Health-Related Quality of Life and Toxicity After Definitive High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Among Veterans With Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for prostate cancer. There is limited research, however, investigating toxicity outcomes with HDRBT treatment among veterans. The objective of this study is to assess the impact on health-related quality of life (hrQOL) and physician-graded toxicities associated with HDRBT as monotherapy among veterans treated at Edward Hines, Jr. Veterans Affairs Hospital in Hines, Illinois. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2019, 74 veterans with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with HDRBT as monotherapy with 27 Gy in 2 fractions, delivered over 2 implants. Veteran-reported hrQOL in the genitourinary (GU), gastrointestinal (GI), and sexual domains was assessed using the International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) questionnaire. Mixed linear effect models were used to assess differences in the hrQOL scores at follow-up compared with baseline scores. Statistically significant differences in hrQOL scores from baseline were further assessed for clinical significance, using minimal clinically important difference (MCID) evaluations. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 18 months. Veterans reported declines in GU, GI, and sexual hrQOL scores immediately after treatment, with the IPSS and EPIC-26 hrQOL scores all displaying significant decrease from baseline over time. The majority of the declines in hrQOL scores met criteria for MCID. These hrQOL scores trended toward a return to baseline, with the EPIC-26 urinary obstruction score returning to baseline at the 18-month follow-up assessment and the EPIC-26 bowel score returning to baseline at the 12-month follow-up. The IPSS, urinary incontinence, and sexual scores did not return to baseline at 18 months. The grade 2 maximum physician-graded GU, GI, and sexual toxicity rates were 65%, 5%, and 53%, respectively. There was 1 incidence of grade 3 GU toxicity but no grade 3 GI or sexual toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: HDRBT as monotherapy is a well-tolerated treatment option for veterans with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer, with favorable veteran-reported and physician-graded toxicities. Veterans should be educated about HDRBT as an option when counseled regarding treatment for localized prostate cancer.

Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging in high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy planning: The impact on patient-reported health-related quality of life.

PURPOSE: High-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy uses volumetric imaging for treatment planning. Our institution transitioned from computed tomography (CT)-based planning to MRI-based planning with the hypothesis that improved visualization could reduce treatment-related toxicity. This study aimed to compare the patient-reported health-related quality of life (hrQOL) and physician-graded toxicity outcomes of CT-based and MRI-based HDR prostate brachytherapy. METHODS: From 2016 to 2019, 122 patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy. Patients underwent CT only or CT and MRI imaging for treatment planning and were grouped per treatment planning imaging modality. Patient-reported hrQOL in the genitourinary (GU), gastrointestinal (GI), and sexual domains was assessed using International Prostate Symptom Score and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form-26 questionnaires. Baseline characteristics, changes in hrQOL scores, and physician-graded toxicities were compared between groups. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 18 months. Patient-reported GU, GI, and sexual scores worsened after treatment but returned toward baseline over time. The CT cohort had a lower baseline mean International Prostate Symptom Score (5.8 vs. 7.8, p = 0.03). The other patient-reported GU and GI scores did not differ between groups. Overall, sexual scores were similar between the CT and MRI cohorts (p = 0.08) but favored the MRI cohort at later follow-up with a smaller decrease in Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form-26 sexual score from baseline at 18 months (4.9 vs. 19.8, p = 0.05). Maximum physician-graded GU, GI, and sexual toxicity rates of grade ≥2 were 68%, 3%, and 53%, respectively, with no difference between the cohorts (p = 0.31). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that CT- and MRI-based HDR brachytherapy results in similar rates of GU and GI toxicity. MRI-based planning may result in improved erectile function recovery compared with CT-based planning.

Patient and physician reported toxicity with two-fraction definitive high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy: the impact of implant interval.

PURPOSE: High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy is an effective method of treating localized prostate cancer. There are limited data on the relationship between implant interval and outcomes. This study aims to assess if the implant interval between HDR treatments has an impact on patient-reported health-related quality of life (QOL) and physician-graded toxicity in men treated for localized prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients were treated with HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy with 27 Gy in 2 fractions, given over two implants, performed 1-2 weeks apart. Patients were dichotomized into one-week and two-week cohorts. Patient-reported EPIC-26 genitourinary (GU), gastrointestinal (GI), and sexual QOL were assessed. Linear regression, chi-squared testing, and generalized linear mixed effect models were used to assess the differences in patient characteristics, patient-reported QOL, and physician-graded toxicity. RESULTS: Outcomes of 122 patients were analyzed. Median follow-up was 18 months. Patient-reported GU and GI QOL worsened after treatment with a return towards baseline over time, while patient-reported sexual QOL worsened after treatment, but did not return towards baseline. There were no differences in patient-reported health related QOL as a function of implant interval. Maximum physician-graded GU, GI, and sexual toxicity rates of grade 2 or 3 were 68%, 3%, and 53%, respectively. There was no difference in rates of grade 2 or 3 toxicity as a function of implants interval. CONCLUSIONS: HDR brachytherapy for prostate cancer is a well-tolerated treatment. The interval between treatments is not associated with differences in patient-reported QOL or physician-graded toxicities.

Pretreatment Factors Influencing Radiation Pneumonitis after Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Lung Cancer.

Objective Radiation pneumonitis (RP) is a dose-limiting toxicity that affects the treatment of lung cancer. Data on factors predictive of developing symptomatic RP after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) are limited. We reviewed data to identify pretreatment factors predictive of the development of symptomatic RP in patients' lung cancer treated with SBRT. Methods Data were collected on 296 patients treated with SBRT for lung cancer. Factors available at time of consultation were analyzed for the development of symptomatic RP, defined as CTCAE v. 4.0 ≥ Grade 2. The factors analyzed included patient demographic, tumor-specific, and pretreatment pulmonary function data. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess for predictive factors. Results Median follow-up was 22 months. The rate of symptomatic RP was 16%. Univariate analysis showed an increased rate of symptomatic RP with treatments to the right lung (22% vs. 9%, p = 0.007), driven primarily by an increased rate of symptomatic RP when treating the right lower lobe (RLL) vs. other lobes (31 vs. 13%, p = 0.03). Patients with a history of prior lung directed therapy were also more likely to develop symptomatic RP (12% vs. 24%, p = 0.008). These statistical differences were retained on multivariate analysis. Conclusion SBRT to the right lung, especially the RLL, and to patients with a history of prior lung-directed therapy increases the risk of developing symptomatic RP after SBRT. Further studies on ways to predict and prevent symptomatic RP are needed.

Anterior-oriented proton beams for prostate cancer: A multi-institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: Proton beam therapy (PBT) for prostate cancer generally involves the use of two lateral beams that transverse the hips. In patients with hip replacements or a previously irradiated hip, this arrangement is contraindicated. The use of non-lateral beams is possible, but not well described. Here we report a multi-institutional experience for patients treated with at least one non-lateral proton beam for prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 2010 and 2014, 20 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer and a history of hip prosthesis underwent proton therapy utilizing at least one anterior oblique beam (defined as between 10° and 85° from vertical) at one of three proton centers. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 6.4 months. No patients have developed PSA failure or distant metastases. The median planning target volume (PTV) D95 was 79.2 Gy (RBE) (range 69.7-79.9). The median rectal V70 was 9.2% (2.5-15.4). The median bladder V50, V80, and mean dose were 12.4% (3.7-27.1), 3.5 cm3 (0-7.1), and 14.9 Gy (RBE) (4.6-37.8), respectively. The median contralateral femur head V45 and max dose were 0.01 cm3 (0-16.6) and 43.7 Gy (RBE) (15.6-52.5), respectively. The incidence of acute Grade 2 urinary toxicity was 40%. There were no Grade≥3 urinary toxicities. There was one patient who developed late Grade 2 rectal proctitis, with no other cases of acute or late ≥Grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity. Grade 2 erectile dysfunction occurred in two patients (11.1%). Mild hip pain was experienced by five patients (25%). There were no cases of hip fracture. CONCLUSION: PBT for prostate cancer utilizing anterior oblique beam trajectories is feasible with favorable dosimetry and acceptable toxicity. Further follow-up is needed to assess for long-term outcomes and toxicities.