PURPOSE: To identify dosimetric parameters predictive of a good prostate seed I(125) quality implant. We analyzed preimplant and postimplant realtime dosimetry in patients treated with intraoperative (IO) inverse planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed 127 consecutively treated patients with primarily low-risk prostate carcinoma who underwent prostate permanent seed I(125) brachytherapy using an IO planning approach. The implant was done using the three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound (PRE-TRUS)-guided IO interactive inverse preplanning system. The TRUS was repeated in the operating room after the implant procedure was complete (POST-TRUS). The prostate was recontoured and postimplant dosimetry was calculated. Each patient underwent computed tomography scan on Day 28 (CT-D28) to evaluate implant quality. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) was evaluated for models predictive of a V100 of > or =90% and a D90 of > or =140 Gy on the basis of CT-D28 values. RESULTS: On CT-D28, 72.4% of patients had a V100 of > or =90% and 74.8% had a D90 of > or =140 Gy. AUROC for a V100 of > or =90% was 0.665 (p = 0.004) on PRE-TRUS and 0.619 (p = 0.039) on POST-TRUS. AUROC for D90 of > or =140 Gy was 0.602 (p = 0.086) on PRE-TRUS and 0.614 (p = 0.054) on POST-TRUS. Using PRE-TRUS V100 cutoff of >97% gives sensitivity of 88% and a false-positive rate of 63%. A POST-TRUS D90 cutoff of >170 Gy resulted in a sensitivity of 62% and a false-positive rate of 34%. CONCLUSIONS: Because of unacceptably high false-positive rates, IO preimplant and postimplant TRUS-based dosimetry are not accurate tools to predict for postimplant computed tomography-based dosimetry.
PURPOSE: To identify dosimetric parameters predictive of a good prostate seed I(125) quality implant. We analyzed preimplant and postimplant realtime dosimetry in patients treated with intraoperative (IO) inverse planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed 127 consecutively treated patients with primarily low-risk prostate carcinoma who underwent prostate permanent seed I(125) brachytherapy using an IO planning approach. The implant was done using the three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound (PRE-TRUS)-guided IO interactive inverse preplanning system. The TRUS was repeated in the operating room after the implant procedure was complete (POST-TRUS). The prostate was recontoured and postimplant dosimetry was calculated. Each patient underwent computed tomography scan on Day 28 (CT-D28) to evaluate implant quality. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) was evaluated for models predictive of a V100 of > or =90% and a D90 of > or =140 Gy on the basis of CT-D28 values. RESULTS: On CT-D28, 72.4% of patients had a V100 of > or =90% and 74.8% had a D90 of > or =140 Gy. AUROC for a V100 of > or =90% was 0.665 (p = 0.004) on PRE-TRUS and 0.619 (p = 0.039) on POST-TRUS. AUROC for D90 of > or =140 Gy was 0.602 (p = 0.086) on PRE-TRUS and 0.614 (p = 0.054) on POST-TRUS. Using PRE-TRUS V100 cutoff of >97% gives sensitivity of 88% and a false-positive rate of 63%. A POST-TRUS D90 cutoff of >170 Gy resulted in a sensitivity of 62% and a false-positive rate of 34%. CONCLUSIONS: Because of unacceptably high false-positive rates, IO preimplant and postimplant TRUS-based dosimetry are not accurate tools to predict for postimplant computed tomography-based dosimetry.
Authors: Tanmay Singh; Junghoon Lee; Marianna Zahurak; Hee Joon Bae; Tamey Habtu; Robert Hobbs; Yi Le; Everette C Burdette; Daniel Y Song Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-03-13