Long-term outcomes of partial prostate treatment with magnetic resonance imaging-guided brachytherapy for patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Partial prostate treatment has emerged as a potential method for treating patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer while minimizing toxicity. The authors previously demonstrated poor rates of biochemical disease control for patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate-risk disease using partial gland treatment with brachytherapy. The objective of the current study was to estimate the rates of distant metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) for this cohort. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2007, a total of 354 men with clinical T1c disease, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level < 15 ng/mL, and Gleason grade ≤3 + 4 prostate cancer underwent partial prostate treatment with brachytherapy to the peripheral zone under 0.5-Tesla magnetic resonance guidance. The cumulative incidences of metastasis and PCSM for the NCCN very low-risk, low-risk, and intermediate-risk groups were estimated. Fine and Gray competing risk regression was used to evaluate clinical factors associated with time to metastasis. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients developed metastases at a median of 11.0 years (interquartile range, 6.9-13.9 years). The 12-year metastasis rates for patients with very low-risk, low-risk, and intermediate-risk disease were 0.8% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.1%-4.4%), 8.7% (95% CI, 3.4%-17.2%), and 15.7% (95% CI, 5.7%-30.2%), respectively, and the 12-year PCSM estimates were 1.6% (95% CI, 0.1%-7.6%), 1.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-6.8%), and 8.2% (95% CI, 1.9%-20.7%), respectively. On multivariate analysis, NCCN risk category (low risk: hazard ratio, 6.34 [95% CI, 1.18-34.06; P = .03] and intermediate risk: hazard ratio, 6.98 [95% CI, 1.23-39.73; P = .03]) was found to be significantly associated with the time to metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: Partial prostate treatment with brachytherapy may be associated with higher rates of distant metastasis and PCSM for patients with intermediate-risk disease after long-term follow-up. Treatment of less than the full gland may not be appropriate for this cohort.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Borderline and Unresectable Pancreas Cancer.

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel reviewed the pertinent literature and voted on five variants to establish appropriate recommended treatment of borderline and unresectable pancreatic cancer. The guidelines reviewed the use of radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery. Radiation technique, dose, and targets were evaluated, as was the recommended chemotherapy, administered either alone or concurrently with radiation. This report will aid clinicians in determining guidelines for the optimal treatment of borderline and unresectable pancreatic cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Resectable Stomach Cancer.

For resectable gastric cancer, perioperative chemotherapy or adjuvant chemoradiation with chemotherapy are standards of care. The decision making for adjuvant therapeutic management can depend on the stage of the cancer, lymph node positivity, and extent of surgical resection. After gastric cancer resection, postoperative chemotherapy combined with chemoradiation should be incorporated in cases of D0 lymph node dissection, positive regional lymph nodes, poor clinical response to induction chemotherapy, or positive margins. In the setting of a D2 lymph node dissection, especially those with negative regional lymph nodes, adjuvant chemotherapy alone could be considered. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a breast neoplasm with potential for progression to invasive cancer. Management commonly involves excision, radiotherapy, and hormonal therapy. Surgical assessment of regional lymph nodes is rarely indicated except in cases of microinvasion or mastectomy. Radiotherapy is employed for local control in breast conservation, although it may be omitted for select low-risk situations. Several radiotherapy techniques exist beyond standard whole-breast irradiation (ie, partial-breast irradiation [PBI], hypofractionated whole-breast radiation); evidence for these is evolving. We present an update of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® for the management of DCIS. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions, which are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi technique) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria local-regional recurrence (LRR) and salvage surgery-breast cancer.

Although both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy generally provide excellent local-regional control of breast cancer, local-regional recurrence (LRR) does occur. Predictors for LRR include patient, tumor, and treatment-related factors. Salvage after LRR includes coordination of available modalities, including surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy, depending on the clinical scenario. Management recommendations for breast cancer LRR, including patient scenarios, are reviewed, and represent evidence-based data and expert opinion of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on LRR.The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel.The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® rectal cancer: metastatic disease at presentation.

The management of rectal cancer in patients with metastatic disease at presentation is highly variable. There are no phase III trials addressing therapeutic approaches, and the optimal sequencing of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery remains unresolved. Although chemoradiation is standard for patients with stage II/III rectal cancer, its role in the metastatic setting is controversial. Omitting chemoradiation may not be appropriate in all stage IV patients, particularly those with symptomatic primary tumors. Moreover, outcomes in this setting are vastly different, as some treatments carry the potential for cure in selected patients, while others are purely palliative. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application, by the panel, of a well-established consensus methodology (Modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used as the basis for recommending imaging or treatment.

Updated results of magnetic resonance imaging guided partial prostate brachytherapy for favorable risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy.

PURPOSE: We report updated results of magnetic resonance imaging guided partial prostate brachytherapy and propose a definition of biochemical failure following focal therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997 to 2007, 318 men with cT1c, prostate specific antigen less than 15 ng/ml, Gleason 3 + 4 or less prostate cancer received magnetic resonance imaging guided brachytherapy in which only the peripheral zone was targeted. To exclude benign prostate specific antigen increases due to prostatic hyperplasia, we investigated the usefulness of defining prostate specific antigen failure as nadir +2 with prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year. Cox regression was used to determine the factors associated with prostate specific antigen failure. RESULTS: Median followup was 5.1 years (maximum 12.1). While 36 patients met the nadir +2 criteria, 16 of 17 biopsy proven local recurrences were among the 26 men who also had a prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year (16 of 26 vs 1 of 10, p = 0.008). Using the nadir +2 definition, prostate specific antigen failure-free survival for low risk cases at 5 and 8 years was 95.1% (91.0-97.3) and 80.4% (70.7-87.1), respectively. This rate improved to 95.6% (91.6-97.7) and 90.0% (82.6-94.3) using nadir +2 with prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year. For intermediate risk cases survival was 73.0% (55.0-84.8) at 5 years and 66.4% (44.8-81.1) at 8 years (the same values as using nadir +2 with prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year). CONCLUSIONS: Requiring a prostate specific antigen velocity greater than 0.75 ng/ml per year in addition to nadir +2 appears to better predict clinical failure after therapies that target less than the whole gland. Further followup will determine whether magnetic resonance imaging guided brachytherapy targeting the peripheral zone produces comparable cancer control to whole gland treatment in men with low risk disease. However, at this time it does not appear adequate for men with even favorable intermediate risk disease.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Operable Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

PURPOSE: Limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options for nonmetastatic, operable patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). In this systematic review, the American Radium Society (ARS) gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) evaluating how neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment regimens compared with each other, surgery alone, or definitive chemoradiation in terms of response to therapy, quality of life, and oncologic outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was used to develop an extensive analysis of peer-reviewed phase 2R and phase 3 randomized controlled trials as well as meta-analyses found within the Ovid Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase databases between 2009 to 2019. These studies were used to inform the expert panel, which then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 4 broadly representative clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). RESULTS: For a medically operable nonmetastatic patient with a cT3 and/or cN+ adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or GEJ (Siewert I-II), the panel most strongly recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation. For a cT2N0M0 patient with high-risk features, the panel recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. For patients found to have pathologically involved nodes (pN+) who did not receive any neoadjuvant therapy, the panel recommends adjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. These guidelines assess the appropriateness of various dose-fractionating schemes and target volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens for esophageal cancer are still evolving with many areas of active investigation. These guidelines are intended for the use of practitioners and patients who desire information about the management of operable esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Patient-reported quality of life after salvage brachytherapy for radio-recurrent prostate cancer: A prospective Phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported quality of life (QOL) after salvage brachytherapy for radiorecurrent prostate cancer has not been well-characterized prospectively. METHODS: We examined 25 men who recurred after primary radiotherapy for prostate cancer and received MRI-guided salvage brachytherapy as part of a prospective Phase II study. These patients received prospectively a validated patient-reported QOL questionnaire to fill out at baseline, as well as 3, 15, and 27 months after re-irradiation to determine the degree of sexual, bowel, and urinary dysfunction (maximum dysfunction score=100). RESULTS: On average, sexual function continued to decline with time, and patients had significantly worse sexual function scores at 27 months than baseline (p=0.01). Although bowel and urinary symptoms worsened acutely at 3 or 15 months, they showed on average some improvement by 27 months, and there were no significant differences between baseline and 27-month urinary or bowel scores. An interval to re-irradiation less than 4.5 years and prior brachytherapy were each associated significantly with the largest decrements in bowel function (p=0.035). CONCLUSION: Similar to the patterns seen in the de novo setting, patients who receive salvage brachytherapy report a worsening of bowel and urinary symptoms followed by some improvement by 27 months, while sexual function steadily declines over time. Interval to re-irradiation and type of prior radiation received may be used to counsel and optimize selection of men for salvage brachytherapy with regard to QOL endpoints.

Evaluating the influence of prostate-specific antigen kinetics on metastasis in men with PSA recurrence after partial gland therapy.

PURPOSE: Although current Delphi Consensus guidelines do not recommend a specific definition of biochemical recurrence after partial gland therapy, these guidelines acknowledge that serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests remain the best marker for monitoring disease after treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine whether PSA velocity at failure per the Phoenix (nadir + 2 ng/mL) definition is associated with metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in a cohort of patients who experienced PSA failure after partial gland therapy. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2007, 285 patients with favorable risk prostate cancer underwent partial prostate brachytherapy to the peripheral zone. PSA velocity was calculated for 94 patients who experienced PSA failure per the Phoenix (nadir + 2) definition. Fine and Gray competing risks regression was performed to determine whether PSA velocity and other clinical factors were associated with metastasis and PCSM. RESULTS: The median time to PSA failure was 4.2 years (interquartile range: 2.2, 7.9), and the median followup time after PSA failure was 6.5 years (3.5-9.7). Seventeen patients developed metastases, and five experienced PCSM. On multivariate analysis, PSA velocity ≥3.0 ng/mL/year (adjusted hazard ratio 5.97; [2.57, 13.90]; p < 0.001) and PSA nadir (adjusted hazard ratio 0.39; [0.24, 0.64]; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with metastasis. PSA velocity ≥3.0 ng/mL/year was also associated with PCSM (HR 15.3; [1.8, 128.0]; p = 0.012) on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid PSA velocity at PSA failure after partial gland treatment may be prognostic for long-term outcomes.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Stage I Breast Cancer: Initial Workup and Surveillance for Local Recurrence and Distant Metastases in Asymptomatic Women.

As the proportion of women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer increases, the role of imaging for staging and surveillance purposes is considered. National and international guidelines discourage the use of staging imaging for asymptomatic patients newly diagnosed with stage 0 to II breast cancer, even if there is nodal involvement, as unnecessary imaging can delay care and affect outcomes. In asymptomatic patients with a history of stage I breast cancer that received treatment for curative intent, there is no role for imaging to screen for distant recurrences. However, routine surveillance with an annual mammogram is the only imaging test that should be performed to detect an in-breast recurrence or a new primary breast cancer in women with a history of stage I breast cancer. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer.

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria on resectable rectal cancer: expert panel on radiation oncology--rectal/anal cancer.

In what arguably may be the most pivotal recent trial in the area of resectable rectal cancer management, a randomized trial from Germany has established a regimen of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and surgery followed by additional cycles of chemotherapy alone as the standard of care for clinical stages T3 or T4, or for node-positive rectal cancer. Other clinical studies from the United States, Europe, and Asia have also influenced the treatment strategies of operable rectal cancer, as various approaches using preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy, have been examined. A summary of the major randomized clinical trials spanning the past several decades is provided.

Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology.

UNLABELLED: The rationale was to develop recommendations on the use of (18)F-FDG PET in breast, colorectal, esophageal, head and neck, lung, pancreatic, and thyroid cancer; lymphoma, melanoma, and sarcoma; and unknown primary tumor. Outcomes of interest included the use of (18)F-FDG PET for diagnosing, staging, and detecting the recurrence or progression of cancer. METHODS: A search was performed to identify all published randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in the literature. An additional search was performed to identify relevant unpublished systematic reviews. These publications comprised both retrospective and prospective studies of varied methodologic quality. The anticipated consequences of false-positive and false-negative tests when evaluating clinical usefulness, and the impact of (18)F-FDG PET on the management of cancer patients, were also reviewed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET should be used as an imaging tool additional to conventional radiologic methods such as CT or MRI; any positive finding that could lead to a clinically significant change in patient management should be confirmed by subsequent histopathologic examination because of the risk of false-positive results. (18)F-FDG PET should be used in the appropriate clinical setting for the diagnosis of head and neck, lung, or pancreatic cancer and for unknown primary tumor. PET is also indicated for staging of breast, colon, esophageal, head and neck, and lung cancer and of lymphoma and melanoma. In addition, (18)F-FDG PET should be used to detect recurrence of breast, colorectal, head and neck, or thyroid cancer and of lymphoma.

A cost comparison analysis of partial versus whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess, if and for whom, there are cost savings associated with alternate breast radiotherapy (RT) techniques when compared with the conventional external beam-based whole-breast RT with a boost (WBRT-B). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment planning and delivery utilization data were modeled for eight different breast RT techniques: (1) WBRT-B: 60 Gy in 30 fractions; (2) WBRT: 50 Gy in 25 fractions; (3) WBRT-accelerated (AC): 42.5 Gy in 16 fractions; (4) WBRT-intensity-modulated RT (IMRT): 60 Gy in 30 fractions; (5) accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI)-IC, MammoSite: 34 Gy in 10 twice-daily fractions; (6) APBI-IT, HDR interstitial: 34 Gy in 10 twice-daily fractions; (7) APBI three-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT): 38.5 Gy in 10 twice-daily fractions; or (8) APBI-IMRT: 38.5 Gy in 10 twice-daily fractions. Costs incurred by payer (i.e., direct medical costs; 2003 Medicare Fee Schedule) and patient (i.e., direct nonmedical costs; time and travel) were estimated. Total societal costs were then calculated for each treatment approach. RESULTS: Not all efforts to reduce overall treatment time result in total cost savings. The least expensive partial breast-based RT approaches were the external beam techniques (APBI-3D-CRT, APBI-IMRT). Any reduced cost to patients for the HDR brachytherapy-based APBI regimens were overshadowed by substantial increases in cost to payers, resulting in higher total societal costs; the cost of HDR treatment delivery was primarily responsible for the increased direct medical cost. For the whole breast-based RT approaches, treating without a boost (WBRT) or with WBRT-AC reduced total costs. Overall, WBRT-AC was the least costly of all the regimens, in terms of costs to society; APBI approaches, in general, were favored over whole-breast techniques when only considering costs to patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on societal cost considerations, WBRT-AC appears to be the preferred approach. If one were to pursue a partial-breast RT regimen to minimize patient costs, it would be more advantageous from a societal perspective to pursue external beam-based approaches such as APBI-3D-CRT or APBI-IMRT in lieu of the brachytherapy-based regimens.

Cost-effectiveness of radiation therapy following conservative surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of radiation therapy (RT) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Markov model was constructed for a theoretical cohort of 55-year-old women with DCIS over a life-time horizon. Probability estimates for local noninvasive (N-INV), local invasive (INV), and distant recurrences were obtained from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-17. Utilities for eight nonmetastatic health states were collected from both healthy women and DCIS patients. Direct medical (2002 Medicare fee schedule) and nonmedical costs (time and transportation) of RT were ascertained. RESULTS: For BCS + RT vs. BCS alone, the estimated N-INV and INV rates at 12 years were 9% and 8% vs. 16% and 18%, respectively. The incremental cost of adding RT was 3300 US dollars despite an initial RT cost of 8700 US dollars due to higher local recurrence-related salvage costs incurred with the BCS alone strategy. An increase of 0.09 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) primarily reflected the lower risk of INV with RT, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 36,700 US dollars/QALY. Sensitivity analyses revealed the ICER to be affected by baseline probability of a local recurrence, relative efficacy of RT in preventing INV, negative impact of an INV on quality of life, and cost of initial RT. Cost of salvage BCS + RT and source of utilities (healthy women vs. DCIS patients) influenced the ICER albeit to a lesser degree. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of RT following BCS for patients with DCIS should not be withheld because of concerns regarding its cost-effectiveness.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Local Excision in Early Stage Rectal Cancer.

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection are considered standard treatments for early rectal cancer but may be associated with morbidity in selected patients who are candidates for early distal lesions amenable to local excision (LE). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a LE approach. Patients who may be candidates for LE alone include those with small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. Several surgical approaches can be utilized for LE however none include lymph node evaluation. Adjuvant radiation±chemotherapy may be warranted depending on the risk of nodal metastases. Patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors not amenable to radical surgery may also benefit from adjuvant treatment; however, patients with positive margins or T3 lesions should be offered abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection. Neoadjuvant radiation±chemotherapy followed by LE in higher risk patients results in excellent local control, but it is not clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria®-Anal Cancer.

The management of anal cancer is driven by randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. However, trials may present conflicting conclusions. Furthermore, different clinical situations may not be addressed in certain trials because of eligibility inclusion criteria. Although prospective studies point to the use of definitive 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C-based chemoradiation as a standard, some areas remain that are not well defined. In particular, management of very early stage disease, radiation dose, and the use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy remain unaddressed by phase III studies. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Variability in MRI vs. ultrasound measures of prostate volume and its impact on treatment recommendations for favorable-risk prostate cancer patients: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Prostate volume can affect whether patients qualify for brachytherapy (desired size ≥20 mL and ≤60 mL) and/or active surveillance (desired PSA density ≤0.15 for very low risk disease). This study examines variability in prostate volume measurements depending on imaging modality used (ultrasound versus MRI) and volume calculation technique (contouring versus ellipsoid) and quantifies the impact of this variability on treatment recommendations for men with favorable-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: We examined 70 patients who presented consecutively for consideration of brachytherapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer who had volume estimates by three methods: contoured axial ultrasound slices, ultrasound ellipsoid (height × width × length × 0.523) calculation, and endorectal coil MRI (erMRI) ellipsoid calculation. RESULTS: Average gland size by the contoured ultrasound, ellipsoid ultrasound, and erMRI methods were 33.99, 37.16, and 39.62 mLs, respectively. All pairwise comparisons between methods were statistically significant (all p < 0.015). Of the 66 patients who volumetrically qualified for brachytherapy on ellipsoid ultrasound measures, 22 (33.33%) did not qualify on ellipsoid erMRI or contoured ultrasound measures. 38 patients (54.28%) had PSA density ≤0.15 ng/dl as calculated using ellipsoid ultrasound volumes, compared to 34 (48.57%) and 38 patients (54.28%) using contoured ultrasound and ellipsoid erMRI volumes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ultrasound ellipsoid and erMRI ellipsoid methods appeared to overestimate ultrasound contoured volume by an average of 9.34% and 16.57% respectively. 33.33% of those who qualified for brachytherapy based on ellipsoid ultrasound volume would be disqualified based on ultrasound contoured and/or erMRI ellipsoid volume. As treatment recommendations increasingly rely on estimates of prostate size, clinicians must consider method of volume estimation.