Prostate brachytherapy post implant dosimetry: Timing matters

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

14597 Background: Permanent seed implant (PSI) brachytherapy is a common treatment modality for low-risk prostate cancer. Post implant dosimetry (PID) is utilized to asses the quality of the implant. Significant prostate swelling occurs as a result of the implant procedure, and this swelling subsides over time. PID completed on Day 0 after the implant procedure captures the prostate swelling from the procedure. Conversely, PID completed one month later does not have this swelling. PID can therefore show great variation, depending on the timing of the analysis. It is hypothesized that PID completed on Day 0 demonstrates lower dosimetric parameters than PID completed one month later. Methods: Thirteen low risk prostate cancer patients, (Stage ≤ T2, PSA < 13.9, Gleason Score ≤7) were implanted with 125Iodine seeds, with a prescription dose of 145Gy to the prostate plus a 5mm margin. Computed Tomography (CT) PID was completed for each patient on day 0 and on average 33 days following the implant. The prostate was contoured on each axial CT image and the data was analyzed using commercially available PSI planning software. The dose which encompassed 90% of the prostate volume (D90) was calculated for day 0 and day 33 PID. Results: On average, the prostate volume contoured was larger on day 0 PID (Avg. 44.9 cc; range 19–97 cc) compared to day 33 PID (Avg. 38.9 cc; range 18–59 cc) (P = 0.068). The D90 values however, were significantly higher on day 33 PID (Avg.163.7 Gy; range 125–212 Gy) than on day 0 PID (Avg.149 Gy; range 112–166 Gy) (P = 0.003). This D90 relationship was even demonstrated paradoxically in two patients whose contoured prostate volume was larger on the day 33 PID as compared to the day 0 PID. Conclusions: Timing does matter in the analysis of post implant dosimetry for PSI brachytherapy. The D90 values were significantly greater on day 33 PID compared to Day 0 PID while the contoured prostate volumes were not. Future studies which use PID planning to evaluate implant quality should specify the timing of the PID, as this would facilitate cross study comparison. No significant financial relationships to disclose.