AIM: The present retrospective study was to compare toxicity and survival outcomes in a group of low-risk PCa patients treated with either the preoperative planning technique (145â¯Gy) or the real-time IoP technique (160â¯Gy). BACKGROUND: The two most common permanent seed implantation techniques are preoperative planning (PP) with 145â¯Gy and real-time intraoperative planning (IoP) with 160â¯Gy. Although IoP has largely replaced PP at many centres in recent years, few studies have directly compared these two techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 408 patients with low-risk PCa treated with permanent seed implant brachytherapy at our institution between October 2003 and December 2014. Of these, 187 patients were treated with PP at a dose of 145â¯Gy while 221 received real-time IoP with 160â¯Gy. RESULTS: At a median follow up of 90 months, 5- and 8-year rates of biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) were 94.8% and 86% with the IoP technique versus 90.8% and 83.9%, respectively, with PP. The maximum dose to the urethra was <217â¯Gy with both techniques. Despite the higher dose, IoP did not cause any significant increase in toxicity (pâ¯=â¯0.11). CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that real-time intraoperative brachytherapy at a dose of 160â¯Gy yield better biochemical control than preoperative planning at 145â¯Gy. In addition, urinary toxicity did not increase, despite the dose escalation, probably because the dose constraints to the urethra were met despite the increased dose escalation. These findings support the use of real-time IoP.
PURPOSE: The use of radiation therapy (RT) for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) has been changing throughout the last century. Over the last decades, the use of radiotherapy has surged with the development of new techniques, applicators, and devices. In recent years, electronic brachytherapy (eBT) devices that use small x-ray sources have been introduced as alternative to radionuclide dependence. Nowadays, several devices have been incorporated, with a few series reported, and with a short follow-up, due to the recent introduction of these systems. The purpose of this work is to describe the clinical results of our series after two years follow-up with a specific eBT system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective single-center, non-randomized pilot study, to assess clinical results of electronic brachytherapy in basal cell carcinoma using the Esteya® system. In 2014, 40 patients with 60 lesions were treated. Patient follow-up on a regular basis was performed for a period of two years. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients with 44 lesions achieved two years follow-up. A complete response was documented in 95.5% of cases. Toxicity was mild (G1 or G2) in all cases, caused by erythema, erosion, or alopecia. Cosmesis was excellent in 88.6% of cases, and good in the rest. Change in pigmentation was the most frequent cosmetic alteration. CONCLUSIONS: This work is special, since the equipment's treatment voltage was 69.5 kV, and this is the first prospective study with long term follow-up with Esteya®. These preliminary report show excellent results with less toxicity and excellent cosmesis. While surgery has been the treatment of choice, certain patients might benefit from eBT treatment. These are elderly patients with comorbidities or undergoing anticoagulant treatment as well as those who simply refuse surgery or might have other contraindications.
PURPOSE: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is a very common cancer in the Caucasian population. Treatment aims to eradicate the tumor with the lowest possible functional and aesthetic impact. Electronic brachytherapy (EBT) is a treatment technique currently emerging. This study aims to show the outcomes of two consecutive prospective pilot clinical trials using different radiation doses of EBT with Esteya(®) EB system for the treatment of superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two prospective, single-center, non-randomized, pilot studies were conducted. Twenty patients were treated in each study with different doses. The first group (1) was treated with 36.6 Gy in 6 fractions of 6.1 Gy, and the second group (2) with 42 Gy in 6 fractions of 7 Gy. Cure rate, acute toxicity, and late toxicity related to cosmesis were analyzed in the two treatment groups. RESULTS: In group 1, a complete response in 90% of cases was observed at the first year of follow-up, whereas in group 2, the complete response was 95%. The differences with reference to acute toxicity and the cosmetic results between the two treatment groups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial experience with Esteya(®) EB system to treat superficial and nodular BCC shows that a dose of 36.6 Gy and 42 Gy delivered in 6 fraction of 7 Gy achieves a 90% and 95% clinical cure rate at 1 year, respectively. Both groups had a tolerable toxicity and a very good cosmesis. The role of EBT in the treatment of BCC is still to be defined. It will probably become an established option for selected patients in the near future.
PURPOSE: Surface electronic brachytherapy (EBT) is an alternative radiotherapy solution to external beam electron radiotherapy and high-dose-rate radionuclide-based brachytherapy. In fact, it is also an alternative solution to surgery for a subgroup of patients. The objective of this work is to confirm the clinical efficacy, toxicity and cosmesis of a new EBT system, namely Esteya(®) in the treatment of nodular and superficial basal cell carcinoma (BCC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective single-center, non-randomized pilot study to assess the efficacy and safety of EBT in nodular and superficial BCC using the Esteya(®) system. The study was conducted from June 2014 to February 2015. The follow up time was 6 months for all cases. RESULTS: Twenty patients with 23 lesions were included. A complete response was documented in all lesions (100%). A low level of toxicity was observed after the 4(th) fraction in all cases. Erythema was the most frequent adverse event. Cosmesis was excellent, with more than 60% of cases without skin alteration and with subtle changes in the rest. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic brachytherapy with Esteya(®) appears to be an effective, simple, safe, and comfortable treatment for nodular and superficial BCC associated with excellent cosmesis. It could be a good choice for elderly patients, patients with contraindications for surgery (due to comorbidities or anticoagulant drugs) or patients where surgery would result in a more disfiguring outcome. A longer follow-up and more studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare high frequency ultrasonography (HFUS) and histpathologic assessment done by punch biopsy in order to determine depth of basal cell carcinoma (BCC), in both superficial and nodular BCCs prior to brachytherapy treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study includes 20 patients with 10 superficial and 10 nodular BCCs. First, punch biopsy was done to confirm the diagnosis and to measure tumour depth (Breslow rate). Subsequently, HFUS was done to measure tumour depth to search for correlation of these two techniques. RESULTS: Neither clear tendency nor significance of the punch biopsy vs. HFUS depth determination is observed. Depth value differences with both modalities resulted patient dependent and then consequence of its uncertainty. Conceptually, HFUS should determine the macroscopic lesion (gross tumour volume - GTV), while punch biopsy is able to detect the microscopic extension (clinical target volume - CTV). Uncertainties of HFUS are difficult to address, while punch biopsy is done just on a small lesion section, not necessarily the deepest one. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results, HFUS is less accurate at very shallow depths. Nodular cases present higher depth determination differences than superficial ones. In our clinical practice, we decided to prescribe at 3 mm depth when HFUS measurements give depth lesion values smaller than this value.
Although surgery is usually the first-line treatment for nonmelanoma skin cancers, radiotherapy (RT) may be indicated in selected cases. Radiation therapy as primary therapy can result in excellent control rates, cosmetics, and quality of life. Brachytherapy is a radiation treatment modality that offers the most conformal option to patients. A new modality for skin brachytherapy is electronic brachytherapy. This involves the placement of a high dose rate X-ray source directly in a skin applicator close to the skin surface, and therefore combines the benefits of brachytherapy with those of low energy X-ray radiotherapy. The Esteya electronic brachytherapy system is specifically designed for skin surface brachytherapy procedures. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the clinical implementation of the new Esteya electronic brachytherapy system, which may provide guidance for users of this system. The information covered includes patient selection, treatment planning (depth evaluation and margin determination), patient marking, and setup. The justification for the hypofractionated regimen is described and compared with others protocols in the literature. Quality assurance (QA) aspects including daily testing are also included. We emphasize that these are guidelines, and clinical judgment and experience must always prevail in the care of patients, as with any medical treatment. We conclude that clinical implementation of the Esteya brachytherapy system is simple for patients and providers, and should allow for precise and safe treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancers.
