PURPOSE: To identify , within the framework of a current Phase I trial, whether factors related to intraprostatic cancer lesions (IPLs) or individual patients predict the feasibility of high-dose intraprostatic irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Endorectal coil MRI scans of the prostate from 42 men were evaluated for dominant IPLs. The IPLs, prostate, and critical normal tissues were contoured. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans were generated with the goal of delivering 75.6 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions to the prostate, with IPLs receiving a simultaneous integrated boost of 3.6 Gy per fraction to a total dose of 151.2 Gy, 200% of the prescribed dose and the highest dose cohort in our trial. Rectal and bladder dose constraints were consistent with those outlined in current Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocols. RESULTS: Dominant IPLs were identified in 24 patients (57.1%). Simultaneous integrated boosts (SIB) to 200% of the prescribed dose were achieved in 12 of the 24 patients without violating dose constraints. Both the distance between the IPL and rectum and the hip-to-hip patient width on planning CT scans were associated with the feasibility to plan an SIB (p = 0.002 and p = 0.0137, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this small cohort, the distance between an intraprostatic lesion and the rectum most strongly predicted the ability to plan high-dose radiation to a dominant intraprostatic lesion. High-dose SIB planning seems possible for select intraprostatic lesions. Published by Elsevier Inc.
PURPOSE: To identify , within the framework of a current Phase I trial, whether factors related to intraprostatic cancer lesions (IPLs) or individual patients predict the feasibility of high-dose intraprostatic irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Endorectal coil MRI scans of the prostate from 42 men were evaluated for dominant IPLs. The IPLs, prostate, and critical normal tissues were contoured. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans were generated with the goal of delivering 75.6 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions to the prostate, with IPLs receiving a simultaneous integrated boost of 3.6 Gy per fraction to a total dose of 151.2 Gy, 200% of the prescribed dose and the highest dose cohort in our trial. Rectal and bladder dose constraints were consistent with those outlined in current Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocols. RESULTS: Dominant IPLs were identified in 24 patients (57.1%). Simultaneous integrated boosts (SIB) to 200% of the prescribed dose were achieved in 12 of the 24 patients without violating dose constraints. Both the distance between the IPL and rectum and the hip-to-hip patient width on planning CT scans were associated with the feasibility to plan an SIB (p = 0.002 and p = 0.0137, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this small cohort, the distance between an intraprostatic lesion and the rectum most strongly predicted the ability to plan high-dose radiation to a dominant intraprostatic lesion. High-dose SIB planning seems possible for select intraprostatic lesions. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: M J Zelefsky; Z Fuks; M Hunt; H J Lee; D Lombardi; C C Ling; V E Reuter; E S Venkatraman; S A Leibel Journal: J Urol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Eugene H Huang; Alan Pollack; Larry Levy; George Starkschall; Lei Dong; Isaac Rosen; Deborah A Kuban Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alan Pollack; Gunar K Zagars; George Starkschall; John A Antolak; J Jack Lee; Eugene Huang; Andrew C von Eschenbach; Deborah A Kuban; Isaac Rosen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Rojymon Jacob; Alexandra L Hanlon; Eric M Horwitz; Benjamin Movsas; Robert G Uzzo; Alan Pollack Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Louise J Murray; John Lilley; Christopher M Thompson; Vivian Cosgrove; Josh Mason; Jonathan Sykes; Kevin Franks; David Sebag-Montefiore; Ann M Henry Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Murat Osman; Haytham Shebel; Sandeep Sankineni; Marcelino L Bernardo; Dagane Daar; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Harsh K Agarwal Journal: Radiol Res Pract Date: 2014-10-13
Authors: Matthew T Studenski; Yanisley Valenciaga; Matthew C Abramowitz; Radka Stoyanova; Elizabeth Bossart; Nesrin Dogan; Alan Pollack Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2016-05-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Florian Sterzing; Clemens Kratochwil; Hannah Fiedler; Sonja Katayama; Gregor Habl; Klaus Kopka; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Jürgen Debus; Uwe Haberkorn; Frederik L Giesel Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 9.236