Brachytherapy
Volume 6, Issue 4 , Pages 238-245 , October 2007

Initial comparison of inverse optimization, modified peripheral technique, and geometric optimization as real-time intraoperative computer planning options for permanent seed implantation of the prostate

  • Adam Raben

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, 4701 Ogletown-Stanton Road, Suite 1110, Newark, DE 19713. Tel.: +1-302-623-4800; fax: +1-302-623-4850.
    • ,
  • Sarah Sammons

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE
    • ,
  • Sang Sim

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, NJ
    • ,
  • Hansen Chen

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE
    • ,
  • Alexandra Hanlon

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA
    • ,
  • Abhirup Sarkar

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE
    • ,
  • Viroon Donavanik

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE
    • ,
  • Arnold Grebler

      Affiliations

    • Shore Urology Professional Associate, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, NJ
    • ,
  • Jules Geltzeiler

      Affiliations

    • Shore Urology Professional Associate, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, NJ
    • ,
  • Bruce Benge

      Affiliations

    • Brandywine Urology Consultants, Wilmington, DE
    • ,
  • Andrew Glick

      Affiliations

    • Brandywine Urology Consultants, Wilmington, DE
    • ,
  • Dayee Jacob

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE
    • ,
  • Paul Koprowski

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Helen F. Graham Cancer Center, Newark, DE

References 

  1. Stock RG, Stone NN, Lo YC. Intraoperative dosimetric representation of the real-time ultrasound-guided prostate implant. Tech Urol. 2000;6:95–98
  2. Zelefsky MJ, Yamada Y, Cohen G, et al. Postimplantation dosimetric analysis of permanent transperineal prostate implantation: Improved dose distributions with an intraoperative computer-optimized conformal planning technique. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:601–608
  3. Beyer DC, Shapiro RH, Puente F. Real-time optimized intraoperative dosimetry for prostate brachytherapy: A pilot study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:1583–1589
  4. Raben A, Chen H, Grebler A, et al. Prostate seed implantation using 3D-computer assisted intraoperative planning vs. a standard look-up nomogram: Improved target conformality with reduction in urethral and rectal wall dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:1631–1638
  5. Grimm PD, Blasko JC, Sylvester JE, et al. 10-year Biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) control of prostate cancer with (125)I brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51:31–40
  6. Stock RG, Stone N, Dahlal M, et al. What is the optimal dose for I125 prostate implants? A dose-response analysis of biochemical control, post treatment prostate biopsies, and long term urinary symptoms. Brachytherapy. 2002;1:83–89
  7. Zelefsky MJ, Yamada Y, Marion C, et al. Improved conformality and decreased toxicity with intraoperative computer-optimized transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:956–963
  8. Zelefsky MJ, Yamada J, Fuks Z, et al. Comparison of 5-year outcomes between conformal LDR brachytherapy and high dose IMRT for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2004;37(Suppl. 2):71;Abstract S18
  9. Nath R, Lowell L, Anderson L, et al. Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources. American Association of Physicists in Medicine: Report 61 (Task Group 43) Med Phys. 1995;22:209–234
  10. Hsu IC, Lessard E, Weinberg V, et al. Comparison of inverse planning simulated annealing and geometrical optimization for high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2004;3:147–152
  11. Chen H, Yang J, Murphy S, et al. Ultrasound guided intra-operative inverse-optimization (US-IOIO) prostate seeds implant: 82 patient results for equivalent target conformity with reduction in urethral and rectal dose. Poster Presentation; 46 Annual AAPM Meeting and Technical Exhibition; Pittsburgh PA, 2004.
  12. Zelefsky MJ, Yamada Y, Cohen G, et al. Five-year outcome of intraoperative conformal permanent I-125 interstitial implantation for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:65–70
  13. Potters L, Calugaru E, Jassal A, et al. Is there a role for postimplant dosimetry after real-time dynamic permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:1014–1019
  14. Potters L, Morgenstrn C, Calugaru E, et al. 12-year Outcomes following permanent prostate brachytherapy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005;173:1562–1566
  15. 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
  16. Grimm PD, Blasko JC, Sylvester JE, et al. Technical improvement in permanent seed implantation: A two-stage brachytherapy system: Description and comparison with current technique. Brachytherapy. 2004;3:34–40
  17. Acher P, Popert R, Nichol J, et al. Permanent prostate brachytherapy: Dosimetric analysis of a learning curve with a dynamic dose-feedback technique. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:694–698

 Presented for oral presentation at the 26th Annual American Brachytherapy Society meeting, San Francisco, CA, 2005.

PII: S1538-4721(07)00240-1

doi: 10.1016/j.brachy.2007.08.001

Brachytherapy
Volume 6, Issue 4 , Pages 238-245 , October 2007

Article Tools