Focal Salvage MR Imaging-Guided Cryoablation for Localized Prostate Cancer Recurrence after Radiotherapy: 12-Month Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety, quality of life (QoL), and local cancer control after focal salvage MR imaging-guided cryoablation in patients with local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) after radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, single-center study was performed in 62 patients with radiorecurrent PCa who underwent MR imaging-guided cryoablation since May 2011 with a follow-up ≥12 months in December 2017. Rates and descriptions of adverse events were reported. Ablation complications were classified according to the Clavien and SIR systems. Validated questionnaires were used to observe functional outcomes and QoL before therapy and 6 and 12 months after therapy. Cancer control was defined as no biochemical failure according to Phoenix criteria and no other clinical evidence for local or metastatic disease. RESULTS: All procedures were technically feasible. The number of complications requiring major therapy (Clavien grade 3b/4 or SIR grade D/E/F) was low (2 [3.2%] and 1 [1.6%], respectively). After 12 months, the International Consultation of Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (P < .001) and 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (P = .001) scores became significantly worse, indicating increased symptoms of incontinence and diminished erectile function, without compromising QoL. Six patients developed metastases within 6 months. After 12 months, 36 patients (63%) were disease-free. CONCLUSIONS: Focal salvage MR imaging-guided cryoablation is safe and is associated with a high technical success rate, preservation of QoL, and local PCa control. This treatment can be a reasonable alternative to salvage radical prostatectomy in properly selected patients with low morbidity and preservation of QoL; however, longer follow-up is needed.

A short-term intervention with selenium affects expression of genes implicated in the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in the prostate.

In parallel with the inconsistency in observational studies and chemoprevention trials, the mechanisms by which selenium affects prostate cancer risk have not been elucidated. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to examine the effects of a short-term intervention with selenium on gene expression in non-malignant prostate tissue. Twenty-three men received 300 µg selenium per day in the form of selenized yeast (n=12) or a placebo (n=11) during 5 weeks. Prostate biopsies collected from the transition zone before and after intervention were analysed for 15 participants (n=8 selenium, n=7 placebo). Pathway analyses revealed that the intervention with selenium was associated with down-regulated expression of genes involved in cellular migration, invasion, remodeling and immune responses. Specifically, expression of well-established epithelial markers, such as E-cadherin and epithelial cell adhesion molecule EPCAM, was up-regulated, while the mesenchymal markers vimentin and fibronectin were down-regulated after intervention with selenium. This implies an inhibitory effect of selenium on the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Moreover, selenium was associated with down-regulated expression of genes involved in wound healing and inflammation; processes which are both related to EMT. In conclusion, our explorative data showed that selenium affected expression of genes implicated in EMT in the transition zone of the prostate.

Who will benefit most from hydrogel rectum spacer implantation in prostate cancer radiotherapy? A model-based approach for patient selection.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies confirmed that implantable rectum spacers (IRS) decreased acute gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicity in a significant percentage of prostate cancer patients undergoing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We developed decision rules based on clinical risk factors (CRFs) to select those patients who are expected to benefit most from IRS implantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 26 patients dose distributions with (IMRT+IRS) and without (IMRT-IRS) IRS were calculated. Validated nomograms based on CRFs and dosimetric criteria (anorectal V40Gy and V75Gy) were used to predict probabilities for grade 2-3 (G2-3) acute GI toxicity, G2-3 late rectal bleeding (LRB), G3 LRB, and G2-3 faecal incontinence (FI) for IMRT+IRS and IMRT-IRS. All permutations of CRFs were generated to identify most benefit scenarios (MBS) in which a predicted toxicity reduction of ⩾5% points in ⩾25% of the cohort was present due to IRS implantation. RESULTS: IMRT+IRS revealed a significant reduction in V40Gy (p=0.0357) and V75Gy (p<0.0001) relative to IMRT-IRS. For G2-3 acute GI toxicity and G2-3 LRB, the predicted toxicity rates decreased in 17/26 (65%) and 20/26 (77%) patients, and decision rules were derived for 22/32 (69%) and 12/64 (19%) MBS, respectively. From the decision rules, it follows that diabetes status has no impact on G2-3 acute toxicity, and in absence of pre-RT abdominal surgery, the implantation of an IRS is predicted to show no clinically relevant benefit for G2-3 LRB. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer patients who are expected to benefit most from IRS implantation can be identified prior to IMRT based on their CRFs profile.

Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy: What Do Clinicians Have to Know?

Radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PC) has steadily evolved over the last decades, with improving biochemical disease-free survival. Recently population based research also revealed an association between overall survival and doses ≥ 75.6 Gray (Gy) in men with intermediate- and high-risk PC. Examples of improved RT techniques are image-guided RT, intensity-modulated RT, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and stereotactic ablative body RT, which could facilitate further dose escalation. Brachytherapy is an internal form of RT that also developed substantially. New devices such as rectum spacers and balloons have been developed to spare rectal structures. Newer techniques like protons and carbon ions have the intrinsic characteristics maximising the dose on the tumour while minimising the effect on the surrounding healthy tissue, but clinical data are needed for confirmation in randomised phase III trials. Furthermore, it provides an overview of an important discussion issue in PC treatment between urologists and radiation oncologists: the comparison between radical prostatectomy and RT. Current literature reveals that all possible treatment modalities have the same cure rate, but a different toxicity pattern. We recommend proposing the possible different treatment modalities with their own advantages and side-effects to the individual patient. Clinicians and patients should make treatment decisions together (shared decision-making) while using patient decision aids.

Chronic radiation proctitis: tricks to prevent and treat.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to give an overview of the measures used to prevent chronic radiation proctitis (CRP) and to provide an algorithm for the treatment of CRP. METHODS: Medical literature databases including PubMed and Medline were screened and critically analyzed for relevance in the scope of our purpose. RESULTS: CRP is a relatively frequent late side effect (5-20%) and mainly dependent on the dose and volume of irradiated rectum. Radiation treatment (RT) techniques to prevent CRP are constantly improving thanks to image-guided RT and intensity-modulated RT. Also, newer techniques like protons and new devices such as rectum spacers and balloons have been developed to spare rectal structures. Biopsies do not contribute to diagnosing CRP and should be avoided because of the risk of severe rectal wall damage, such as necrosis and fistulas. There is no consensus on the optimal treatment of CRP. A variety of possibilities is available and includes topical and oral agents, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and endoscopic interventions. CONCLUSIONS: CRP has a natural history of improving over time, even without treatment. This is important to take into account when considering these treatments: first be conservative (topical and oral agents) and be aware that invasive treatments can be very toxic.

Spacers in radiotherapy treatment of prostate cancer: is reduction of toxicity cost-effective?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of treating prostate cancer patients with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and a spacer (IMRT+S) versus IMRT-only without a spacer (IMRT-O). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was constructed to examine the effect of late rectal toxicity and compare the costs and quality-adjusted Life Years (QALYs) of IMRT-O and IMRT+S. The main assumption of this modeling study was that disease progression, genito-urinary toxicity and survival were equal for both comparators. RESULTS: For all patients, IMRT+S revealed a lower toxicity than IMRT-O. Treatment follow-up and toxicity costs for IMRT-O and IMRT+S amounted to €1604 and €1444, respectively, thus saving €160 on the complication costs at an extra charge of €1700 for the spacer in IMRT+S. The QALYs yielded for IMRT-O and IMRT+S were 3.542 and 3.570, respectively. This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €55,880 per QALY gained. For a ceiling ratio of €80,000, IMRT+S had a 77% probability of being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: IMRT+S is cost-effective compared to IMRT-O based on its potential to reduce radiotherapy-related toxicity.

[Anorectal symptoms after prostate radiotherapy]. / Anorectale klachten na prostaatbestraling.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in Dutch men and has a relatively good survival rate. Anorectal symptoms after irradiation of the prostate, including rectal blood loss and faecal incontinence, can have a serious impact on quality of life. On endoscopy, the Vienna Rectoscopy Score may reveal telangiectasia or other mucosal changes, but there may also be other causes of blood loss. Endoscopy or watchful waiting can be considered in patients with rectal bleeding. Sucralfate enemas, argon plasma coagulation and hyperbaric oxygen therapy are effective treatments. Increase in frequency of defaecation, faecal urgency or incontinence are related to decreased rectal compliance or to lowered anal resting pressure. Dietary measures can be considered in patients with faecal urgency or incontinence, but scientific evidence for the effectiveness of this is marginal. More accurate radiation techniques and the use of a spacer or endorectal balloon will probably contribute to maintaining rectal and anal function.

Systematic review: anal and rectal changes after radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Pelvic radiotherapy may lead to changes of anorectal function resulting in incontinence-related complaints. The aim of this study was to systematically review objective findings of late anorectal physiology and mucosal appearance after irradiation for prostate cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched. Original articles in which anal function, rectal function, or rectal mucosa were examined ≥3 months after EBRT for prostate cancer were included. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included with low to moderate quality. Anal resting pressures significantly decreased in 6 of the 9 studies including 277 patients. Changes of squeeze pressure and rectoanal inhibitory reflex were less uniform. Rectal distensibility was significantly impaired after EBRT in 7 of 9 studies (277 patients). In 4 of 9 studies on anal and in 5 of 9 on rectal function, disturbances were associated with urgency, frequent bowel movements or fecal incontinence. Mucosal changes as assessed by the Vienna Rectoscopy Score revealed telangiectasias in 73 %, congestion in 33 %, and ulceration in 4 % of patients in 8 studies including 346 patients, but no strictures or necrosis. Three studies reported mucosal improvement during follow-up. Telangiectasias, particularly multiple, were associated with rectal bleeding. Not all bowel complaints (30 %) were related to radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Low to moderate quality evidence indicates that EBRT reduces anal resting pressure, decreases rectal distensibility, and frequently induces telangiectasias of rectal mucosa. Objective changes may be associated with fecal incontinence, urgency, frequent bowel movements, and rectal bleeding, but these symptoms are not always related to radiation damage.

A retrospective analysis of the prognosis of prostate cancer patients with lymph node involvement on MR lymphography: who might be cured.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of prostate cancer patients with lymph node metastases so small they can only be visualized by new imaging techniques as MR lymphography (MRL) is unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognosis of prostate cancer patients with non-enlarged metastatic lymph nodes on MRL and to identify a subgroup of MRL-positive patients who might be candidates for curative treatment. METHODS: The charts of 138 prostate cancer patients without enlarged lymph nodes on CT, in whom a pre-treatment MRL was performed were reviewed. Endpoints were distant metastases-free survival and overall survival. Relation between the following factors and outcome were investigated: T-stage, PSA value at diagnosis, Gleason score, diameter (short axis and long axis) of the largest MRL-positive lymph node, number of MRL-positive lymph nodes, the presence of extra-pelvic nodal disease, and the extent of resection of the positive lymph nodes. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to estimate the survival functions. RESULTS: Of the 138 patients, 24 (17%) had a positive MRL. Patients with a short axis of the largest positive lymph node of ≤8 mm had a significantly better 5-year distant metastases-free (79% vs 16%) and overall survival (81% vs 36%) than patients with larger positive lymph nodes. This also accounted for patients with a largest long axis of ≤10 mm (71% vs 20% and 73% vs 40%, respectively). Outcome was also better in patients in whom all positive lymph nodes had been resected. CONCLUSION: A selection of MRL-positive patients with a good prognosis could be identified, consisting of patients with small positive lymph nodes. In these patients, cure might be pursued.

Individualized image-based lymph node irradiation for prostate cancer.

Controversy surrounds the benefit of whole pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) over prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) for intermediate-risk and high-risk patients with prostate cancer. In the PSA screening era, two large randomized trials as well as multiple retrospective studies comparing WPRT with PORT have been performed, albeit with contradictory results. Data regarding the use of WPRT in patients with biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy are scarce. As a consequence, the practice of WPRT varies worldwide. Advanced highly accurate imaging methods for the detection of lymph node metastases in patients with prostate cancer have been developed, such as PET, single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), diffusion-weighted MRI and magnetic resonance lymphography (MRL). The use of these new imaging methods might improve nodal irradiation, as they can be used not only for selection of patients, but also for accurately determining the target volume to reduce geographical miss. Furthermore, these new techniques can enable dose escalation to involved lymph nodes.

Impact of late anorectal dysfunction on quality of life after pelvic radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Anorectal dysfunction is common after pelvic radiotherapy. This study aims to explore the relationship of subjective and objective anorectal function with quality of life (QoL) and their relative impact in patients irradiated for prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients underwent anal manometry, rectal barostat measurement, and completed validated questionnaires, at least 1 year after prostate radiotherapy (range 1-7 years). QoL was measured by the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale (FIQL) and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Bowel domain (EPICB)-bother subscale. Severity of symptoms was rated by the EPICB function subscale. RESULTS: Anorectal function was evaluated in 85 men. Sixty-three percent suffered from one or more anorectal symptoms. Correlations of individual symptoms ranged from r = 0.23 to r = 0.53 with FIQL domains and from r = 0.36 to r = 0.73 with EPICB bother scores. They were strongest for fecal incontinence and urgency. Correlations of anal sphincter pressures, rectal capacity, and sensory thresholds ranged from r = 0.00 to r = 0.42 with FIQL domains and from r = 0.15 to r = 0.31 with EPICB bother scores. Anal resting pressure correlated most strongly. Standardized regression coefficients for QoL outcomes were largest for incontinence, urgency, and anal resting pressure. Regression models with subjective parameters explained a larger amount (range 26-92 %) of variation in QoL outcome than objective parameters (range 10-22 %). CONCLUSIONS: Fecal incontinence and rectal urgency are the symptoms with the largest influence on QoL. Impaired anal resting pressure is the objective function parameter with the largest influence. Therefore, sparing the structures responsible for an adequate fecal continence is important in radiotherapy planning.

Choice between prostatectomy and radiotherapy when men are eligible for both: a randomized controlled trial of usual care vs decision aid.

UNLABELLED: WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: Many patients are eligible for more than one treatment option for prostate cancer. In usual care, urologists have a large influence on the treatment choice. Decision aids, providing balanced information on the pros and cons of different treatment options, improve the match between patient preferences and treatment received. In men eligible for both surgery and external beam radiotherapy, treatment choice differed by hospital. Across the participating hospitals, the decision aid consistently led to fewer patients remaining undecided on their treatment preference and more patients choosing brachytherapy. OBJECTIVES: To examine the treatment choice for localized prostate cancer in selected men who were eligible for both prostatectomy and radiotherapy. To examine whether increased patient participation, using a decision aid, affected the treatment choice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2008 to 2011, 240 patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled from three separate hospitals. They were selected to be eligible for both prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy. Brachytherapy was a third option for about half of the patients. In this randomized controlled trial, patients were randomized to a group which only discussed their treatment with their specialist (usual care group) and a group which received additional information from a decision aid presented by a researcher (decision aid group). The decision aid was based on a literature review. Predictors of treatment choice were examined. RESULTS: Treatment choice was affected by the decision aid (P = 0.03) and by the hospital of intake (P < 0.001). The decision aid led to more patients choosing brachytherapy (P = 0.02) and fewer patients remaining undecided (P < 0.05). Prostatectomy remained the most frequently preferred treatment. Age, tumour characteristics or pretreatment urinary, bowel or erectile functioning did not affect the choice in this selected group. Patients choosing brachytherapy assigned more weight to convenience of the procedure and to maintaining erectile function. CONCLUSIONS: Traditionally, patient characteristics differ between surgery and radiotherapy groups, but not in this selected group of patients. Men eligible for both prostatectomy and radiotherapy mostly preferred prostatectomy, and the treatment choice was influenced by the hospital they visited. Giving patients evidence-based information, by means of a decision aid, led to an increase in brachytherapy.

Geographical distribution of lymph node metastases on MR lymphography in prostate cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To investigate the pattern of lymph node spread on magnetic resonance lymphography (MRL) in prostate cancer patients and compare this pattern to the clinical target volume for elective pelvis irradiation as defined by the radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG-CTV). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The charts of 60 intermediate and high risk prostate cancer patients with non-enlarged positive lymph nodes on MRL were reviewed. Positive lymph nodes were assigned to a lymph node region according to the guidelines for delineation of the RTOG-CTV. Five lymph node regions outside this RTOG-CTV were defined: the para-aortal, proximal common iliac, pararectal, paravesical and inguinal region. RESULTS: Fifty-three percent of the patients had an MRL-positive lymph node in a lymph node region outside the RTOG-CTV. The most frequently involved aberrant sites were the proximal common iliac, the pararectal and para-aortal region, which were affected in 30%, 25% and 18% respectively. CONCLUSION: More than half of the patients had an MRL-positive lymph node outside the RTOG-CTV. To reduce geographical miss while minimizing the toxicity of radiotherapy, image based definition of an individual target volume seems to be necessary.

Magnetic resonance lymphography findings in patients with biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy and the relation with the Stephenson nomogram.

PURPOSE: To estimate the occurrence of positive lymph nodes on magnetic resonance lymphography (MRL) in patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after prostatectomy and to investigate the relation between score on the Stephenson nomogram and lymph node involvement on MRL. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-five candidates for salvage radiation therapy were referred for an MRL to determine their lymph node status. Clinical and histopathologic features were recorded. For 49 patients, data were complete to calculate the Stephenson nomogram score. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine how well this nomogram related to the MRL result. Analysis was done for the whole group and separately for patients with a PSA <1.0 ng/mL to determine the situation in candidates for early salvage radiation therapy, and for patients without pathologic lymph nodes at initial lymph node dissection. RESULTS: MRL detected positive lymph nodes in 47 patients. ROC analysis for the Stephenson nomogram yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.93). Of 29 patients with a PSA <1.0 ng/mL, 18 had a positive MRL. Of 37 patients without lymph node involvement at initial lymph node dissection, 25 had a positive MRL. ROC analysis for the Stephenson nomogram showed AUCs of 0.84 and 0.74, respectively, for these latter groups. CONCLUSION: MRL detected positive lymph nodes in 72% of candidates for salvage radiation therapy, in 62% of candidates for early salvage radiation therapy, and in 68% of initially node-negative patients. The Stephenson nomogram showed a good correlation with the MRL result and may thus be useful for identifying patients with a PSA recurrence who are at high risk for lymph node involvement.

Value of PET/CT and MR lymphography in treatment of prostate cancer patients with lymph node metastases.

PURPOSE: To determine the clinical value of two novel molecular imaging techniques: (11)C-choline positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) and ferumoxtran-10 enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (magnetic resonance lymphography [MRL]) for lymph node (LN) treatment in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Therefore, we evaluated the ability of PET/CT and MRL to assess the number, size, and location of LN metastases in patients with primary or recurrent PCa. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 29 patients underwent MRL and PET/CT for LN evaluation. The MRL and PET/CT data were analyzed independently. The number, size, and location of the LN metastases were determined. The location was described as within or outside the standard clinical target volume for elective pelvic irradiation as defined by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Subsequently, the results from MRL and PET/CT were compared. RESULTS: Of the 738 LNs visible on MRL, 151 were positive in 23 of 29 patients. Of the 132 LNs visible on PET/CT, 34 were positive in 13 of 29 patients. MRL detected significantly more positive LNs (p < 0.001) in more patients than PET/CT (p = 0.002). The mean diameter of the detected suspicious LNs on MRL was significantly smaller than those detected by PET/CT, 4.9 mm and 8.4 mm, respectively (p < 0.0001). In 14 (61%) of 23 patients, suspicious LNs were found outside the clinical target volume with MRL and in 4 (31%) of 13 patients with PET/CT. CONCLUSION: In patients with PCa, both molecular imaging techniques, MRL and (11)C-choline PET/CT, can detect LNs suspicious for metastasis, irrespective of the existing size and shape criteria for CT and conventional magnetic resonance imaging. On MRL and PET/CT, 61% and 31% of the suspicious LNs were located outside the conventional clinical target volume. Therefore, these techniques could help to individualize treatment selection and enable image-guided radiotherapy for patients with PCa LN metastases.

Magnetic resonance lymphography-guided selective high-dose lymph node irradiation in prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of magnetic resonance lymphography (MRL) -guided delineation of a boost volume and an elective target volume for pelvic lymph node irradiation in patients with prostate cancer. The feasibility of irradiating these volumes with a high-dose boost to the MRL-positive lymph nodes in conjunction with irradiation of the prostate using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was also investigated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 4 prostate cancer patients with a high risk of lymph node involvement but no enlarged lymph nodes on CT and/or MRI, MRL detected pathological lymph nodes in the pelvis. These lymph nodes were identified and delineated on a radiotherapy planning CT to create a boost volume. Based on the location of the MRL-positive lymph nodes, the standard elective pelvic target volume was individualized. An IMRT plan with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) was created with dose prescriptions of 42 Gy to the pelvic target volume, a boost to 60 Gy to the MRL-positive lymph nodes, and 72 Gy to the prostate. RESULTS: All MRL-positive lymph nodes could be identified on the planning CT. This information could be used to delineate a boost volume and to individualize the pelvic target volume for elective irradiation. IMRT planning delivered highly acceptable radiotherapy plans with regard to the prescribed dose levels and the dose to the organs at risk (OARs). CONCLUSION: MRL can be used to select patients with limited lymph node involvement for pelvic radiotherapy. MRL-guided delineation of a boost volume and an elective pelvic target volume for selective high-dose lymph node irradiation with IMRT is feasible. Whether this approach will result in improved outcome for these patients needs to be investigated in further clinical studies.

Differences in radiation dosimetry and anorectal function testing imply that anorectal symptoms may arise from different anatomic substrates.

PURPOSE: To explore the influence of functional changes and dosimetric parameters on specific incontinence-related anorectal complaints after prostate external beam radiotherapy and to estimate dose-effect relations for the anal wall and rectal wall. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty patients, irradiated for localized prostate cancer, underwent anorectal manometry and barostat measurements to evaluate anal pressures, rectal capacity, and rectal sensory functions. In addition, 30 untreated men were analyzed as a control group. In 36 irradiated patients, the anal wall and rectal wall were retrospectively delineated on planning computed tomography scans, and dosimetric parameters were retrieved from the treatment plans. Functional and dosimetric parameters were compared between patients with and without complaints, focusing on urgency, incontinence, and frequency. RESULTS: After external beam radiotherapy, reduced anal pressures and tolerated rectal volumes were observed, irrespective of complaints. Patients with urgency and/or incontinence showed significantly lower anal resting pressures (mean 38 and 39 vs. 49 and 50 mm Hg) and lower tolerated rectal pressures (mean 28 and 28 vs. 33 and 34 mm Hg), compared to patients without these complaints. In patients with frequency, almost all rectal parameters were reduced. Several dosimetric parameters to the anal wall and rectal wall were predictive for urgency (e.g., anal D(mean)>38 Gy), whereas some anal wall parameters correlated to incontinence and no dose-effect relation for frequency was found. CONCLUSIONS: Anorectal function deteriorates after external beam radiotherapy. Different incontinence-related complaints show specific anorectal dysfunctions, suggesting different anatomic and pathophysiologic substrates: urgency and incontinence seem to originate from both anal wall and rectal wall, whereas frequency seems associated with rectal wall dysfunction. Also, dose-effect relations differed between these complaints. This implies that anal wall and rectal wall should be considered separate organs in radiotherapy planning.

High occurrence of aberrant lymph node spread on magnetic resonance lymphography in prostate cancer patients with a biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the pattern of lymph node spread in prostate cancer patients with a biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy, eligible for salvage radiotherapy; and to determine whether the clinical target volume (CTV) for elective pelvic irradiation in the primary setting can be applied in the salvage setting for patients with (a high risk of) lymph node metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The charts of 47 prostate cancer patients with PSA recurrence after prostatectomy who had positive lymph nodes on magnetic resonance lymphography (MRL) were reviewed. Positive lymph nodes were assigned to a lymph node region according to the guidelines of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) for delineation of the CTV for pelvic irradiation (RTOG-CTV). We defined four lymph node regions for positive nodes outside this RTOG-CTV: the para-aortal, proximal common iliac, pararectal, and paravesical regions. They were referred to as aberrant lymph node regions. For each patient, clinical and pathologic features were recorded, and their association with aberrant lymph drainage was investigated. The distribution of positive lymph nodes was analyzed separately for patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <1.0 ng/mL. RESULTS: MRL detected positive aberrant lymph nodes in 37 patients (79%). In 20 patients (43%) a positive lymph node was found in the pararectal region. Higher PSA at the time of MRL was associated with the presence of positive lymph nodes in the para-aortic region (2.49 vs. 0.82 ng/mL; p = 0.007) and in the proximal common iliac region (1.95 vs. 0.59 ng/mL; p = 0.009). There were 18 patients with a PSA <1.0 ng/mL. Ten of these patients (61%) had at least one aberrant positive lymph node. CONCLUSION: Seventy-nine percent of the PSA-recurrent patients had at least one aberrant positive lymph node. Application of the standard RTOG-CTV for pelvic irradiation in the salvage setting therefore seems to be inappropriate.

Dose-effect relationships for individual pelvic floor muscles and anorectal complaints after prostate radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To delineate the individual pelvic floor muscles considered to be involved in anorectal toxicity and to investigate dose-effect relationships for fecal incontinence-related complaints after prostate radiotherapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 48 patients treated for localized prostate cancer, the internal anal sphincter (IAS) muscle, the external anal sphincter (EAS) muscle, the puborectalis muscle (PRM), and the levator ani muscles (LAM) in addition to the anal wall (Awall) and rectal wall (Rwall) were retrospectively delineated on planning computed tomography scans. Dose parameters were obtained and compared between patients with and without fecal urgency, incontinence, and frequency. Dose-effect curves were constructed. Finally, the effect of an endorectal balloon, which was applied in 28 patients, was investigated. RESULTS: The total volume of the pelvic floor muscles together was about three times that of the Awall. The PRM was exposed to the highest RT dose, whereas the EAS received the lowest dose. Several anal and rectal dose parameters, as well as doses to all separate pelvic floor muscles, were associated with urgency, while incontinence was associated mainly with doses to the EAS and PRM. Based on the dose-effect curves, the following constraints regarding mean doses could be deduced to reduce the risk of urgency: ≤ 30 Gy to the IAS; ≤ 10 Gy to the EAS; ≤ 50 Gy to the PRM; and ≤ 40 Gy to the LAM. No dose-effect relationships for frequency were observed. Patients treated with an endorectal balloon reported significantly less urgency and incontinence, while their treatment plans showed significantly lower doses to the Awall, Rwall, and all pelvic floor muscles. CONCLUSIONS: Incontinence-related complaints show specific dose-effect relationships to individual pelvic floor muscles. Dose constraints for each muscle can be identified for RT planning. When only the Awall is delineated, substantial components of the continence apparatus are excluded.