PURPOSE: Despite the wide use of permanent prostate implants for the treatment of early stage prostate cancer, there is no consensus for optimal pre-implant planning guidelines that results in maximal post-implant target coverage. The purpose of this study was to compare post-implant target volume coverage and dosimetry between patients treated before and after Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 98-05 guidelines were adopted using several dosimetric endpoints. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten consecutively treated patients before the adoption of the RTOG 98-05 planning guidelines were compared with ten consecutively treated patients after implementation of the guidelines. Pre-implant planning for patients treated pre-RTOG was based on the clinical target volume (CTV) defined by the pre-implant TRUS definition of the prostate. The CTV was expanded in each dimension according to RTOG 98-05 and defined as the planning target volume. The evaluation target volume was defined as the post-implant computed tomography definition of the prostate based on RTOG 98-05 protocol recommendations. Implant quality indicators included V(100), V(90), V(100), and Coverage Index (CI). RESULTS: The pre-RTOG median V(100), V(90), D(90), and CI values were 82.8, 88.9%, 126.5 Gy, and 17.1, respectively. The median post-RTOG V(100), V(90), D(90), and CI values were 96.0, 97.8%, 169.2 Gy, and 4.0, respectively. These differences were all statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the RTOG 98-05 implant planning guidelines has increased coverage of the prostate by the prescription isodose lines compared with our previous technique, as indicated by post-implant dosimetry indices such as V(100), V(90), D(90). The CI was also improved significantly with the protocol guidelines. Our data confirms the validity of the RTOG 98-05 implant guidelines for pre-implant planning as it relates to enlargement of the CTV to ensure adequate margin between the CTV and the prescription isodose lines.
PURPOSE: Despite the wide use of permanent prostate implants for the treatment of early stage prostate cancer, there is no consensus for optimal pre-implant planning guidelines that results in maximal post-implant target coverage. The purpose of this study was to compare post-implant target volume coverage and dosimetry between patients treated before and after Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 98-05 guidelines were adopted using several dosimetric endpoints. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten consecutively treated patients before the adoption of the RTOG 98-05 planning guidelines were compared with ten consecutively treated patients after implementation of the guidelines. Pre-implant planning for patients treated pre-RTOG was based on the clinical target volume (CTV) defined by the pre-implant TRUS definition of the prostate. The CTV was expanded in each dimension according to RTOG 98-05 and defined as the planning target volume. The evaluation target volume was defined as the post-implant computed tomography definition of the prostate based on RTOG 98-05 protocol recommendations. Implant quality indicators included V(100), V(90), V(100), and Coverage Index (CI). RESULTS: The pre-RTOG median V(100), V(90), D(90), and CI values were 82.8, 88.9%, 126.5 Gy, and 17.1, respectively. The median post-RTOG V(100), V(90), D(90), and CI values were 96.0, 97.8%, 169.2 Gy, and 4.0, respectively. These differences were all statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the RTOG 98-05 implant planning guidelines has increased coverage of the prostate by the prescription isodose lines compared with our previous technique, as indicated by post-implant dosimetry indices such as V(100), V(90), D(90). The CI was also improved significantly with the protocol guidelines. Our data confirms the validity of the RTOG 98-05 implant guidelines for pre-implant planning as it relates to enlargement of the CTV to ensure adequate margin between the CTV and the prescription isodose lines.