Title: Prostate Brachytherapy for intermediate risk patients
1Prostate Brachytherapy for intermediate risk
patients
- David Bottomley
- Cookridge Hospital
- Leeds
2Intermediate risk patients
- Gleason gt 6 (exclude Gleason 9, 10)
- PSA gt 10 lt 20
- gtT2
- 1 risk factor allowed, otherwise high risk
3PARTIN TABLESLOW RISK
- T1-T2, Gleason lt 6, PSA lt 10
- CP 9 - 44
- SV 0 - 5
- LN 0 - 4
4DFS POST SURGERY WITH ECE ANDNEGATIVE MARGINS
5EXTRAPROSTATIC EXTENSION
6RADIAL EXTENT OF EXTRAPROSTATIC DISEASE (EPD)
c T1-T2/ Gl lt 6/ PSA lt 10
- DAVIS 107 SPEC.
- 10 demonstrated EPD
- Mean extension 0.03 mm
- Max. extension 0.6 mm
7PARTIN TABLESINTERMEDIATE RISK
- T1-T2, Gleason gt6, PSA lt 10
- T1-T2, Gleason lt 7, PSA 10-20
- CP 30 - 57
- SV 4 - 24
- LN 1 - 16
8MAGNITUDE OF ECE VS PSA/GLEASON
Soyhada
9POST-IMPLANT CT DOSIMETRY SEATTLE IMPLANTS
10MONOTHERAPY TREATMENT MARGINS(26 Patients,
13,104 Data Points)
Merrick, Wallner
11PURPOSE OF ADDING EXTERNAL BEAM
- Addresses disease potentially beyond implant
range - Capsule penetration
- S.V. Invasion
- Indicated if any one factor present
- gt T2 / Gl gt6 / PSA gt10
- Spackle effect
12SPACKLE EFFECT OF EBRT
13THERAPEUTIC MARGIN HOW MUCH DOES 45 GY EBRT ADD?
- AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL EXTRAPROSTATIC TISSUE
COVERED BY THE ADDITION OF 45 GY - ASSUMPTIONS
- Minimum cancericidal isodose line with EBRT is at
the 50 brachy isodose - Therapeutic margin therefore increased by 4 mm
1425mm
15THERAPEUTIC MARGINS
16MAGNITUDE OF ECE VS PSA/GLEASON
Soyhada
17bNED iPSA 10-20MONOTHERAPY VS COMBINED
Mono. Blasko Zelefsky Combined
Dattoli Critz
18 I125/ Pd103 IMPLANT EBRT PSA PFS
Intermediate Risk, n 200
EBRT Implant - 84
Implant Alone - 74
Cumulative Probability
p0.16
Low T1-T2b / GSlt7 / iPSAlt10 Intermediate T2c /
GSgt6 / iPSAgt10 (1 Factor) High T2c / GSgt6 /
iPSAgt10 (2 Factors)
0.0
0
12
Time post-implant (months)
19DISADVANTAGES OF ADDING EBRT
- Increased morbidity
- Decreased patient convenience
- Increased cost
20Hormones and Seed Implants
- Commonly used to downsize large prostates prior
to seed implant - Lee et al (IJROBP 200252(2) 444-52
- 201 Patients of intermediate high risk (Glgt6,
PSAgt10, stagegtT2a). Follow-up 42 months - BDFS 79 with hormones
- BDFS 54 without hormones
21Implant quality and outcome
- Stock et al 1998
- 134 patients (T1/2, Gleason lt7)
- D90 calculated
- 4 year FFBF 68 for D90lt 140 Gy
- 92 for D90gt 140 Gy
- 81 for D90100-140 Gy
- Difference greater when presenting PSAgt10
22Leeds results 3/95 12/01seeds alone 145Gy
- Patients 667
- Mean age 63 (range 42-77)
- Hormones 346 (51.9)
- PSAlt10 421 (63.1)
- Gleasonlt7 462 (69.2)
- T1-T2a 519 (77.7)
23Number of patients of each risk group and PSA
relapse-free survival rate
24I125/Pd103 IMPLANT EBRT BRFS BY RISK GROUP,
n 634
Low Risk
Intermediate Risk
High Risk
Cumulative Probability
Low T1-T2 / GSlt7 / iPSAlt10 Intermediate T3 /
GSgt6 / iPSAgt10 (1 Factor) High T3 / GSgt6 /
iPSAgt10 (2 Factors)
Patients at Risk
612 555 461 361 263 193 129 78 33
16 9 1
0.0
0
12
Time post-implant (months)
25Actuarial PSA-RFS according to ESTRO risk groups
based on initial PSA and Gleason score prior to
treatment.84.3 Solid line, Low risk 73.9
dashed Intermediate risk and 52.6 dotted High
risk
26Hormones v no hormones in intermediate risk group
Ns
27Multivariate analysis to predict PSA relapse free
survival
28Influence of Gleason grade on outcome after
brachytherapy
- 1029 consecutive patients at MSK 1993-99
- All T1/T2. All had central pathology review
- 614 grade 33
- 208 grade 34
- 150 grade 43
- 57 grade 44
- Potters et al IJROBP 2003, 56(3)749-754
29Stratification of treatment
30Kaplan-Meier biochemical freedom from recurrence
(median follow-up 46m)
31Multivariate analysis of factors predicting for
BFR
32Comparison of Two I125 Monotherapy Cohorts
Biochemical Relapse Free
Low Risk Intermed. Risk
Grimm et al IJROBP 2001
33BFR
34Conclusion
- Results in medical literature conflicting for
intermediate risk patients - Inconclusive evidence of benefit of additional
EBRT or NAAD - Further studies required