Martin C Tom1, Jaroslaw T Hepel2, Rakesh Patel3, Mitchell Kamrava4, Shahed N Badiyan5, Gil'ad N Cohen6, Chirag Shah7. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Brown University, Providence, RI; Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sutter Health, Los Gatos, CA. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, MO. 6. Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: csshah27@hotmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Brachytherapy is utilized in the treatment of many different malignancies; although traditionally performed with low-dose-rate or high-dose-rate techniques, more recently, electronic brachytherapy (EB) has emerged as a potential alternative. At this time, there are no evidence-based guidelines to assist clinicians in patient selection for EB and concerns exits regarding differences in dosimetry as compared to traditional brachytherapy techniques. As such, the American Brachytherapy Society appointed a group of physicians and physicists to create a consensus statement regarding the use of EB. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Physicians and physicists with expertise in brachytherapy created a site-directed consensus statement for appropriate patient selection and utilization of EB based on a literature search and clinical experience. RESULTS: EB has been utilized to deliver accelerated partial breast irradiation with, thus far acceptable local control and toxicity rates including a randomized trial that used EB to deliver intraoperative radiotherapy; however, prospective data with large patient numbers and long-term follow up are needed. Increasing numbers of patients have been treated with EB for nonmelanomatous skin cancers; although, preliminary data are promising, there is a lack of data comparing EB to traditional radiotherapy techniques as well as a lack of long-term follow up. For treatment of the vaginal cuff with EB, small retrospective studies have been reported without long-term follow up. CONCLUSIONS: In light of a randomized trial in breast showing higher rates of recurrence and the lack of prospective data with mature follow up with other sites, as well as concerns regarding dosimetry, it is not recommended that EB be utilized for accelerated partial breast irradiation, nonmelanomatous skin cancers, or vaginal cuff brachytherapy outside prospective clinical trials at this time.
PURPOSE: Brachytherapy is utilized in the treatment of many different malignancies; although traditionally performed with low-dose-rate or high-dose-rate techniques, more recently, electronic brachytherapy (EB) has emerged as a potential alternative. At this time, there are no evidence-based guidelines to assist clinicians in patient selection for EB and concerns exits regarding differences in dosimetry as compared to traditional brachytherapy techniques. As such, the American Brachytherapy Society appointed a group of physicians and physicists to create a consensus statement regarding the use of EB. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Physicians and physicists with expertise in brachytherapy created a site-directed consensus statement for appropriate patient selection and utilization of EB based on a literature search and clinical experience. RESULTS:EB has been utilized to deliver accelerated partial breast irradiation with, thus far acceptable local control and toxicity rates including a randomized trial that used EB to deliver intraoperative radiotherapy; however, prospective data with large patient numbers and long-term follow up are needed. Increasing numbers of patients have been treated with EB for nonmelanomatous skin cancers; although, preliminary data are promising, there is a lack of data comparing EB to traditional radiotherapy techniques as well as a lack of long-term follow up. For treatment of the vaginal cuff with EB, small retrospective studies have been reported without long-term follow up. CONCLUSIONS: In light of a randomized trial in breast showing higher rates of recurrence and the lack of prospective data with mature follow up with other sites, as well as concerns regarding dosimetry, it is not recommended that EB be utilized for accelerated partial breast irradiation, nonmelanomatous skin cancers, or vaginal cuff brachytherapy outside prospective clinical trials at this time.
Authors: Sofian Benkhaled; Dirk Van Gestel; Carolina Gomes da Silveira Cauduro; Samuel Palumbo; Veronique Del Marmol; Antoine Desmet Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-27
Authors: Li Ma; Junhao Qiang; Heliang Yin; Lin Lin; Yan Jiao; Changying Ma; Xinwei Li; Li Dong; Jinglin Cui; Dongmei Wei; Ankur M Sharma; David L Schwartz; Weikuan Gu; Hong Chen Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2020-06-17 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Uma Goyal; Michael K Cheung; Justin Suszko; Brady Laughlin; Yongbok Kim; Jeanette Askam; Hina Arif-Tiwari; Benjamin Slane; John Gordon; Baldassare Stea Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2021-10-06