International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 72, Issue 1 , Pages 247-254 , 1 September 2008

Comparison of Dosimetric and Biologic Effective Dose Parameters for Prostate and Urethra Using 131Cs and 125I for Prostate Permanent Implant Brachytherapy

  • Arjun Sahgal, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre at Sunnybrook Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
    • ,
  • Siavash Jabbari, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • ,
  • Josephine Chen, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • ,
  • Barbie Pickett, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • ,
  • Mack Roach III, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • ,
  • Vivian Weinberg, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center Biostatistics Core, San Francisco, CA
    • ,
  • I-Chow Hsu, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • ,
  • Jean Pouliot, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to: Jean Pouliot, Ph.D., Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, 1600 Divisadero St., Suite H1031, San Francisco, CA 94143. Tel: (415) 353-8900; Fax: (415) 353-8679

Received 18 February 2008 ,Revised 27 April 2008

References 

  1. Sahgal A, Roach M. Permanent prostate seed brachytherapy: A current perspective on the evolution of the technique and its application. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2007;4:658–670
  2. Prestidge BR, Bice WS. Clinical outcomes of a phase II, multi-institutional cesium-131 permanent prostate brachytherapy trial. Brachytherapy. 2007;6:78
  3. Moran BJ, Braccioforte MG. Cesium-131 prostate brachytherapy: An early experience. Brachytherapy. 2007;6:80
  4. Lessard E, Kwa SL, Pickett B, et al. Class solution for inversely planned permanent prostate implants to mimic an experienced dosimetrist. Med Phys. 2006;33:2773–2782
  5. Stock RG, Stone NN, Cesaretti JA, et al. Biologically effective dose values for prostate brachytherapy: Effects on PSA failure and posttreatment biopsy results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:527–533
  6. Dale RG. The application of the linear-quadratic dose-effect equation to fractionated and protracted radiotherapy. Br J Radiol. 1985;58:515–528
  7. Crook JM, Potters L, Stock RG, et al. Critical organ dosimetry in permanent seed prostate brachytherapy: Defining the organs at risk. Brachytherapy. 2005;4:186–194
  8. Armpilia CI, Dale RG, Coles IP, et al. The determination of radiobiologically optimized half-lives for radionuclides used in permanent brachytherapy implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:378–385
  9. Beaulieu L, Archambault L, Aubin S, et al. The robustness of dose distributions to displacement and migration of 125I permanent seed implants over a wide range of seed number, activity, and designs. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:1298–1308
  10. Sloboda RS, Pedersen JE, Halperin R. Is there a preferred strength for regularly spaced 125I seeds in inverse-planned prostate implants?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:234–244
  11. Waterman FM, Yue N, Corn BW, et al. Edema associated with I-125 or Pd-103 prostate brachytherapy and its impact on post-implant dosimetry: An analysis based on serial CT acquisition. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;41:1069–1077
  12. Chen Z, Deng J, Roberts K, et al. Potential impact of prostate edema on the dosimetry of permanent seed implants using the new 131Cs (model CS-1) seeds. Med Phys. 2006;33:968–975
  13. Yue N, Heron DE, Komanduri K, et al. Prescription dose in permanent (131)Cs seed prostate implants. Med Phys. 2005;32:2496–2502
  14. Rivard MJ. Brachytherapy dosimetry parameters calculated for a 131Cs source. Med Phys. 2007;34:754–762
  15. Stock RG, Stone NN, Lo YC, et al. Postimplant dosimetry for (125)I prostate implants: Definitions and factors affecting outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:899–906
  16. Zelefsky MJ, Kuban DA, Levy LB, et al. Multi-institutional analysis of long-term outcome for stages T1-T2 prostate cancer treated with permanent seed implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:327–333
  17. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43:1095–1101
  18. Brenner DJ, Martinez AA, Edmundson GK, et al. Direct evidence that prostate tumors show high sensitivity to fractionation (low alpha/beta ratio), similar to late-responding normal tissue. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52:6–13
  19. Kal HB, Van Gellekom MP. How low is the alpha/beta ratio for prostate cancer?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:1116–1121
  20. Wang JZ, Li XA, Yu CX, et al. The low alpha/beta ratio for prostate cancer: What does the clinical outcome of HDR brachytherapy tell us?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:1101–1108
  21. Stone NN, Potters L, Davis BJ, et al. Customized dose prescription for permanent prostate brachytherapy: Insights from a multicenter analysis of dosimetry outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69:1472–1477
  22. Stone NN, LP, Davis BJ, et al. Multicenter analysis of impact of high biologically effective dose (BED) on biochemical failure (Phoenix definition) and survival outcomes in patients with Gleason score 7–10 prostate cancer treated by permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;69:S85–S86.
  23. Merrick GS, Galbreath RW, Butler WM, et al. Primary Gleason pattern does not impact survival after permanent interstitial brachytherapy for Gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Cancer. 2007;110:289–296
  24. Cha CM, Potters L, Ashley R, et al. Isotope selection for patients undergoing prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45:391–395
  25. Ling CC. Permanent implants using Au-198, Pd-103 and I-125: Radiobiological considerations based on the linear quadratic model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992;23:81–87
  26. Herstein A, Wallner K, Merrick G, et al. I-125 versus Pd-103 for low-risk prostate cancer: Long-term morbidity outcomes from a prospective randomized multicenter controlled trial. Cancer J. 2005;11:385–389

 Conflict of interest: none.

PII: S0360-3016(08)00833-X

doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.05.013

International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 72, Issue 1 , Pages 247-254 , 1 September 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution