Intact Prostate Cancer Discussion - SBRT, Brachytherapy, EBRT, SpaceOAR, Margins

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Krukenberg said:
late RT toxicities don’t plateau. The longer you follow the more you’ll see
Click to expand...
Agreed, even 5 years out though, can't remember the last one
Members don't see this ad.
 
PhotonBomb said:
Again - there is no need to do this in your standard patient, for those who are still doing conventional fractionation.

There is rationale for it in SBRT patients as well as patients who are on anti-coagulation, even if nine-weekers, because they are at higher risk of bleeding.
Click to expand...
Yes this makes the most sense
 
PhotonBomb said:
I really appreciate your posts, you have a strong general clinical experience and it shows.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I appreciate it. I love this field and am fortunate to have a good job and felt like I had good training.

I had a professor say you should never be the first to do a procedure (or a new technique, etc), but also don't be the last. I want to at least have spaceOAR in my toolkit so to speak (luckily as noted above, we already had ultrasound/stepper equipment...because even with that equipment when you put man hours into the equation the finances are just not good and possibly even detrimental...not to mention the patients costs go up too). Trying to take a pragmatic approach.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
We have a very robust prostate program in conjunction with a large group of urologists, offering the full gamut of everything except hdr brachy. We have used a lot of spaceoar but now after doing it for several years, have had a handful of trainwrecks in line with the above quoted data. We use it less now.
 
radmonckey said:
We have a very robust prostate program in conjunction with a large group of urologists, offering the full gamut of everything except hdr brachy. We have used a lot of spaceoar but now after doing it for several years, have had a handful of trainwrecks in line with the above quoted data. We use it less now.
Click to expand...

May want to consider publishing it if you have any inclination at all. That randomized trial data is almost too good. Zero problems and ?improvements in urinary and ED function? not clearly explained by dosimetry.

I understand the reluctance to publish but could reach out to the other centers to combine data so you’re not singled out.
 
Of course it improves urinary toxicity/DVH. It shoves the prostate anteriorly into the bladder. Makes complete sense. [green font]
 
radmonckey said:
We have a very robust prostate program in conjunction with a large group of urologists, offering the full gamut of everything except hdr brachy. We have used a lot of spaceoar but now after doing it for several years, have had a handful of trainwrecks in line with the above quoted data. We use it less now.
Click to expand...
As rad oncs we treat patients with the greatest non-invasive therapy in the history of medicine: the beam. Even so there's been a tendency to muck it up with invasive accoutrements like SpaceOAR. (How about when rad oncs were asking ENTs to remove/re-implant salivary glands to prevent xerstomia?) I have not had a significant rectal toxicity in 10+ years over thousands of patients w/ IG-IMRT and being anal about DVHs and rational about margins.
 
scarbrtj said:
As rad oncs we treat patients with the greatest non-invasive therapy in the history of medicine: the beam. Even so there's been a tendency to muck it up with invasive accoutrements like SpaceOAR. (How about when rad oncs were asking ENTs to remove/re-implant salivary glands to prevent xerstomia?) I have not had a significant rectal toxicity in 10+ years over thousands of patients w/ IG-IMRT and being anal about DVHs and rational about margins.
Click to expand...

You mean you don’t use 10mm margins (allowed on the phase 3 trial)?
 
scarbrtj said:
As rad oncs we treat patients with the greatest non-invasive therapy in the history of medicine: the beam. Even so there's been a tendency to muck it up with invasive accoutrements like SpaceOAR. (How about when rad oncs were asking ENTs to remove/re-implant salivary glands to prevent xerstomia?) I have not had a significant rectal toxicity in 10+ years over thousands of patients w/ IG-IMRT and being anal about DVHs and rational about margins.
Click to expand...


Absolutely agree with scarbrtj.

Looking at the MAUDE data more closely:

5 colostomies in 3 years? No thank you.

1573996969173.png
 
BobbyHeenan said:
You mean you don’t use 10mm margins (allowed on the phase 3 trial)?
Click to expand...


lol

this does raise a good discussion point - what are the standard margins (non-posterior and posterior you all use?) I'm a 5 mm/3 mm posterior guy. Daily IGRT, no fiducials. (this is non SBRT I'm talking about, standard hypofrac)
 
PhotonBomb said:
lol

this does raise a good discussion point - what are the standard margins (non-posterior and posterior you all use?) I'm a 5 mm/3 mm posterior guy. Daily IGRT, no fiducials. (this is non SBRT I'm talking about, standard hypofrac)
Click to expand...
With cbct? Don't think anyone is just doing kv alone without fiducials and those kind of margins.

I do 6/4 with fiducials, kv daily
 
Members don't see this ad :)
SneakyBooger said:
Absolutely agree with scarbrtj.

Looking at the MAUDE data more closely:

5 colostomies in 3 years? No thank you.

View attachment 286532
Click to expand...

Like protons this seems to be a therapy that looks better on paper/dose distribution but is accompanied by small risk of disasterous events that are just not seen or heard of with IGRT based ebrt.
 
Heard from someone in the company they are expecting up to a 50% cut in reimbursement for spaceoar..
Factoring in cost of equipment lease I'm not sure its going to be a big financial draw moving forward. I know the reps have been aggressively selling it to my urologists by pointing out the prof reimbursement is about the same as prostatectomy.
 
SneakyBooger said:
Hmmmmm, I totally missed the 2nd half of the toxicity table in the MAUDE study.

As if colostomies weren't bad enough, it gets even worse - deaths.

View attachment 286610
Click to expand...
I have personally not seen it, but a partner who does more has had a few pts with post procedure n/v and syncope
 
I wonder if worldwide there have been 2 grade V toxicities from prostate imrt in the past 2 years. Because in the tiny fraction of those who got SpaceOAR, two died directly as a result of it.

Good marketing gimmick. Solution to a non problem.
 
RickyScott said:
Was at academic center that used calypso for prostate 10 yrs ago although I didn’t treat prostate there. 2 pts ended up in icu with sepsis over several years. Thought it was the stupidest thing ever for whatever minor theoretical benefit the product delivered.
Click to expand...
I've seen urosepsis with plain old trus fiducials as well. One argument for cbct
 
medgator said:
I've seen urosepsis with plain old trus fiducials as well. One argument for cbct
Click to expand...
I agree. But with calypso needles and trackers are larger so more of an issue. Number of icu admits probably equaled number of times they stopped beam intrafraction due to gas or something during that period.
 
is there anyone that actually does a 1 cm expansion? I am sure there are - would love to know their reasons.
 
No one has done a 1cm ptv in probably 8 years except.... some corporation running a trial trying to have enough events to find a statistically significant difference
 
Mandelin Rain said:
No one has done a 1cm ptv in probably 8 years except.... some corporation running a trial trying to have enough events to find a statistically significant difference
Click to expand...


one would hope but I am certain some people do it 'because you never know' and 'just to be safe' and 'that's how the trials did it' and other garbage
 
Mandelin Rain said:
No one has done a 1cm ptv in probably 8 years except.... some corporation running a trial trying to have enough events to find a statistically significant difference
Click to expand...

10 mm was allowed on the trial. But only 5-10 mm was mandated.

I have no clue what % of patients had what margins. Would LOVE to see a breakdown on toxicity based on margins though in a supplement. Suspect that's buried somewhere. I asked the reps and they looked at me like I was special needs when I asked them about these margin issues.
 
There have been a few published results with HDR single fraction... all the way up to 21 Gy. (19, 20, 20.5, 21) Most showing inferior bFFS. There is also data to suggest that DIL boost doesn't help as much as we hoped it would.

The magic number will be somewhere between 21 and 24. The question is what can the urethra tolerate? Also, if doing single fraction SBRT... you would probably need a foley to ensure that the urethra doesn't get toasted.

Dr. Greco in Portugal has a trial looking at 45/5 vs 24/1. (they use a rectal balloon, fiducials, and foley) https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.6_suppl.128

---
I think with the changing reimbursement rates for SpaceOAR it will be done a bit more judiciously. I also think that if we're moving towards single fraction SBRT/HDR, that SpaceOAR will become more important.
 
Mandelin Rain said:
I wonder if worldwide there have been 2 grade V toxicities from prostate imrt in the past 2 years. Because in the tiny fraction of those who got SpaceOAR, two died directly as a result of it.

Good marketing gimmick. Solution to a non problem.
Click to expand...

Personally I’ve seen 3 (Urologist here). Story usually goes:

Bad radiation cystitis->refractory hematuria requiring cbi-> CBI clots off -> Bladder perforates-> peritonitis -> ex lap -> death.

Of course these are from GU toxicity. Never seen a death from rectal toxicity.
 
DoctwoB said:
Personally I’ve seen 3 (Urologist here). Story usually goes:

Bad radiation cystitis->refractory hematuria requiring cbi-> CBI clots off -> Bladder perforates-> peritonitis -> ex lap -> death.

Of course these are from GU toxicity. Never seen a death from rectal toxicity.
Click to expand...
Curious if these could have been prevented with cone beams checking to make sure bladder is full. Possible rare pt with cystitis had empty bladder throughout treatment. I know personally some very large institutional experiences with well followed pts that never had grade v toxicity or rectal fistula.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OTN
RickyScott said:
Curious if these could have been prevented with cone beams checking to make sure bladder is full. Possible rare pt with cystitis had empty bladder throughout treatment. I know personally some very large institutional experiences with well followed pts that never had grade v toxicity or rectal fistula.
Click to expand...

These things can just happen no matter what you do. No matter how great your plan looks and how great the prep is, the prostate closely approximates the rectal and bladder walls, which will see full dose and potentially be at risk. Additionally, some patients cannot maintain a full bladder with all the coaxing and pharmacologic optimization in the world. Some patients will have other risk factors such as anticoagulation or underlying radiosensitivity.

Practice long enough and you will see some bad things happen no matter how perfect you practice. If you don't, you don't see that many patients, don't follow your patients, or are very very lucky.
 
DoctwoB said:
Personally I’ve seen 3 (Urologist here). Story usually goes:

Bad radiation cystitis->refractory hematuria requiring cbi-> CBI clots off -> Bladder perforates-> peritonitis -> ex lap -> death.

Of course these are from GU toxicity. Never seen a death from rectal toxicity.
Click to expand...
Are you sure of any of these: 1) IMRT or not, 2) tx (PTV) margins (incl. volumes such as ENI or no), 3) daily imaging/IGRT employed (if at all)... for these three cases...
It's one thing to call these radiation cystitis cases. Quite a different thing to call them IG-IMRT cystitis cases. E.g., in "proper" prostate only IG-IMRT, not much more than the trigonal region will get high dose RT exposure. A urologist would have a long row to hoe with me if he described, or showed me pics of, a bloody mess all along the dome of the bladder and tried to call it radiation cystitis. I'm not saying I've ever personally managed localized hematuria from a small region of the bladder vs "fulminant"whole-bladder hematuria, but I can guess they'd be different clinical scenarios. Prostatectomies done by one-armed, half-blind surgeons are bound to have different clinical outcomes vs able-bodied surgeons. Again... a guess!
 
We are not doing SpaceOAR, it's not covered by insurance (yet). Furthermore, there are only a few people with experience on it and like everything else in medicine, there certainly is a learning curve in how to use.
DVHs certainly look better with a SpaceOAR and rectal toxicity will be lower, the question is how clinical (not statistical) significant will the benefit be.

Other than that we treat the prostate with a 7mm uniform margin, fiducials, daily CBCT. Standard fractionation is 63/3.

I would love to go lower in terms of fractions and I believe we will in the coming years. Something like 5-10 fractions sounds reasonable to me.
I am not a fan of the ultra-fractionation with 1 x 19 Gy (or whatever else). I do not think it will work in all prostate tumors.
 
scarbrtj said:
Are you sure of any of these: 1) IMRT or not, 2) tx (PTV) margins (incl. volumes such as ENI or no), 3) daily imaging/IGRT employed (if at all)... for these three cases...
It's one thing to call these radiation cystitis cases. Quite a different thing to call them IG-IMRT cystitis cases. E.g., in "proper" prostate only IG-IMRT, not much more than the trigonal region will get high dose RT exposure. A urologist would have a long row to hoe with me if he described, or showed me pics of, a bloody mess all along the dome of the bladder and tried to call it radiation cystitis. I'm not saying I've ever personally managed localized hematuria from a small region of the bladder vs "fulminant"whole-bladder hematuria, but I can guess they'd be different clinical scenarios. Prostatectomies done by one-armed, half-blind surgeons are bound to have different clinical outcomes vs able-bodied surgeons. Again... a guess!
Click to expand...

Honestly have no idea about the characteristics of treatment they received. Anecdotally most of the bad hemorrhagic radiation cystitis I see is in men with XRT >5 years ago, but whether that is a factor of the time course of the complication or less modern techniques used I couldn’t tell you.
 
DoctwoB said:
Honestly have no idea about the characteristics of treatment they received. Anecdotally most of the bad hemorrhagic radiation cystitis I see is in men with XRT >5 years ago, but whether that is a factor of the time course of the complication or less modern techniques used I couldn’t tell you.
Click to expand...
I can tell you 😉
 
I will try to quote Patrick Kupelian from 2005 who was using Novalis (kV IGRT w/ fiducials) at that time at MD Anderson Orlando:
"I put 4mm around the prostate. Past 72 Gy, I put 0 posteriorly."

He just recently had another margin-y paper.

I talk about this a lot but what if you used 4mm margins vs 7mm margins on a 4cm prostate:
PTV volume 7mm margins: 82.5 cc
PTV volume 4mm margins: 57.9 cc
Toxicity correlates with treatment volume in radiation therapy. Trimming margins just 3mm from 7 to 4 cuts treatment volume by 30% here! All dose isovolumes will contract/expand accordingly too; i.e., the 50% isovol will maybe go from 300ccs to 210ccs with a 7->4 reduction. As Herman Suit used to say, "There's no clinical indication for one picogray of dose outside the tumor."
 
radmonckey said:
These things can just happen no matter what you do. No matter how great your plan looks and how great the prep is, the prostate closely approximates the rectal and bladder walls, which will see full dose and potentially be at risk. Additionally, some patients cannot maintain a full bladder with all the coaxing and pharmacologic optimization in the world. Some patients will have other risk factors such as anticoagulation or underlying radiosensitivity.

Practice long enough and you will see some bad things happen no matter how perfect you practice. If you don't, you don't see that many patients, don't follow your patients, or are very very lucky.
Click to expand...
I have quite a bit of experience, know a lot of people, and several instituitonal experiences. Never ever heard one case fatal cystitis let a lone 3. Only heard - 2nd hand of one rectal fistula after ill advised biopsy. Again, at one time highly involved with very large prostate database. This just didn’t happen. Never Ever

As pointed out, cystitis should be at base of bladder. In few dialysis pts I have treated, very careful about how much I expand into bladder if at all if no disease detected on base at biopsy or mri.
 
Last edited:
RickyScott said:
I have quite a bit of experience, know a lot of people, and several instituitonal experiences. Never ever heard one case fatal cystitis let a lone 3. Only heard of one fistulas after ill advised biopsy either. Again, at one time highly involved with very large prostate database. This just didn’t happen.

As pointed out, cystitis should be at base of bladder. In few dialysis pts I have treated, very careful about how much I expand into bladder if at all if no disease detected on base at biopsy or mri.
Click to expand...
If I had patients with complications like this after prostatectomy, radiation with ~zero risk of life threatening complications would sound pretty good!
 
I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Some places don't do margins correctly, don't do proper dose constraints, etc, and will be at higher risk for developing bad late side effects.

I think the people who have had zero side effects need to think about dose escalating. Also I will be on the urologist's side here that frequently these patients are not followed > 5 years out by rad onc, which is where some of these toxicities can and do still develop. If you're not seeing them for follow-up you won't know that they had this toxicity because the urologists aren't going to bother calling you about it.
 
What margins are people using for prostate SBRT?

for HDR, are you guys doing 13.5x2?
 
thecarbonionangle said:
What margins are people using for prostate SBRT?
Click to expand...

5mm except 3mm posterior (w/ fiducials, CBCT)

thecarbonionangle said:
for HDR, are you guys doing 13.5x2?
Click to expand...

Yes. Either 2 days back to back (single implant) or 1 week apart. (2 implants)
If they have a reason to be sensitive to radiation we might fractionate the HDR a bit more.
If radiorecurrent we do 6Gy x 6
Combo we do 15 Gy x 1 w/ fiducials/SpaceOAR at the time of HDR implant. Followed by EBRT
 
Aphtalyfe said:
5mm except 3mm posterior (w/ fiducials, CBCT)



Yes. Either 2 days back to back (single implant) or 1 week apart. (2 implants)
If they have a reason to be sensitive to radiation we might fractionate the HDR a bit more.
If radiorecurrent we do 6Gy x 6
Combo we do 15 Gy x 1 w/ fiducials/SpaceOAR at the time of HDR implant. Followed by EBRT
Click to expand...

Would you ever do 13.5 BID, separated by 6-8 hrs?

i like the idea of a single implant so the back to back, 2 day regimen is appealing as well for my future practice

whenever you do two days, two fractions, do you do a sim and a plan for each fraction or treat with previous day plan?
 
Last edited:
For prostate SBRT, say 7.25x5 how many of you sim and treat with a foley vs no foley?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Operating rooms for brachytherapy
Replies
4
Views
964
evilbooyaa
evilbooyaa
D
CTV in Lung Cancer Discussion
Replies
22
Views
655
taserlaser
T
R
HCC, SBRT vs RFA
Replies
13
Views
2K
evilbooyaa
evilbooyaa
N
Late GI Toxicity after EBRT w/ ENI w/ mod hypo regimen discussion
Replies
48
Views
2K
evilbooyaa
evilbooyaa
Palex80
Prostate Single Fraction Treatment Discussion
2
Replies
78
Views
4K
thesauce
thesauce
Top