CyberKnife Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Rationale and Technical Feasibility

There is a clear dose response for localized prostate cancer radiotherapy and there probably is a radiobiological rationale for hypo-fractionation. Combining the two should maximize tumor control and increase the therapeutic ratio. This study examines the rationale and technical feasibility of CyberKnife radiotherapy (a robotic arm-driven linear accelerator) for localized prostate cancer. Its ability to deliver non-coplanar non-isocentric arcs can yield maximally conformal isodoses. It is the only integrated system capable of target position verification and real-time tracking during delivery of conformal stereotactic radiotherapy. Inverse planning with the CyberKnife is used to design a course of radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Fiducial markers within the gland are used to verify organ position and track organ motion via an orthogonal pair of electronic x-ray imaging devices and provide real-time feedback correction to the robotic arm during delivery. Conformal isodose curves and dose volume histograms (DVH) are used to compare with an optimized Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) plan actually delivered to the study patient based upon CT scan-derived organ volumes. The CyberKnife can produce superior DVHs for sparing of rectum and bladder and excellent DVHs for target coverage compared with IMRT, and possesses dose heterogeneities to the same degree as IMRT plans. Because of the significantly longer delivery times required it would be best suited for hypo-fractionated regimens. Such dose regimens might allow for biologically equivalent dose escalation without increased normal tissue toxicity. Since the CyberKnife can verify organ position and motion and correct for this in real-time it is the ideal means of achieving such excellent DVHs without a compromise in doses to normal tissues. These capabilities are essential if one contemplates hypo-fractionated regimens with large dose-per-fraction sizes (>5Gy to 10Gy) and dose-escalation.

[1]  A. Swan,et al.  Carcinoma of prostate treated by radical external beam radiotherapy using hypofractionation. Twenty-two years' experience (1962-1984). , 1990, Urology.

[2]  T. Schultheiss,et al.  Observations of pretreatment prostate-specific antigen doubling time in 107 patients referred for definitive radiotherapy. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  M Wannenmacher,et al.  Combined error of patient positioning variability and prostate motion uncertainty in 3D conformal radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  G J Kutcher,et al.  Measurement of patient positioning errors in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy of the prostate. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  R Oyen,et al.  Cell kinetic measurements in prostate cancer. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  William R. Fair,et al.  DOSE ESCALATION WITH THREE-DIMENSIONAL CONFORMAL RADIATION THERAPY AFFECTS THE OUTCOME IN PROSTATE CANCER , 1998 .

[7]  Duchesne Gm,et al.  What is the alpha/beta ratio for prostate cancer? Rationale for hypofractionated high-dose-rate brachytherapy. , 1999 .

[8]  D J Brenner,et al.  Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  G. Gustafson,et al.  Interim report of image-guided conformal high-dose-rate brachytherapy for patients with unfavorable prostate cancer: the William Beaumont phase II dose-escalating trial. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  G Starkschall,et al.  Preliminary results of a randomized radiotherapy dose-escalation study comparing 70 Gy with 78 Gy for prostate cancer. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  D. Brenner.  Toward optimal external-beam fractionation for prostate cancer. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  J. Fowler,et al.  A simple analytic derivation suggests that prostate cancer α/β ratio is low , 2001 .

[13]  H Alasti,et al.  Portal imaging for evaluation of daily on-line setup errors and off-line organ motion during conformal irradiation of carcinoma of the prostate. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  G. Gustafson,et al.  Phase II prospective study of the use of conformal high-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for the treatment of favorable stage prostate cancer: a feasibility report. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[15]  A. Hanlon,et al.  Defining the optimal radiation dose with three‐dimensional conformal radiation therapy for patients with nonmetastatic prostate carcinoma by using recursive partitioning techniques , 2001, Cancer.

[16]  Rick Chappell,et al.  Is α/β for prostate tumors really low? , 2001 .

[17]  C. Reddy,et al.  Short-course intensity-modulated radiotherapy (70 GY at 2.5 GY per fraction) for localized prostate cancer: preliminary results on late toxicity and quality of life. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  D. Brenner,et al.  Direct evidence that prostate tumors show high sensitivity to fractionation (low α/β ratio), similar to late-responding normal tissue , 2002 .