Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Screening colonoscopies (CS) performed before prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allow for identifying synchronous malignancies and comorbid gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. Performing these procedures prior to radiation precludes the necessity of post-SBRT pelvic instrumentation, which may lead to severe toxicity and fistulization. We review compliance of CSs, incidence of GI pathology, and the impact of pretreatment CS findings on subsequent physician-reported toxicity and patient-reported quality of life (QoL). METHODS AND MATERIALS/UNASSIGNED:We reviewed an institutional database of patients treated for prostate cancer with SBRT including toxicity and QoL outcomes. A detailed review of pretreatment CS findings was reviewed including identification of diverticulosis, location of polyp resection, and presence of hemorrhoids. Pretreatment CS findings were then correlated with outcomes following SBRT. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Identification of comorbid GI conditions was a common event, with the presence of diverticulosis in 49.5% (n = 100), hemorrhoids in 67% (n = 136), and polyps in 48% (n = 98). More than half of patients with polyps removed had at least 1 removed from the rectosigmoid. Pretreatment CS did not introduce a delay in SBRT start date. Grade 1 toxicity was significantly lower in patients who underwent CS closer to the initiation of SBRT. There was no increased risk of physician-graded toxicity in the presence of diverticulosis, hemorrhoids, or polyps. Patient-reported GI QoL pattern in our screening cohort mimicked that seen in the previously published nonscreened population. There was no overt QoL detriment observed in patients who had GI pathology identified before SBRT. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:GI pathology identified in our elderly patient population was commonly identified on pretreatment CS. Screening CS may optimize bowel health for patients heading into radiation therapy. Toxicity and QoL for patients with GI pathologies identified on pretreatment CS do not preclude the delivery of prostate SBRT. We advocate for pretreatment CS in patients eligible prior to SBRT.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To explore pragmatic approaches integrating MRI and PSMA-PET/CT for evaluating extraprostatic extension (EPE) of prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS:>12). Diagnostic performance was tested with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and compared using DeLong and McNemar tests. RESULTS:>12 among which 87.5% (7/8) were corrected upgraded and had pathological EPE. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Several pragmatic approaches were explored for integrating MRI and PSMA-PET/CT to assess EPE in PCa. Combining morphological information from MRI and PSMA expression on PET/CT demonstrated good diagnostic performance and may be a simple pragmatic integrated method that can be used.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:This systematic review provides an overview of the available literature regarding the efficacy and safety of implantable rectal spacers (IRS) in reducing rectal dose and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity during prostate cancer (PC) radiotherapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:A comprehensive literature search was conducted in December 2024. Results included prospective research in humans and were limited to the English language. The 30 included studies, all published between 2007 and 2024, were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or clinical trials which focused on adverse events (AEs), rectal dose reduction, GI toxicity, or bowel quality of life (QOL). Secondly, IRS implantation technique, safety, and spacing distance were assessed. RESULTS:RCT data was available for hydrogel (HG), hyaluronic acid (HA) and rectal balloon implant (RBI) spacers, while only one pilot study is available for HC. Prospective clinical research on IRS in brachytherapy is limited. One centimeter of spacing between rectum and prostate sufficed to spare the rectum, the primary dose-limiting organ. Findings indicate a favorable safety profile, with an overall complication rate of 0,96% when using hydrogel (HG) spacers. There was no grade 4-5 GI toxicity reported in clinical trials. The use of an IRS was associated with improved long-term bowel QOL. CONCLUSIONS:The integration of IRS into clinical practice offers potential to enhance the therapeutic landscape for PC patients. However, its use should be guided by careful consideration of individual patient needs to determine those who benefit most from IRS, as not all patients may benefit equally.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/CT has become integral to management of prostate cancer; however, PSMA-avid rib lesions pose a diagnostic challenge. This study investigated clinicopathological and imaging findings that predict metastatic etiology of PSMA-avid rib lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:), miPSMA score), CT features (sclerotic, lucent, fracture, no correlate), other sites of metastases, and primary tumor findings. A composite reference standard for rib lesion etiology (metastatic vs non-metastatic) based on histopathology, serial imaging, and clinical assessment was used. RESULTS:, miPSMA), more commonly involved multiple ribs, and were more often sclerotic (p < 0.01); lucency/fractures were only seen in benign lesions. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Several imaging and clinicopathological factors differed between PSMA-avid metastatic and benign lesions. Isolated rib lesions without other sites of metastasis are almost always benign. Careful assessment of CT features can help diagnose benign lesions. KEY POINTS/CONCLUSIONS:Question While prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/CT has become integral to the management of prostate cancer, PSMA-avid rib lesions pose a diagnostic challenge. Findings Approximately a quarter of patients who had PSMA-avid rib lesions were metastatic. However, only 2.1% of them had isolated rib metastasis (without PSMA-avid metastases elsewhere). Clinical relevance Isolated PSMA-avid rib lesions are almost always benign when there is no evidence of metastatic disease elsewhere. Scrutinizing CT features can help diagnose benign PSMA-avid lesions with greater certainty.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:An increasing number of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergo assessment with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT). This offers comprehensive multimodality staging but can lead to discrepancies. The objective was to assess the rates and types of discordance between MRI and PSMA-PET/CT for primary PCa assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Consecutive men diagnosed with intermediate and high-risk PCa who underwent MRI and PSMA-PET/CT in 2021-2023 were retrospectively included. MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were interpreted using PI-RADS v2.1 and PRIMARY scores. Discordances between the two imaging modalities were categorized as "minor" (larger or additional lesion seen on one modality) or "major" (positive on only one modality or different index lesions between MRI and PSMA-PET/CT) and reconciled using radical prostatectomy or biopsy specimens. RESULTS:Three hundred and nine men (median age 69 years, interquartile range (IQR) 64-75) were included. Most had Gleason Grade Group ≥ 3 PCa (70.9% (219/309)). Median PSA was 9.0 ng/mL (IQR 5.6-13.6). MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were concordant in 157/309 (50.8%) and discordant in 152/309 (49.1%) patients; with 39/152 (25.7%) major and 113/152 (74.3%) minor discordances. Of 27 patients with lesions only seen on MRI, 85.2% (23/27) were clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Of 23 patients with lesions only seen on PSMA-PET/CT, 78.3% (18/23) were csPCa. Altogether, lesions seen on only one modality were csPCa in 80.0% (36/45). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were discordant in half of patients for primary PCa evaluation, with major discrepancies seen in roughly one out of eight patients. KEY POINTS/CONCLUSIONS:Question While both MRI and PSMA-PET/CT can be used for primary tumor assessment, the discordances between them are not well established. Findings MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were discordant in about half of the patients. Most prostate lesions seen on only one modality were significant cancer. Clinical relevance MRI and PSMA-PET/CT are often discordant for assessing the primary prostate tumor. Using both modalities for primary prostate tumor evaluation can provide complementary information that may substantially impact treatment planning.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:We hypothesized that an in-house developed system using megavoltage and kilovoltage image guidance (MKIG) to ensure correct prostate positioning during stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) could potentially avoid unwanted doses to nontarget tissues, leading to reduced toxicities. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:We built a 3-dimensional MKIG platform that accurately tracks prostate implanted fiducials in real time and clinically translated the system to replace a commercial approach, intrafraction motion review (IMR), which only tracks fiducials in the 2-dimensional kilovoltage views. From 2017 to 2019, 150 patients with prostate cancer were treated with SBRT and monitored using MKIG. The motion trace of the fiducials alerts therapists to interrupt and reposition the prostate when displacement exceeds a 1.5 mm threshold. A comparison cohort of 121 patients was treated with the same dose regimen and treatment technique but managed by IMR. Statistics of intrafractional patient shifts and delivery time were collected to evaluate the workflow efficacy. The incidence of grade ≥2 urinary toxicities was analyzed to assess clinical complications. The median follow-up time was 3.7 years (0.2-8.2 years). RESULTS:MKIG treatments had more treatment shifts (1.09 vs 0.28) and a longer average delivery time per fraction (579 ± 205 seconds vs 357 ± 117 seconds) than IMR treatments. Three-quarters (75%) of shifts resulting from MKIG were ≤3 mm, versus 51% in IMR, indicating that MKIG detected and corrected smaller deviations. The incidence of grade ≥2 urinary toxicity was lower in the MKIG than the IMR cohort: 10.7% versus 19.8% (P = .047). On multivariate analysis of late urinary toxicity, only high (>7) preradiation therapy international prostate symptom score (P < .043) and the use of MKIG were selected (P < .029). CONCLUSIONS:Automated and quantitative MKIG introduced minimal workflow impact and was superior to IMR in localizing the prostate during SBRT, which correlated with a clinically significant reduction in late urinary toxicity. Further clinical testing using randomized trials will be required to validate the impact on outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate the incidence and degree of rectal wall infiltration (RWI) of spacer gel used during prostate radiotherapy among two practitioners experienced in using rectal spacers. MATERIALS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Consecutive patients with prostate cancer who received prostate radiotherapy after hydrogel rectal spacer insertion in August 2023-August 2024 by two experienced practitioners were retrospectively included. Post-implant magnetic resonance imaging examinations were evaluated by two radiologists for RWI: 0 (no abnormality), 1 (rectal wall edema), 2 (superficial RWI), and 3 (deep RWI). Scores 2-3 were considered positive for RWI and their location and degree of RWI (radial, longitudinal, and circumferential) were also categorized. Inter-reader agreement was assessed with Cohen's Kappa. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:215 men were included. Agreement was substantial between the radiologists for RWI scores (Kappa, 0.697; 95% confidence interval, 0.594-0.800). RWI scores were 0 in 80.5% (173/215), 1 in 7.9% (17/215), 2 in 10.7% (23/215), and, 3 in 0.9% (2/215) of the men. Altogether, RWI was present (scores 2-3) in 11.6% (25/215), most commonly in the mid-gland and apex with median radial, longitudinal, and circumferential involvement of 3.2 mm, 8.6 mm, and 11.5%. None of these patients demonstrated any significant rectal toxicity. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:RWI was very uncommon for experienced practitioners. The degree of RWI was focal and not associated with increased complications.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To commission a beam model in ClearCalc (Radformation Inc.) for use as a secondary dose calculation algorithm and to implement its use into an adaptive workflow for an MR-linear accelerator. METHODS:A beam model was developed using commissioning data for an Elekta Unity MR-linear accelerator and entered into ClearCalc. The beam model consisted of absolute dose calculation settings, output factors, percent depth-dose (PDD) curves, mutli-leaf collimator (MLC) transmission and dose leaf gap error, and cryostat corrections. Beam profiles were hard-coded by the manufacturer into the beam model and were compared with Monaco-derived profiles. The beam model was tested by comparing point doses in a homogenous phantom obtained through measurements using an ionization chamber in water, Monaco, and ClearCalc for various field sizes, source-surface distances (SSDs), and point locations. Additional testing including point dose verification for test plans using a heterogeneous phantom and patient plans. Post clinical implementation, performance of ClearCalc was evaluated for the first 41 patients treated, which included 215 adaptive plans. RESULTS:PDDs generated using ClearCalc fell within 1.2% of measurements. Field profile comparison between ClearCalc and Monaco showed an average pass rate of 98% using a 3%/3 mm gamma criteria. Measured cryostat corrections used in the beam model showed a maximum deviation from unity of 1.4%. Point dose and field monitor units (MUs) comparisons in a homogenous phantom (N = 22), heterogeneous phantoms (N = 22), and patient plans (N = 57) all passed with a threshold of 5%/5MU. Clinically, ClearCalc was implemented as a physics check post adaptive planning completed prior to beam delivery. Point dose and field MUs showed good agreement at a 5%/5MU threshold for prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), pelvic lymph nodes, rectum, and prostate and lymph node plans. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:This work demonstrated commissioning and clinical implementation of ClearCalc into an adaptive planning workflow. No primary or adaptive plan failures were reported with proper beam model testing.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Rectal spacers have gained popularity as a dose-sparing material for prostate cancer radiation therapy (RT). However, the procedure can be associated with unintended rectal wall infiltration (RWI) of the spacer gel. We therefore classified RWI severity as a function of depth and explored its association with rectal toxicity using a data set from prostate cancer patients treated with RT on a prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT). METHODS AND MATERIALS/UNASSIGNED:Postimplant T2-weighted magnetic resonance images of 149 subjects randomized to the hydrogel spacer arm of a published multicenter RCT were assessed for the presence and depth of RWI. All implants were assigned a score of 0 (no rectal wall signal changes), 1 (rectal wall edema/signal change), 2 (partial RWI), or 3 (full-thickness RWI); RWI was defined as a score of 2 or 3. Correlations were made between RWI score and physician-reported procedure, acute, and late rectal toxicity. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= .85) rectal toxicity incidence or grade was detected between RWI categories; none of the 6 men with a RWI score of 3 developed late rectal toxicity by 15 months. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Based on data from an RCT, RWI did not contribute to increased rectal toxicity prior and up to 15 months after conventional prostate cancer RT.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is known to provide predictors for malignancy and treatment outcome. The inclusion of these datasets in workflows for online adaptive planning remains under investigation. We demonstrate the feasibility of longitudinal relaxometry in online MR-guided adaptive stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to the prostate and dominant intra-prostatic lesion (DIL). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Fifty patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were included in the study. The clinical target volume (CTV) was defined as the prostate gland plus 1 cm of seminal vesicles. The gross tumor volume (GTV) was defined as the DIL identified on multiparametric MRI. Online adaptive radiotherapy was delivered in a 1.5 T MR-Linac using a prescription of 800 cGy/900 cGy × 5 fractions to the CTV + 3 mm/GTV + 2 mm. Relaxometry and diffusion-weighted imaging were implemented using clinically available sequences. Test-retest measurements were performed in eight patients, at each treatment fraction. Bias and uncertainty in relaxometry measurements were also assessed using a reference phantom. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The bias in longitudinal/transverse relaxation times was negligible while uncertainty was within 3 %. Test-retest measurements demonstrate that bias/uncertainty in patient T1 and T2 were comparable to bias/uncertainty estimated in the phantom. Mean T1 and T2 relaxation were significantly different between the prostate and DIL. The correlation between T1, T2, and diffusion was significant in the DIL, but not in the prostate. During treatment, mean T1 in the DIL approaches mean T1 in the prostate. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Longitudinal relaxometry for online MR-guided adaptive SBRT is feasible in a high-field MR-Linac and may provide complementary information for target delineation and response assessment.