17 research outputs found

    GI factors, potential to predict prostate motion during radiotherapy; a scoping review

    No full text
    Purpose: A scoping literature review was conducted to identify gastrointestinal (GI) factors most likely to influence prostate motion during radiotherapy. We proffer that patient specific measurement of these GI factors could predict motion uncertainty during radiotherapy, facilitating personalised care by optimising treatment technique e.g., daily adaption or via bespoke patient pre-habilitation and preparation. Methods: The scoping review was undertaken as per JBI guidelines. Searches were conducted across four databases: Ovid Medline®, EMBASE, CINAHL and EBSCO discovery. Articles written in English from 2010-present were included. Those pertaining to paediatrics, biological women exclusively, infectious and post-treatment GI morbidity and diet were excluded.Common GI factors impacting men were identified and related symptoms, incidence and measurement tools examined. Prevalence among persons with prostate cancer was explored and suitable assessment tools discussed. Results: A preliminary search identified four prominent GI-factors: mental health, co-morbidity and medication, physical activity, and pelvic floor disorder. The scoping search found 3644 articles; 1646 were removed as duplicates. A further 1249 were excluded after title and abstract screening, 162 remained subsequent to full text review: 42 mental health, 53 co-morbidity and medication, 39 physical activity and 28 pelvic floor disorder.Six GI factors prevalent in the prostate cancer population and estimated most likely to influence prostate motion were identified: depression, anxiety, diabetes, obesity, low physical activity, and pelvic floor disorder. Reliable, quick, and easy to use tools are available to quantify these factors. Conclusion: A comprehensive GI factor assessment package suitable to implement into the radiotherapy clinic has been created. Unveiling these GI factors upfront will guide improved personalisation of radiotherapy

    MR-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

    No full text
    Contains fulltext : 229889.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)External beam radiotherapy remains the primary treatment modality for localized prostate cancer. The radiobiology of prostate carcinoma lends itself to hypofractionation, with recent studies showing good outcomes with shorter treatment schedules. However, the ability to accurately deliver hypofractionated treatment is limited by current image-guided techniques. Magnetic resonance imaging is the main diagnostic tool for localized prostate cancer and its use in the therapeutic setting offers anatomical information to improve organ delineation. MR-guided radiotherapy, with daily re-planning, has shown early promise in the accurate delivery of radiotherapy. In this article, we discuss the shortcomings of current image-guidance strategies and the potential benefits and limitations of MR-guided treatment for prostate cancer. We also recount present experiences of MR-linac workflow and the opportunities afforded by this technology

    Integrated MRI-guided radiotherapy - opportunities and challenges

    No full text
    MRI can help to categorize tissues as malignant or non-malignant both anatomically and functionally, with a high level of spatial and temporal resolution. This non-invasive imaging modality has been integrated with radiotherapy in devices that can differentially target the most aggressive and resistant regions of tumours. The past decade has seen the clinical deployment of treatment devices that combine imaging with targeted irradiation, making the aspiration of integrated MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT) a reality. The two main clinical drivers for the adoption of MRIgRT are the ability to image anatomical changes that occur before and during treatment in order to adapt the treatment approach, and to image and target the biological features of each tumour. Using motion management and biological targeting, the radiation dose delivered to the tumour can be adjusted during treatment to improve the probability of tumour control, while simultaneously reducing the radiation delivered to non-malignant tissues, thereby reducing the risk of treatment-related toxicities. The benefits of this approach are expected to increase survival and quality of life. In this Review, we describe the current state of MRIgRT, and the opportunities and challenges of this new radiotherapy approach.In the past decade, treatment devices that combine imaging with targeted irradiation have been developed to deliver MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT). This treatment modality uses motion management and biological targeting to improve local control rates whilst reducing the radiation delivered to non-malignant tissues. The authors of this Review describe the current state of MRIgRT, and the opportunities and challenges of this radiotherapy approach

    Integrated MRI-guided radiotherapy - opportunities and challenges

    No full text
    MRI can help to categorize tissues as malignant or non-malignant both anatomically and functionally, with a high level of spatial and temporal resolution. This non-invasive imaging modality has been integrated with radiotherapy in devices that can differentially target the most aggressive and resistant regions of tumours. The past decade has seen the clinical deployment of treatment devices that combine imaging with targeted irradiation, making the aspiration of integrated MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT) a reality. The two main clinical drivers for the adoption of MRIgRT are the ability to image anatomical changes that occur before and during treatment in order to adapt the treatment approach, and to image and target the biological features of each tumour. Using motion management and biological targeting, the radiation dose delivered to the tumour can be adjusted during treatment to improve the probability of tumour control, while simultaneously reducing the radiation delivered to non-malignant tissues, thereby reducing the risk of treatment-related toxicities. The benefits of this approach are expected to increase survival and quality of life. In this Review, we describe the current state of MRIgRT, and the opportunities and challenges of this new radiotherapy approach.In the past decade, treatment devices that combine imaging with targeted irradiation have been developed to deliver MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT). This treatment modality uses motion management and biological targeting to improve local control rates whilst reducing the radiation delivered to non-malignant tissues. The authors of this Review describe the current state of MRIgRT, and the opportunities and challenges of this radiotherapy approach.Biological, physical and clinical aspects of cancer treatment with ionising radiatio

    Magnetic Resonance-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: The First Results from the MOMENTUM study-An International Registry for the Evidence-Based Introduction of Magnetic Resonance-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy.

    No full text
    PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance (MR)-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) is a new technique for treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). We report the 12-month outcomes for the first PCa patients treated within an international consortium (the MOMENTUM study) on a 1.5T MR-Linac system with ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients treated with 5 × 7.25 Gy were identified. Prostate specific antigen-level, physician-reported toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]), and patient-reported outcomes (Quality of Life Questionnaire PR25 and Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 questionnaires) were recorded at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up (FU). Pairwise comparative statistics were conducted to compare outcomes between baseline and FU. RESULTS: The study included 425 patients with localized PCa (11.4% low, 82.0% intermediate, and 6.6% high-risk), and 365, 313, and 186 patients reached 3-, 6-, and 12-months FU, respectively. Median prostate specific antigen level declined significantly to 1.2 ng/mL and 0.1 ng/mL at 12 months FU for the nonandrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) and ADT group, respectively. The peak of genitourinary and gastrointestinal CTCAE toxicity was reported at 3 months FU, with 18.7% and 1.7% grade ≥2, respectively. The QLQ-PR25 questionnaire outcomes showed significant deterioration in urinary domain score at all FU moments, from 8.3 (interquartile range [IQR], 4.1-16.6) at baseline to 12.4 (IQR, 8.3-24.8; P = .005) at 3 months, 12.4 (IQR, 8.3-20.8; P = .018;) at 6 months, and 12.4 (IQR, 8.3-20.8; P = .001) at 12 months. For the non-ADT group, physician- and patient-reported erectile function worsened significantly between baseline and 12 months FU. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrahypofractionated MR-guided radiation therapy for localized PCa using a 1.5T MR-Linac is effective and safe. The peak of CTCAE genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity was reported at 3 months FU. Furthermore, for patients without ADT, a significant increase in CTCAE erectile dysfunction was reported at 12 months FU. These data are useful for educating patients on expected outcomes and informing study design of future comparative-effectiveness studies
    corecore