Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb 22;15(5):1396.
doi: 10.3390/cancers15051396.

Dose Distribution of High Dose-Rate and Low Dose-Rate Prostate Brachytherapy at Different Intervals-Impact of a Hydrogel Spacer and Prostate Volume

Affiliations

Dose Distribution of High Dose-Rate and Low Dose-Rate Prostate Brachytherapy at Different Intervals-Impact of a Hydrogel Spacer and Prostate Volume

Hathal Haddad et al. Cancers (Basel). .

Abstract

The study aimed to compare the dose distribution in permanent low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT), specifically focusing on the impact of a spacer and prostate volume. The relative dose distribution of 102 LDR-BT patients (prescription dose 145 Gy) at different intervals was compared with the dose distribution of 105 HDR-BT patients (232 HDR-BT fractions with prescription doses of 9 Gy, n = 151, or 11.5 Gy, n = 81). A hydrogel spacer (10 mL) was only injected before HDR-BT. For the analysis of dose coverage outside the prostate, a 5 mm margin was added to the prostate volume (PV+). Prostate V100 and D90 of HDR-BT and LDR-BT at different intervals were comparable. HDR-BT was characterized by a considerably more homogenous dose distribution and lower doses to the urethra. The minimum dose in 90% of PV+ was higher for larger prostates. As a consequence of the hydrogel spacer in HDR-BT patients, the intraoperative dose at the rectum was considerably lower, especially in smaller prostates. However, prostate volume dose coverage was not improved. The dosimetric results well explain clinical differences between these techniques reported in the literature review, specifically comparable tumor control, higher acute urinary toxicity rates in LDR-BT in comparison to HDR-BT, decreased rectal toxicity after spacer placement, and improved tumor control after HDR-BT in larger prostate volumes.

Keywords: 125I; 192Ir; dosimetry; interstitial brachytherapy; prostate cancer; spacer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
LDR-BT plan and HDR-BT plan with prostate, urethra, rectum contours, 50%-, 100%- and 150%-isodoses (example).

References

    1. Henry A., Pieters B.R., Andre Siebert F., Hoskin P. GEC-ESTRO ACROP prostate brachytherapy guidelines. Radiother. Oncol. 2022;167:244–251. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.12.047. - DOI - PubMed
    1. King M.T., Keyes M., Frank S.J., Crook J.M., Butler W.M., Rossi P.J., Cox B.W., Showalter T.N., Mourtada F., Potters L., et al. Low dose rate brachytherapy for primary treatment of localized prostate cancer: A systemic review and executive summary of an evidence-based consensus statement. Brachytherapy. 2021;20:1114–1129. doi: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.07.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hathout L., Mahmoud O., Wang Y., Vergalasova I., Barkati M., Despres P., Martin A.G., Foster W., Lacroix F., Delouya G., et al. A Phase 2 Randomized Pilot Study Comparing High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy as Monotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer. Adv. Radiat. Oncol. 2019;4:631–640. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2019.04.003. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Giberti C., Chiono L., Gallo F., Schenone M., Gastaldi E. Radical retropubic prostatectomy versus brachytherapy for low-risk prostatic cancer: A prospective study. World J. Urol. 2009;27:607–612. doi: 10.1007/s00345-009-0418-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Grimm P.D., Blasko J.C., Sylvester J.E., Meier R.M., Cavanagh W. 10-year biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) control of prostate cancer with (125) I brachytherapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2001;51:31–40. doi: 10.1016/S0360-3016(01)01601-7. - DOI - PubMed