. HT can achieve full target coverage while decreasing high doses to the heart and ipsilateral lung. However, the low doses to normal tissue volumes need to be reduced in future studies.

Is there a detrimental effect of waiting for radiotherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a possible deleterious effect of waiting time to radiotherapy on the biochemical relapse (BR) of patients with localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients included in this retrospective study had localized prostate adenocarcinoma treated with external-beam irradiation alone. Waiting time was defined as the interval between the first consultation and the first radiation treatment. BR was defined as 3 consecutive rises of prostatic specific antigen (PSA). Patients were split into 3 groups of waiting time: group A were treated within 40 days; group B waited 41 to 80 days; group C waited >80 days to receive radiotherapy. The effect of waiting on BR was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling was adjusted for known prognostic factors. RESULTS: There were 289 patients who participated in the analysis. Median follow-up time was 6.1 year. Overall BR rate was 44% at 5 years. The median waiting time increased over the study period from 26 days in 1992 to 123 days in 2000. In adjusted multivariate analysis there was a nonsignificant higher risk of BR with waiting for 41 to 80 days (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3-1.6) and for >80 days (HR = 0.6; 95% CI = 0.2-1.5) when compared with patients treated within 40 days after consultation. CONCLUSION: Delaying the start of radiotherapy showed little effect on the rate of BR in the group of 288 prostate cancer patients analyzed in this study.