title: Low-dose-rate or high-dose-rate brachytherapy in treatment of prostate cancer - between options.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Permanent low-dose-rate (LDR-BT) and temporary high-dose-rate (HDR-BT) brachytherapy are competitive techniques for clinically localized prostate radiotherapy. Although a randomized trial will likely never to be conducted comparing these two forms of brachytherapy, a comparative analysis proves useful in understanding some of their intrinsic differences, several of which could be exploited to improve outcomes. The aim of this paper is to look for possible similarities and differences between both brachytherapy modalities. Indications and contraindications for monotherapy and for brachytherapy as a boost to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) are presented. It is suggested that each of these techniques has attributes that advocates for one or the other. First, they represent the extreme ends of the spectrum with respect to dose rate and fractionation, and therefore have inherently different radiobiological properties. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy has the great advantage of being practically a one-time procedure, and enjoys a long-term follow-up database supporting its excellent outcomes and low morbidity. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy has been a gold standard for prostate brachytherapy in low risk patients since many years. On the other hand, HDR is a fairly invasive procedure requiring several sessions associated with a brief hospital stay. Although lacking in significant long-term data, it possesses the technical advantage of control over its postimplant dosimetry (by modulating the source dwell time and position), which is absent in LDR brachytherapy. This important difference in dosimetric control allows HDR doses to be escalated safely, a flexibility that does not exist for LDR brachytherapy.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Radiobiological models support the current clinical evidence for equivalent outcomes in localized prostate cancer with either LDR or HDR brachytherapy, using current dose regimens. At present, all available clinical data regarding these two techniques suggests that they are equally effective, stage for stage, in providing high tumor control rates.
authors: Brachytherapy Department, Greater Poland Cancer Center, Poznań, Poland.
authors: Janusz
authors: J
authors: Skowronek
keywords: HDR; LDR; brachytherapy; prostate cancer; seeds
references: Ann Oncol. 2010 May;21 Suppl 5:v129-33
references: 20555062
references: J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010 Feb;8(2):162-200
references: 20141676
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Oct 1;81(2):376-81
references: 20864269
references: BJU Int. 2012 Feb;109 Suppl 1:22-9
references: 22239226
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jan 1;52(1):81-90
references: 11777625
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Feb 1;37(3):565-9
references: 9112454
references: J Urol. 2004 Mar;171(3):1098-104
references: 14767279
references: Radiother Oncol. 2000 Dec;57(3):289-96
references: 11104888
references: CA Cancer J Clin. 1995 May-Jun;45(3):165-78
references: 7743420
references: Am J Clin Oncol. 2010 Oct;33(5):481-8
references: 19952715
references: Urology. 2002 Sep;60(3 Suppl 1):39-44; discussion 44
references: 12231045
references: J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2011 Sep;3(3):121-4
references: 23346120
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Jun 1;80(2):469-75
references: 20646858
references: Urology. 1998 Jun;51(6):884-9; discussion 889-90
references: 9609622
references: J Urol. 2007 Jun;177(6):2106-31
references: 17509297
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jun 1;53(2):316-27
references: 12023135
references: Brachytherapy. 2002;1(4):219-26
references: 15062170
references: Urology. 2002 Jul;60(1):98-103
references: 12100932
references: World J Urol. 2006 Aug;24(3):289-95
references: 16645877
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Jul 1;44(4):789-99
references: 10386635
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Oct 1;72(2):421-32
references: 18325680
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Apr 1;61(5):1306-16
references: 15817332
references: J Clin Oncol. 2011 Feb 1;29(4):362-8
references: 21149658
references: Radiother Oncol. 2005 Feb;74(2):137-48
references: 15734201
references: Radiother Oncol. 2008 Jan;86(1):114-9
references: 18054101
references: J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2009 Mar;1(1):11-17
references: 27799948
references: Strahlenther Onkol. 2004 Apr;180(4):225-32
references: 15057433
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Dec 1;81(5):1286-92
references: 21310546
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Jan 1;49(1):61-9
references: 11163498
references: Radiother Oncol. 2006 Jul;80(1):62-8
references: 16870289
references: Radiother Oncol. 2000 Dec;57(3):315-21
references: 11104892