Erectile dysfunction following hydrogel injection and hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Our experience in 56 cases
https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2022.2.166
Accepted: April 23, 2022
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Introduction: The incidence of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men with organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) submitted to hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) has been prospectively evaluated. Materials and methods: From April 2018 to September 2020, 56 patients (median age 70 years) with cT1c PCa were treated by HRT directed to the prostate and seminal vesicle. Median PSA was 8.3 ng/ml; 20 patients (35.7%) vs. 28 (50%) vs. 8 (22.3%) had a PCa Grade Group 1 vs. 2 vs. 3, respectively. All patients underwent hydrogel injection of Space OAR and intraprostatic fiducials before HRT. The prescription dose was 60 Gy in 20 fractions 5 days/week over 4 weeks. During the follow up, PSA, genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were evaluated. The sexual function was evaluated by International Index of Erectile Function - 5 (IIEF-5) before, 6 and 18 months from HRT; 32/56 (57.1%) men referred a normal sexual activity before HRT (median IIEF-5 score: 22). Results: Median PSA level at median follow up of 18 months was 0.92 ng/ml and none used adjuvant therapy. One man (1.8%) referred a tardive grade 1 GU complication. At a median follow up of 6 and 18 months, 20/32 (62.5%) kept pretreatment sexual potency (median IIEF-5 score: 21). The 12/32 men who worsened the sexual function following HRT had a median age higher than patients without ED (78 vs. 67 years). Conclusions: The use of hydrogel injection and intraprostatic fiducials followed by HRT allowed to kept pretreatment sexual potency in 62.5% of the cases.
Dearnaley DP, Jovic G, Syndikus I, et al. Escalated-dose versus control-dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: long-term results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15:464-473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70040-3
Aluwini S, Pos F, Schimmel E, et al. Hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with prostate cancer (HYPRO): late toxicity results from a randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17:464-474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00567-7
Hall WA, Tree AC, Dearnaley D, et al. Considering benefit and risk before routinely recommending SpaceOAR. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22:11-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30639-2
Ung M, Bossi A, Abbassi L, et al. [Dosimetric impact of hydrogel spacer use for stereotactic body radiotherapy of localised prostate cancer]. Cancer Radiother 2021; 25:237-241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canrad.2020.09.004
Babar M, Katz A and Ciatto M. Dosimetric and clinical outcomes of SpaceOAR in men undergoing external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2021; 65:384-397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13179
Butler WM, Kurko BS, Scholl WJ, et al. Effect of the timing of hydrogel spacer placement on prostate and rectal dosimetry of lowdose-rate brachytherapy implants. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2021; 13:145-151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2021.105281
Aminsharifi A, Kotamarti S, Silver D, et al. Major Complications and adverse events related to the injection of the SpaceOAR hydrogel system before radiotherapy for prostate cancer: review of the manufacturer and user facility device experience database. J Endourol 2019; 33:868-871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0431
Pepe P, Tamburo M, Pennisi M, et al. Clinical Outcomes of Hydrogel Spacer Injection Space OAR in Men Submitted to Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. In Vivo 2021; 35:3385-3389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12637
Dearnaley D, Syndikus I, Mossop H, and CHHiP Investigators: Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensitymodulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17:1047-1060. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30102-4
Lee WR, Dignam JJ, Amin MB, et al. Randomized Phase III noninferiority study comparing two radiotherapy fractionation schedules in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34:2325-2332. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.67.0448
Catton CN, Lukka H, Gu CS, et al. Randomized trial of a hypofractionated radiation regimen for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35:1884-1890. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.71.7397
Pepe P, Pennisi M: Erectyle dysfunction in 1,050 men submitted to extended (18 cores) vs saturation (28 cores) vs saturation plus MRI targeted prostate biopsy (32 cores). Int J Impot Res 2016; 28:1-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijir.2015.18
Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo GD, et al. Is it time to perform only MRI targeted biopsy? Our experience in 1032 men submitted to prostate biopsy. J Urol 2018; 200:774-778. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.04.061
Pepe P, Pennisi M, Fraggetta F. How many cores should be obtained during saturation biopsy in the era of multiparametric magnetic resonance? Experience in 875 patients submitted to repeat prostate biopsy. Urology 2020; 137:133-137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.11.016
Pepe P, Pepe L, Pennisi M, Fraggetta F. Which prostate biopsy in men enrolled in active surveillance? Experience in 110 men submitted to scheduled three-years transperineal saturation biopsy combined with fusion targeted cores. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2021; 19:305-308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2021.01.004
Hunt AA, Choudhury KR, Nukala V, et al. Risk of erectile dysfunction after modern radiotherapy for intact prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2021; 24: 128-134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-0247-x
Goy BW, Burchette R: Ten-year treatment complication outcomes of radical prostatectomy vs external beam radiation vs brachytherapy for 1503 patients with intermediate risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2021; 20:1083-1089. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2021.04.004
Hall WA, Deshmukh S, Bruner DW, et al. Quality of Life Implications of Dose-Escalated External Beam Radiation for Localized Prostate Cancer: Results of a Prospective Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trial, NRG/RTOG 0126. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2022; 112:83-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.07.004
Teunissen FR, Wortel RC, Wessels FJ, et al. Interrater agreement of contouring of the neurovascular bundles and internal pudendal arteries in neurovascular-sparing magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2021; 32:29-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2021.11.005
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.
Downloads
Citations
