Literature DB >> 28774760

Dosimetric comparison of rectal-sparing capabilities of rectal balloon vs injectable spacer gel in stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer: lessons learned from prospective trials.

Ryan T Jones1, Nima Hassan Rezaeian1, Neil B Desai1, Yair Lotan2, Xun Jia1, Raquibul Hannan1, D W Nathan Kim1, Brad Hornberger2, Jeffrey Dubas1, Aaron M Laine1, Michael J Zelefsky3, Robert D Timmerman1, Michael R Folkert4.   

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the rectal-sparing capabilities of rectal balloons vs absorbable injectable spacer gel in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer. Patient samples included in this analysis were obtained from 2 multi-institutional prospective trials of SBRT for prostate cancer using a rectal balloon (n = 36 patients) and injectable spacer gel (n = 36). Treatment prescription dose was 45 Gy in 5 fractions in 42 patients; for equal comparison, the remaining 30 patients were rescaled to 45 Gy from 47.5 Gy prescription (n = 6) and 50 Gy prescription (n = 24). The median prostate volumes and body mass index in the 2 patient samples were not statistically significantly different (p= 0.67 and 0.45, respectively), supporting anatomic similarity between cohorts. The injectable spacer gel achieved dosimetric superiority over the rectal balloon with respect to the maximum dose to the rectum (42.3 vs 46.2 Gy, p < 0.001), dose delivered to 33% of the rectal circumference (28 vs 35.1 Gy, p < 0.001), and absolute volume of rectum receiving 45 Gy (V45Gy), V40Gy, and V30Gy (0.3 vs 1.7 cc, 1 vs 5.4 cc, and 4.1 vs 9.6 cc, respectively; p < 0.001 in all cases). There was no difference between the 2 groups with respect to the V50Gy of the rectum or the dose to 50% of the rectal circumference (p= 0.29 and 0.06, respectively). The V18.3Gy of the bladder was significantly larger with the rectal balloon (19.9 vs 14.5 cc, p= 0.003). In this analysis of patients enrolled on 2 consecutive multi-institutional prospective trials of SBRT for prostate cancer, the injectable spacer gel outperformed the rectal balloon in the majority of the examined and relevant dosimetric rectal-sparing parameters. The rectal balloon did not outperform the injectable spacer gel in any measured rectal dose parameter.
Copyright © 2017 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Rectal balloon; Rectal dosimetry; Rectal spacer; Rectal toxicity; Stereotactic body radiation therapy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28774760     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2017.07.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of rectal dose reduction by a hydrogel spacer among 3D conformal radiotherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, helical tomotherapy, CyberKnife and proton therapy.

Authors:  Masahide Saito; Toshihiro Suzuki; Yuya Sugama; Kan Marino; Naoki Sano; Takafumi Komiyama; Shinichi Aoki; Yoshiyasu Maehata; Kazuya Yoshizawa; Kazunari Ashizawa; Hidekazu Suzuki; Koji Ueda; Yosuke Miyasaka; Masayuki Araya; Hiroshi Takahashi; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 2.724

2.  Dose-Intensified Stereotactic Ablative Radiation for Localized Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Lily Chen; Bhavani S Gannavarapu; Neil B Desai; Michael R Folkert; Michael Dohopolski; Ang Gao; Chul Ahn; Jeffrey Cadeddu; Aditya Bagrodia; Solomon Woldu; Ganesh V Raj; Claus Roehrborn; Yair Lotan; Robert D Timmerman; Aurelie Garant; Raquibul Hannan
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 6.244

3.  SpaceOAR hydrogel spacer injection prior to stereotactic body radiation therapy for men with localized prostate cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Heather A Payne; Michael Pinkawa; Clive Peedell; Samir K Bhattacharyya; Emily Woodward; Larry E Miller
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 1.817

4.  Personalized Radiation Attenuating Materials for Gastrointestinal Mucosal Protection.

Authors:  James D Byrne; Cameron C Young; Jacqueline N Chu; Jennifer Pursley; Mu Xian Chen; Adam J Wentworth; Annie Feng; Ameya R Kirtane; Kyla A Remillard; Cindy I Hancox; Mandar S Bhagwat; Nicole Machado; Tiffany Hua; Siddartha M Tamang; Joy E Collins; Keiko Ishida; Alison Hayward; Sarah L Becker; Samantha K Edgington; Jonathan D Schoenfeld; William R Jeck; Chin Hur; Giovanni Traverso
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 16.806

5.  A novel model to correlate hydrogel spacer placement, perirectal space creation, and rectum dosimetry in prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Authors:  Mark E Hwang; Paul J Black; Carl D Elliston; Brian A Wolthuis; Deborah R Smith; Cheng-Chia Wu; Sven Wenske; Israel Deutsch
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Application of rectal retractor for postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy of prostate cancer: A case report and literature review.

Authors:  Hamed Ghaffari; Mahdieh Afkhami Ardekani; Seyed Hadi Molana; Mohammad Haghparast; Mastaneh Sanei; Seied Rabi Mahdavi; Bahram Mofid; Aram Rostami
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2019-09-27

7.  Endorectal balloon (ERB) in helical tomotherapy (HT) for localized prostate cancer: a case report of dosimetric analysis.

Authors:  Seung-Gu Yeo; Kwang Hwan Cho
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 1.241

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.