Effectiveness of intraoral stents in reducing oral adverse events during radiotherapy for maxillary or nasal cavity malignant tumors.

PURPOSE: Many patients experience oral adverse events during head and neck cancer radiotherapy (RT). The methods of management of such events are under debate. One such technique is the intraoral stent (IOS) technique, which removes normal tissue from the irradiation field. This retrospective study examined the factors associated with the occurrence of oral mucositis (OM) and dysgeusia and the efficacy of IOSs in preventing them. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients who underwent RT in the maxilla or nasal cavity between 2016 and 2022 were included. They were investigated for background characteristics, treatment factors (IOS and dose-volume histogram), and oral adverse events (OM and dysgeusia). RESULTS: Significant risk factors for the incidence of grade ≥ 2 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0) OM were the non-use of IOSs (p = 0.004) and diabetes (p = 0.025). A significant risk factor for the incidence of grade ≥ 1 dysgeusia was concomitant chemotherapy (p = 0.019). The radiation dose to the tongue was significantly lower in the IOS group than in the non-IOS group. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the use of an IOS during RT reduces the severity of OM by reducing irradiation to the tongue. Therefore, the use of an IOS is recommended during RT performed in the maxilla or nasal cavity.

Factors associated with quality of life in patients receiving palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases: a secondary cross-sectional analysis of data from a prospective multicenter observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors significantly associated with quality of life (QOL) and determine if these associations are strong enough to predict certain aspects of QOL without measuring them. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory secondary analysis of baseline data of 224 patients (enrolled between December 2020 and March 2021) from a previously published prospective observational study on radiotherapy for bone metastases at 26 centres. Using univariable linear regression, we assessed the association between patient/treatment factors and QOL scale scores as measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QOL Questionnaire Core 15-Palliative (QLQ-C15-PAL) and the EORTC QOL Questionnaire Bone Metastases module (QLQ-BM22). RESULTS: Age and sex were not significantly associated with QOL. Worse performance status, higher pain scores, and opioid and single-fraction use were significantly associated with most QOL scales; these four factors were associated with worse global QOL, worse functioning status, and more severe symptoms. The coefficients of determination for most QOL scales were less than 0.2, indicating that most of the variability in QOL scores was not explained by any of the explanatory variables. CONCLUSION: Performance status, pain intensity, and opioid and single-fraction use were significantly associated with most QOL scales. However, the associations were not strong enough to estimate QOL. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: To date, the association between treatment factors and QOL in patients with bone metastases has not been fully studied. We identified the factors that were significantly associated with QOL and found that these associations were not strong enough to predict QOL.

Income and Employment of Patients at the Start of and During Follow-up After Palliative Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastasis.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to understand the income and employment status of patients at the start of and during follow-up after palliative radiation therapy for bone metastasis. Methods and Materials: From December 2020 to March 2021, a prospective multi-institutional observational study was conducted to investigate income and employment of patients at the start of administration of radiation therapy for bone metastasis and at 2 and 6 months after treatment. Of 333 patients referred to radiation therapy for bone metastasis, 101 were not registered, mainly because of their poor general condition, and another 8 were excluded from the follow-up analysis owing to ineligibility. Results: In 224 patients analyzed, 108 had retired for reasons unrelated to cancer, 43 had retired for reasons related to cancer, 31 were taking leave, and 2 had lost their jobs at the time of registration. The number of patients who were in the working group was 40 (30 with no change in income and 10 with decreased income) at registration, 35 at 2 months, and 24 at 6 months. Younger patients (P = 0), patients with better performance status (P = 0), patients who were ambulatory (P = .008), and patients with lower scores on a numerical rating scale of pain (P = 0) were significantly more likely to be in the working group at registration. There were 9 patients who experienced improvements in their working status or income at least once in the follow-up after radiation therapy. Conclusions: The majority of patients with bone metastasis were not working at the start of or after radiation therapy, but the number of patients who were working was not negligible. Radiation oncologists should be aware of the working status of patients and provide appropriate support for each patient. The benefit of radiation therapy to support patients continuing their work and returning to work should be investigated further in prospective studies.

Quality of life in patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with those who underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND: To compare the quality of life (QOL) in patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) or low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent LDR-BT (LDR-BT alone [n = 540] or LDR-BT plus external beam radiation therapy [n = 428]) and RARP (n = 142). QOL was evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM), and 8-item Short Form (SF-8) health survey. The two groups were compared using propensity score matching analysis. RESULTS: At 24 months after treatment, the number of patients with worsened urinary QOL in the urinary domain of EPIC compared with baseline was 78/111 (70%) and 63/137 (46%) in the RARP and LDR-BT groups, respectively (p < 0.001). In the urinary incontinence and function domain, this number was higher in the RARP group versus the LDR-BT group. However, in the urinary irritative/obstructive domain, the number of patients with improved urinary QOL at 24 months compared with baseline was 18/111 (16%) and 9/137 (7%), respectively (p = 0.01). Regarding the SHIM score, sexual domain of EPIC, and mental component summary of SF-8, there were more number of patients with worsened QOL in the RARP group than in the LDR-BT group. In the EPIC bowel domain, the number of patients with worsened QOL was lower in the RARP group versus the LDR-BT group. CONCLUSION: The differences in QOL observed between patients treated with RARP and LDR-BT could assist in treatment selection for prostate cancer.

Local dose (biologically effective dose ≥180 Gy2) is an important predictor of biochemical recurrence in patients undergoing low-dose-rate brachytherapy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate prognostic factors of biochemical recurrence (BCR) in each risk group of prostate cancer patients who underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT). METHODS: A total of 944 patients with clinically confirmed prostate cancer (cT1c-3aN0M0) who had underwent LDR-BT were enrolled. The low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups included 278, 498, and 168 patients, respectively. The median age, PSA value at diagnosis, and the follow-up period were 70 years (range: 48-84), 7.2 ng/ml (range: 1.2-113), and 91 months (range: 2-192), respectively. We evaluated the BCR-free rate, BCR-free survival, clinical recurrence-free rate, overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). We conducted multivariate analysis to elucidate prognostic factors of BCR for all patients and for each risk group. RESULTS: The 5- and 10-year OS rates were 96.0% and 89.5% and the 5- and 10-year CSS rates were 99.8% and 99.1%, respectively, while the 5- and 10-year BCR-free rates were 96.6% and 92.5% in low-risk patients, 95.7% and 90.7% in intermediate-risk patients and 93.8% and 89.0% in high-risk patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between the risk groups. Age-adjusted multivariate analysis indicated biologically effective dose (BED) <180 Gy2 as an independent prognostic factor of BCR in all patients (p = 0.005). There were no independent factors in the low- and high-risk groups, but neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) (p = 0.022) and BED <180Gy2 (p = 0.042) were independent prognostic factors in the intermediate-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: LDR-BT can achieve a higher recurrence-free survival with an adequate local radiation dose (BED ≥ 180 Gy2).

Comparative effectiveness of low-dose-rate brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy in favorable and unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

We compared clinical outcomes associated with seed brachytherapy (SEED-BT) alone and SEED-BT plus external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer using propensity score-matched analysis. From 2006 to 2011, 993 patients diagnosed with intermediate-risk were treated with either SEED-BT alone (n = 775) or SEED-BT plus EBRT (n = 158) at 3 tertiary hospitals. In the propensity score-matched analysis (102 pairs), median follow-up was 95 months (range 18-153 months). The 8-year biochemical recurrence-free rate (bRFR) was significantly better with SEED-BT alone than with combined radiotherapy (93.3% vs. 88.4%; HR 0.396; 95% CI 0.158-0.991). Grade 2 or greater late genitourinary toxicities were significantly fewer with SEED-BT alone than with combined radiotherapy (21.0% vs. 33.2%; HR 0.521; 95% CI 0.308-0.881). Similarly, grade 2 or greater late gastrointestinal toxicities were significantly fewer with SEED-BT alone (0% vs. 12.2%; HR 0.125; 95% CI 0.040-0.390). For the unfavorable intermediate-risk subgroups, SEED-BT alone yielded a significantly better bRFR than the combined radiotherapy (HR 0.325; 95% CI 0.115-0.915). SEED-BT alone might be a better disease-management plan than SEED-BT plus EBRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer regardless of favorable and unfavorable characteristics.

Late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity and radiation-induced second primary cancers in patients treated with low-dose-rate brachytherapy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities and radiation-induced second primary cancers (RISPCs) in patients who received low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) with or without external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study included 897 consecutive patients who received LDR-BT between July 2004 and July 2015 in our institution. Adverse events and the incidence of second primary cancers were evaluated at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 54, and 60 mo after LDR-BT and then once a year. Related factors to ≥grade 2 (G2) toxicity were evaluated using the Cox proportional-hazards model. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 85.2 (interquartile range: 66.8-111.3) mo. The cumulative incidence rates of ≥G2 GU toxicity at 5 and 10 yrs after LDR-BT were 11.2% and 14.7%, respectively. The International Prostate Symptom Score before LDR-BT (continuous) (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03), no neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (HR: 1.69), and combination external beam radiotherapy (HR: 3.30) were risk factors related to the incidence of ≥G2 GU toxicity. The cumulative incidence rates of ≥G2 GI toxicity at 5 and 10 yrs after LDR-BT were 3.3% and 3.3%, respectively. Age (continuous) (HR: 1.09), body mass index (continuous) (HR: 0.87), and rectum V100 (continuous) (HR: 1.64) were risk factors related to ≥G2 GI toxicity. A total of 12 (1.3%) patients developed metachronous RISPCs (bladder cancer: 9; rectal cancer: 3). CONCLUSION: The incidence rates of late GU and GI toxicities and RISPCs after LDR-BT were low.

Direct comparison of low-dose-rate brachytherapy versus radical prostatectomy using the surgical definition of biochemical recurrence for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: We compared the oncological outcomes of patients who received seed brachytherapy (SEED-BT) with those who received radical prostatectomy (RP) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Candidates were patients treated with either SEED-BT (n = 933) or RP (n = 334). One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to adjust the patients' backgrounds. We compared the biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free rate using the Phoenix definition (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] nadir plus 2 ng/mL) for SEED-BT and the surgical definition (PSA cut-off value of 0.2 ng/mL) for RP. We also directly compared the BCR-free rates using the same PSA cut-off value of 0.2 ng/mL for both SEED-BT and RP. RESULTS: In the propensity score-matched analysis with 214 pairs, the median follow-up treatment was 96 months (range 1-158 months). Fifty-three patients (24.7%) were treated with combined SEED-BT and external-beam radiotherapy. Forty-three patients (20.0%) received salvage radiotherapy after RP. Comparing the BCR-free rate using the above definitions for SEED-BT and RP showed that SEED-BT yielded a significantly better 8-year BCR-free rate than did RP (87.4% vs. 74.3%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.420, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.273-0.647). Comparing the 8-year BCR-free rate using the surgical definition for both treatments showed no significant difference between the two treatments (76.7% vs. 74.3%, HR 0.913, 95% CI 0.621-1.341). SEED-BT had a significantly better 8-year salvage hormonal therapy-free rate than did RP (92.0% vs. 85.6%, HR 0.528, 95% CI 0.296-0.942, P = 0.030). The 8-year metastasis-free survival rates (98.5% vs. 99.0%, HR 1.382, 95% CI 0.313-6.083, P = 0.668) and overall survival rates (91.9% vs. 94.6%, HR 1.353, 95% CI 0.690-2.650) did not significantly differ between the treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The BCR-free rates did not significantly differ between patients treated with SEED-BT and those treated with RP for intermediate-risk prostate cancer even when they were directly compared using the surgical definition for BCR. SEED-BT and RP can be adequately compared for oncological outcomes.

Mirabegron Reduces Urinary Frequency and Improves Overactive Bladder Symptoms at 3 Months After 125I-brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer: An Open-Labeled, Randomized, Non-Placebo-Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the additional effects of mirabegron to alpha-1 adrenergic antagonist on lower urinary tract symptoms of patients who underwent 125I-brachytherapy for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent 125I-brachytherapy for prostate cancer (cT1-cT3aN0M0) in a single institute between September 2016 and October 2018 were enrolled in the randomized, non-placebo, open-labeled, paralleled study. Patients were randomly distributed (1:1) to combination group (tamsulosin (0.2 mg/day) plus mirabegron (50 mg/day)) or tamsulosin-alone group after 125I -brachytherapy by envelope method. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in mean voided volume per micturition 3 months after 125I brachytherapy. The secondary endpoints included the changes from baseline of International Prostate Symptom Score, Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite scores and 24 hours urinary frequency after 3 months after 125I brachytherapy. RESULTS: The mean changes in volume voided per micturition in the combination (n = 108) and tamsulosin-alone (n = 110) groups were -62.5 (standard deviation, ±53.8) and -68.0 (standard deviation, ±52.7), respectively (P = .17). The change in Overactive Bladder Symptom Score in combination group (P = .02) was more moderate than in tamsulosin-alone group; and 24 hour urinary frequency in combination group was lower (P = .03) than in tamsulosin-alone group. Retention rates within 3 months after 125I-brachytherapy in the mirabegron and tamsulosin-alone groups were 7.3% (9/122) and 6.0% (7/118), respectively (P = .80). CONCLUSION: Tamsulosin and mirabegron combination therapy after 125I-brachytherapy did not improve voided volume per micturition compared to tamsulosin-only treatment. However, it could improve frequent urination and overactive bladder symptoms.

Impact of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy on postimplant prostate D90 and prostate volume after low-dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Higher quality of postimplant dosimetric evaluation is associated with higher biochemical recurrence-free survival rates after low-dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Postimplant prostate D90 is a key dosimetric parameter showing the quality of low-dose-rate brachytherapy. In this study, to improve the quality of low-dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer, we investigated pre-implant factors affecting the reduction of postimplant prostate D90. METHODS: A total of 441 patients underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy monotherapy and 474 patients underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy with external beam radiation therapy. Logistic regression analysis was carried out to identify predictive factors for postimplant D90 decline. The cut-off value of the D90 decline was set at 170 Gy and 130 Gy in the low-dose-rate brachytherapy monotherapy group and low-dose-rate brachytherapy with external beam radiation therapy group, respectively. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy was identified as an independent predictive factor for the decline of postimplant D90 in both the low-dose-rate brachytherapy monotherapy group (P < 0.001) and low-dose-rate brachytherapy with external beam radiation therapy group (P = 0.003). Prostate volume changes and computed tomography/transrectal ultrasound prostate volume ratio were significantly and negatively correlated with the postimplant D90. The prostate volume changes and computed tomography/transrectal ultrasound prostate volume ratio were significantly higher in patients with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy than those without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy decreased postimplant D90 with substantial prostate gland swelling after low-dose-rate brachytherapy. When neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy is required to reduce prostate volume for patients with large prostate glands and offer adequate local control for patients with high-risk prostate cancer before low-dose-rate brachytherapy, intraoperative D90 adjustment might be necessary.

Erectile dysfunction and sexual quality of life in patients who underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy alone for prostate cancer.

This study evaluated erectile function and sexual quality of life (QoL), and predictive factors for erectile dysfunction (ED) and the deterioration of sexual QoL in 70 patients who underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) alone for prostate cancer without androgen deprivation therapy. Erectile function and sexual QoL were evaluated before and 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months after LDR-BT. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to determine whether age, prostate volume, hypertension, diabetes, Brinkman's index, testosterone, baseline Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) score and post-implant dosimetry parameters could predict ED and deterioration of sexual QoL at 24 and 60 months after LDR-BT. After 24 and 60 months, ED was noted in 39 of 70 patients and 42 of 64 patients respectively. Furthermore, sexual QoL worsened in 42 of 70 and 43 of 64 patients respectively. Baseline SHIM score was identified as a significant predictor of ED (24 months: odds ratio [OR]: 0.83, p = 0.02; 60 months: OR: 0.83, p = 0.03) and the deterioration of sexual QoL (24 months: OR: 0.84, p = 0.03). LDR-BT for prostate cancer promoted decreased erectile function and sexual QoL, with high preimplant potency being a significant predictor of ED and the deterioration of sexual QoL.

Factors affecting urinary frequency after low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Lower urinary tract symptoms are transiently exacerbated by low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) for prostate cancer and recover to pretreatment levels 1 year thereafter. Generally, these symptoms are influenced by temperature. We aimed to search for factors affecting the lower urinary tract symptoms after seed implant including seasons. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 812 patients who underwent LDR-BT at Nara Medical University Hospital from January 2010 to December 2018 and for whom the International Prostate Symptom Score, Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, and frequency volume charts were available. We investigated the relationships between lower urinary tract symptoms, 24-hours urinary frequency, 24-hours urinary volume before and after seed implant, radiation dose, and season of seed implant. RESULTS: The mean age was 69.5 years. The mean prostate volume was 24.2 mL. The International Prostate Symptom Score, Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, and 24-hours urinary frequency increased until 3 months and gradually decreased over 6 months after seed implant. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that 24-hours urinary frequency at 3 months after seed implant was significantly influenced by external beam radiotherapy, larger prostate volume before implant, higher 24-hours urinary frequency at baseline, larger 24-hours urinary volume at 3 months after implant, and performance of implant in summer. CONCLUSIONS: Lower urinary tract symptoms worsened 3 months after seed implant of LDR-BT regardless of the season of implant. The urinary frequency 3 months after seed implant was slightly lower when seed implant was performed in the summer.

Comparison of disease-specific quality of life in prostate cancer patients treated with low-dose-rate brachytherapy: A randomized controlled trial of silodosin versus naftopidil.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of naftopidil and silodosin administration on the quality of life of patients with prostate cancer who underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy. METHODS: In total, 141 men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who were treated with low-dose-rate brachytherapy were enrolled. Patients were randomized (1:1) to the naftopidil (75 mg/day, n = 63) or silodosin group (8 mg/day, n = 64). Naftopidil and silodosin were administered 1 day after low-dose-rate brachytherapy, and were continued for at least 3 months. Using the University of California at Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index and Sexual Health Inventory for Men scores, the mean changes and rates of deterioration from baseline were compared. The deterioration rates in the quality of life of patients at 1 and 3 months after low-dose-rate brachytherapy were evaluated based on the minimal important difference. RESULTS: The rates of deterioration from baseline to 1 and 3 months after low-dose-rate brachytherapy were not significantly different between the two groups in terms of urinary function, urinary bother, bowel bother, sexual function or Sexual Health Inventory for Men scores. In contrast, there were significant differences in bowel function (naftopidil 1 month, 52%; 3 months, 52%; silodosin 1 month, 28%; 3 months, 34%; 1 month, P < 0.01; 3 months, P = 0.048) and sexual bother (naftopidil 3 months, 11%; silodosin 3 months, 29%; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Naftopidil and silodosin provide different disease-specific quality of life outcomes in patients undergoing, especially in terms of bowel function and sexual bother. These findings can help in the selection of α-1 adrenoceptor antagonists after low-dose-rate brachytherapy.

Coverage of the external prostatic region by the hybrid method compared with the conventional method of prostate low-dose-rate brachytherapy: A randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the dose evaluation parameters between conventional (using loose seed alone) and hybrid (using loose seeds in combination with stranded seeds) low-dose rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: Between 2014 and July 2016, a total of 219 patients who underwent low-dose rate brachytherapy were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (trial number: UMIN 000012780). Patients were randomized and allocated to two groups (conventional method vs hybrid method). Post-dosimetric parameters (%D90, minimal percentage of the dose received by 90% of the prostate gland; V100, percentage of the prostate volume receiving 100% of the prescribed minimal peripheral dose; V150, percentage of the prostate volume receiving 150% of the prescribed minimal peripheral dose; %UD30, minimal percentage of the dose received by 30% of the urethra; R100, rectal volume [mL] receiving 100% of the prescribed dose) calculated at 1 month after seed implantation by computed tomography scan were compared between the two groups, as well as the post-dosimetric parameters using the planning target volume of the prostate + 5-mm margin. RESULTS: Regarding dose evaluation parameters, the prostate dose (%D90, V100, V150) and the urethral dose (%UD30) were not significantly different between the two groups, whereas V100 (+5-mm margin) and %D90 (+5-mm margin) were significantly higher in the hybrid method group compared with the conventional method group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The present randomized study shows that the hybrid method of low-dose rate brachytherapy can achieve a higher coverage of the periprostatic region compared with the conventional method while maintaining an acceptable level of urethral and rectal doses.

A prospective study of oral 5-aminolevulinic acid to prevent adverse events in patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing low-dose-rate brachytherapy: Protocol of the AMBER study.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is one of the most frequently selected treatment options for patients with prostate cancer. However, adverse effects related to the irradiated surrounding normal organs are significant clinical concerns. Specifically, genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities can lead to a dramatically reduced quality of life. The aim of this clinical trial is to determine the efficacy of oral 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) phosphate with sodium ferrous citrate (SFC) in patients treated with low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) using an iodine-125 seed source. METHODS: The AMBER study is a prospective, single-center trial in patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing LDR-BT. Patients who undergo supplementary extra-beam radiotherapy are excluded, whereas those who undergo pre-implantation short-term (4-6 months) androgen deprivation therapy to decrease the prostate volume and/or improve oncological outcomes are included. After the screening and registration, the patients will be instructed to take capsules of ALA-SFC twice a day (200 mg and 229.42 mg per day) for 6 months from the day of seed implantation (prescribed radiation dose of 160 Gy). Patient data will be collected before the implantation; during oral ALA-SFC treatment; and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 month(s) after seed implantation. The primary endpoint of this trial is the urinary frequency 3 months after seed implantation. At each visit, the 24-h urinary frequency, total voided volume, and mean voided volume on a frequency volume chart and other patient-reported outcomes are recorded. The data of the trial cases will be compared with those of historical controls, who are consecutive patients undergoing LDR-BT without supplementary extra-beam radiotherapy between January 2016 and January 2019. The number of subjects has been set to be 50 for trial cases and 150 for the historical control cases. Pre- and post-treatment clinicopathologic factors are compared between two groups. DISCUSSION: The goal of this trial is to determine the potential benefit of ALA-SFC in patients who undergo LDR-BT. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the potential clinical benefit of oral ALA-SFC after radiotherapy. More evidence from a further randomized controlled trial is needed to change the standard of care and lead to better post-radiotherapy management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was prospectively registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials on 5 December 2019. The reference number is jRCTs051190077, nara0013 (Certified Review Board of Nara Medical University).

Biochemical control of the combination of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor and 125 I-brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Post hoc analysis of an open-label controlled randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients receiving low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: A total of 310 patients with prostate cancer (cT1c-3aN0M0) who received low-dose-rate brachytherapy between May 2010 and July 2013 were enrolled and allocated to one of the two treatment groups (tamsulosin alone 0.2 mg/day for 6 months vs tamsulosin 0.2 mg/day for 6 months plus celecoxib 200 mg/day for 3 months). The primary end-point was the chronological change in international prostate symptom score, and the number of patients was assessed for the primary end-point. Biochemical recurrence-free, cancer-specific survival and overall survival rates 5 years after the last patient received low-dose-rate brachytherapy were retrospectively examined. RESULTS: The median follow-up period after low-dose-rate brachytherapy was 72.0 months (range 3-99 months). A total of 12 (3.9%) patients experienced biochemical recurrence. The biochemical recurrence-free rate in the celecoxib group (5-year biochemical recurrence-free rate 98.5%) was significantly better (log-rank test P = 0.023, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.63, hazard ratio 0.20) than that in the tamsulosin group (5-year biochemical recurrence-free rate 93.4%). None of the patients died from prostate cancer. However, 14 (4.5%) patients died of other causes. No significant difference was observed in terms of overall survival between the celecoxib and tamsulosin groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor and low-dose-rate brachytherapy can contribute to a better biochemical control of prostate cancer.

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: A 15-year experience in Japan.

The history of prostate brachytherapy has passed one century. In 1983, modern low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy using a transrectal ultrasound-guided procedure was introduced. In the early 1990s, low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced and rapidly spread across the USA due to its excellent oncological control, cost-effectiveness and technically easy procedure. Since low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced in Japan (2003), over 15 years have passed. More than 43 000 patients have undergone low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Japanese urologists and radiation oncologists are on course with leading brachytherapists in the USA. A nationwide prospective cohort study, J-POPS, was initiated in 2005. The J-POPS group also provides educational programs including an annual novel training course in low-dose-rate brachytherapy to familiarize urologists, radiation oncologists and pathologists with the procedure. Important information on Japanese patients has accumulated, especially by the J-POPS study group. The Japanese investigators reported excellent oncological outcomes of low-dose-rate brachytherapy, showing equivalent or superior efficacy to surgery in low- to intermediate-risk patients, and superior efficacy in high-risk patients using the surgery biochemical recurrence definition (prostate-specific antigen cut-off value of 0.2 ng/mL). Two randomized controlled studies (SHIP study: intermediate risk, and TRIP study: high risk) carried out by the J-POPS group are ongoing, and an additional follow-up study (J-POPS 2 study) has been started to evaluate survival outcomes over longer follow-up periods. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy is expected to provide a survival benefit, which must be confirmed by further studies with longer follow-up periods in the future.

Prostate-specific antigen bounce after 125I-brachytherapy for prostate cancer is a favorable prognosticator in patients who are biochemical recurrence-free at 4 years and correlates with testosterone.

BACKGROUND: Because patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) bounce do not experience biochemical recurrence (BCR) until PSA bounce occurs, the period until PSA bounce ends can be considered the so-called lead-time bias. Therefore, we evaluated differences in BCR-free rate in prostate cancer patients who were BCR-free 4 years after 125I-brachytherapy alone. Furthermore, we evaluated predictors for PSA bounce and the correlation between testosterone and PSA bounce. METHODS: From 2004 to 2012, 256 patients with prostate adenocarcinoma underwent 125I-brachytherapy alone. PSA and testosterone levels were monitored prior to 125I-brachytherapy, at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60 months after 125I-brachytherapy and yearly after 5-year follow-up. PSA bounce was defined as ≥0.2 ng/ml increase above the interval PSA nadir, followed by a decrease to nadir or below. RESULTS: BCR-free rate in patients with PSA bounce (100% 7-year BCR-free rate) was significantly better (P < 0.044) than that in patients without PSA bounce (95.7% 7-year BCR-free rate) in patients who were BCR-free 4 years after 125I-brachytherapy alone (n = 223). Age was the only predictor (odds ratio: 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.88-0.98, P = 0.004) for PSA bounce (n = 177). The testosterone level at PSA bounce was significantly higher (P = 0.036) than that at nadir before PSA bounce (87 cases). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PSA bounce had good BCR-free rate even in patients who were BCR-free 4 years after 125I-brachytherapy alone. Testosterone levels were higher at PSA bounce; increased testosterone levels may be a cause of PSA bounce.

Analysis of quality of life after randomized controlled trial of alpha-1 adrenoceptor antagonist alone and in combination with cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor in patients who underwent low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors on quality of life (QoL) of patients undergoing low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 310 patients with prostate cancer who had undergone LDR brachytherapy were enrolled. The patients were randomized (1 : 1) to the monotherapy group (tamsulosin alone: 0.2 mg/day, n = 156) and the combination group (tamsulosin: 0.2 mg/day plus celecoxib: 200 mg/day, n = 154) without placebo. Using the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) and medical outcomes study 8-item short form health survey (SF-8) questionnaire, QoL was evaluated at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after seed implantation. RESULTS: The mean changes in scores from baseline to 1 and 3 months after seed implantation for the urinary (1M: -10.5, 3M: -10.9) and bowel (1M: -2.4, 3M: -4.2) domains of EPIC in the combination group were not significantly different from those (urinary 1M: -11.0, 3M: -11.4, bowel 1M: -2.3, 3M: -4.6) in the monotherapy group. The mean changes in scores from baseline to 1 and 3 months after seed implantation for the physical component summary (1M: 0.009, 3M: -0.32) and mental component summary (1M: 0.41, 3M: 0.36) of SF-8 in the combination group were not significantly different from those (physical component 1M: -0.89, 3M: -0.22, mental component 1M: 1.3, 3M: 1.1) in the monotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Combination treatment with celecoxib and tamsulosin during the peri-operative period is not warranted for improving QoL in patients undergoing LDR brachytherapy.

The impact of the definition of biochemical recurrence following salvage radiotherapy on outcomes and prognostication in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a comparative study of three definitions.

PURPOSE: The clinical management and follow-up of patients with recurrent prostate cancer after salvage radiotherapy (SRT) has not yet been established, and no standardized definition of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after SRT exists. We compared the impact of applying three different definitions of BCR following SRT on patient outcomes and prognostication. SUBJECTS: Patients who received salvage androgen-deprivation therapy before the completion of SRT were excluded. The data of 118 men who had undergone salvage radiation as monotherapy for BCR after radical prostatectomy were reviewed. In all patients, SRT comprised irradiation to the prostatic bed (70 Gy) using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy techniques. Treatment outcomes, including BCR-free survival and prognostic factors, were analyzed and compared among three definitions: The Nara, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9601, and GETUG-AFU 16 definitions. RESULTS: The BCR rate differed significantly among the applied definitions. Multivariate analyses identified the same four independent prognostic factors, including primary Gleason pattern 4 or 5, negative resection margin, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level before SRT 0.5 or more, and PSA doubling time before SRT <6 months, using the RTOG 9601 and GETUG-AFU 16 definitions, whereas only two of the four factors were identified using the Nara definition. Although the results obtained using the RTOG 9601 and GETUG-AFU 16 definitions were similar, the prognostic value of the four factors differed. According to the RTOG 9601 definition of BCR, a negative resection margin on prostatectomy specimens and short PSA doubling time before SRT were associated with no subsequent response in PSA level. CONCLUSIONS: The applied definition of BCR after SRT can influence the reported BCR-free rate and the potential prognostic factors. Establishment of the standardized definition is needed for the optimal management of patients with recurrent prostate cancer undergoing SRT.