Purpose
Brachytherapy, as a definition, is derived from ancient Greek words for ‘short distance’ (brachios) and ‘treatment’ (therapy), and refers to therapeutic use of encapsulated radionuclides within or close to a tumor. It is sometimes called Curietherapy (fr. Curie), and in many cases, an outpatient procedure used in a treatment of different types of cancer. Since the discovery of polonium and radium by Marie and Pierre Curie in the late 19th century [1], and the first use of radium in the treatment of cancer in the late 19th century, brachytherapy (as it would eventually be called) is being used in focused and short treatment courses.
Generally, brachytherapy (BT) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) are the two types of radiation techniques that are used clinically. In BT, the radiation device is placed within or close to the target volume. EBRT uses a device located at a distance from the patient, as in the case in most orthovoltage or supervoltage machines. The arrival of high-voltage EBRT for deeper tumors and problems associated with radiation exposure to high-energy radionuclides, led to a decrease in using BT as a treatment option till the middle of last century. However, over the past three decades, there has been renewed interest in the use of BT. The discovery of man-made radioisotopes and remote afterloading techniques has reduced radiation exposure hazards. Innovative imaging modalities (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, transrectal ultrasound) and sophisticated computerized treatment planning systems has helped to achieve an increased positional accuracy and superior, optimized dose distribution. Finally, while BT was initially used only for cancer treatment, some years ago it has been discovered to be helpful in non-malignant diseases (for example, in prevention of vascular restenosis, in keloids treatment). It is clear that BT is the optimal way to deliver conformal radiotherapy that is tailored to the shape of the tumor, while sparing surrounding normal tissues.
The efficacy of BT, as compared to the efficacy of EBRT alone, is attributed to the ability of radioactive implants to deliver a higher concentrated radiation dose more precisely to tissues, which contributes to improved local control, provided that the tissue is clinically delimitable and accessible. At the same time, the surrounding healthy tissues are spared. In contrast to EBRT, BT is invasive, requiring insertion of site-specific applicators under sedation or anesthesia. The surgeon, who is sometimes involved in these procedures (particularly if laparotomy or craniotomy), is required for the insertion of applicators, or if tumor resection is needed prior to applicator insertion, should be aware of the indications for BT and associated techniques.
Brachytherapy is an internal radiation therapy that is applied either in a permanent manner (sometimes called ‘seed implantation’), or in a temporary manner, often through the use of catheters, into which the radioactive sources are placed. The radioactive materials (seeds or in catheters) are placed inside the body, and positioned in such a way that will most effectively treat the disease. When permanent brachytherapy is being employed, the radioactive ‘seeds’ are left inside the body. The half-life of the radioactive isotope used, gauges how long they will be radioactive within the body, since the radioactivity of seeds diminishes over time. Temporary brachytherapy usually involves either an in-patient procedure (low-dose-rate-brachytherapy – LDR), with the patient staying in hospital for several days, while the radioactive sources treat the disease; or in an out-patient setting (high-dose-rate brachytherapy – HDR), where the patient usually undergoes several radiation treatments within a short period of time. In many centers worldwide, LDR is replaced by HDR or PDR (pulsed-dose-rate) techniques.
Since in BT the radiation source is close to or within the target volume, the dose is determined largely by inverse-square considerations. This means that the geometry of the implant is important. Spatial arrangements have been determined for different types of applications based on the particular anatomic considerations of the tumor and important normal tissues. The dose decreases rapidly, as the distance from the applicator increases. This emphasizes the importance of proper placement of applicators.
BT has now been used for over a century. Nowadays, diseases treated with brachytherapy include prostate cancer, cervical cancer, head and neck cancer, gynecological cancers, and many other tumors. Brachytherapy has been proved to be very effective and safe way of treatment, providing a good alternative to surgical removal of the prostate, breast, and cervix, while reducing the risk of certain long-term side effects.
History
Historically, the removable interstitial and intracavitary sources used were radium and radon; the latter primarily for permanent implants. In 1896, Henri Becquerel discovered natural radioactivity, when he found that uranium produced a black spot on photographic plates that had not been exposed to sunlight. Two years later, Marie Skłodowska-Curie and Pierre Curie working in Becquerel’s laboratory extracted polonium from a ton of uranium ore, and later in the same year, extracted radium. In 1901, Pierre Curie suggested to Danlos at St. Louis Hospital in Paris that a small radium tube may be inserted into a tumor, thus heralding the birth of brachytherapy [2]. In 1903, completely independently, Alexander Graham Bell made a similar suggestion in a letter to the Editor of Archives Roentgen Ray. It was found in these early experiences that inserting radioactive materials into tumors caused cancers to shrink.
In the early twentieth century, major brachytherapy work was completed at the Curie Institute in Paris and at Memorial Hospital in New York. Dr. Robert Abbe, the chief surgeon at St. Luke’s Hospital of New York, placed tubes into tumor beds after resection, and later inserted removable radium sources, thus introducing the afterloading technique as early as 1905. Dr. William Myers at Ohio State University developed several radioisotopes, including 198Au, 60Co, 125I, and 32Ph for clinical brachytherapy. These were implanted surgically by Drs. Arthur James (surgeon) and Ulrich Henschke (radiation oncologist).
Marie Skłodowska-Curie, the discoverer of radium, recognized its importance early and championed the medical use of these isotopes. They were important tools in early cancer therapy, but now have been largely replaced by manmade isotopes, which overcome most of the disadvantages of the naturally occurring ones.
Initially, even removable isotopes were used by directly applying the isotope, and thereby exposing the operator to significant radiation doses. This problem has largely been circumvented through the use of 137Cs, 192Ir, and 60Co. The first two have a lower energy and are much easier to shield. Afterloading techniques are used for removable implants as often as possible. Receptacles for the radioactive material are placed in the patient in the form of needles, tubes, or intracavitary applicators. When they have been satisfactorily placed, they are afterloaded with the radiation sources.
Permanent implants were primarily done with 198Au and 125I; today, 125I, 102Pd, and 131Cs are used in the treatment of prostate cancer. The radioactive seeds are about the size of a grain of rice, and give off radiation that travels only a few millimeters to kill nearby cancer cells. With permanent implants (for example, prostate), the radioactivity of the seeds decays with time, while the actual seeds permanently stay within the treatment area.
Techniques
BT may be:
1. Characterized by duration of the irradiation:
1.1. There are two different kinds of brachytherapy: permanent, when the seeds (radioactive sources, radionuclides, isotopes) remain inside the body, and temporary, when the isotopes are inserted into a tumor or nearby, inside the body, and then removed.
2. Characterized by positioning of the radionuclides:
2.1. Interstitial brachytherapy: radioactive sources are inside the tumor.
2.2. Contact brachytherapy or plesiobrachytherapy: radioactive sources are close to the tumor. Contact brachytherapy is divided into four different kinds of brachytherapy: intracavitary, intraluminal, endovascular, and surface brachytherapy.
3. Characterized by the dose rate (ICRU definitions):
3.1. Low-dose-rate (LDR): 0.4-2.0 Gy/h,
3.2. Pulsed-dose-rate (PDR): 0.5-1.0 Gy/h,
3.3. Medium-dose-rate (MDR): 2-12 Gy/h,
3.4. High-dose-rate (HDR): > 12 Gy/h,
3.5. Ultra LDR (seeds, permanent implants): 0.01-0.3 Gy/h.
Low-dose-rate (LDR) remote afterloading systems offer radiation protection, but do not provide as much flexibility in the design of alternative isodose volumes as that obtained with higher dose rate sources with adjustable stepping positions and dwell times. In many countries, they are not used anymore.
At the other end of the spectrum of brachytherapy methods is the use of high-dose-rate (HDR) afterloading, with a single source of 192Ir moved by computer to a series of dwell positions. In that case, the choice of isodose volume is very flexible. Large doses can be given within few minutes. Sources of that kind require well-shielded bunkers, similar to linear accelerator rooms.
One radiobiological disadvantage in the use of such high-dose-rates of 1-3 Gy/min (greater ratio of late tissue effects) can in practice be overcome by careful placement of catheters, and by good immobility achievable with very short exposures.
Pulsed-dose-rate (PDR) treatment is a recent brachytherapy modality that combines physical advantages of high-dose-rate (HDR) technology (isodose optimization, planning flexibility, and radiation safety) with radiobiological advantages of low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy (repair advantages) [3].
PDR uses a single stepping 192Ir source of 15-37 GBq (0.5-1Ci). This produces treatment dose rates of up to about 3 Gy per hour, which can be utilized (pulsed) typically every hour, 24 pulses per day. The source is enclosed in a 2.5 mm long capsule, 1.1 mm in diameter. The single radioactive stepping source moves through all the implanted catheters during each pulse. A typical pulse length lasts in average 10 minutes per hour, which may be increased to approximately 30 minutes three month later when the 192Ir source has decayed.
PDR BT uses a stronger radiation source than that employed in LDR BT, and gives a series of short 10 to 30 minute exposure long every hour amounting to approximately the same total dose in the same overall time as that in LDR. The trajectory of a single high activity source (similarly like in HDR) through the implanted catheter can be precisely programmed by a dedicated computer and carried out by a remote source projector. The resulting isodoses can be optimized by modulating the dwell time of the source as a function of its trajectory within the implanted volume. This allows individualization of dose distributions, while essentially eliminating radiation exposure to the medical staff.
The PDR source strength is 10 to 20 times lower than that used in HDR BT, and requirements for shielding are less rigorous. An ordinary brachytherapy room would require less than two extra half, value thickness of protection.
Clinical indications
Prostate cancer
Prostate BT usually involves a very effective procedure for either permanent seed implantation or HDR BT to the prostate gland. It has been shown to have comparable 10-year survival rates to radical prostatectomy, and has fewer side effects including a lower incidence of impotence and incontinence [4]. BT is the one of the most efficient methods in the management of the prostate cancer [5,6,7,8]. It is used as BT alone (monotherapy) both in the primary tumor or recurrence (salvage treatment), or as a dose escalation tool (boost) combined with the EBRT. It can be theoretically used in most of patients with localized prostate cancer [9,10,11,12,13,14].
Prostate cancer BT may be carried with the permanent seeds (low-dose-rate, ultra LDR-BT) or temporary techniques (high-dose-rate, HDR-BT) [15,16]. In both techniques, radioactive sources are placed inside the prostate gland. While HDR-BT is provided with the removable catheters and stepping source (192Ir or 60Co), low-dose-rate (ultra LDR) brachytherapy is done with the permanent seeds (i.e., 125I, 103Pd, or 131Cs).
Brachytherapy increases the concentration of the dose within the tumor area, enables the administration of increased fractionated doses and higher biological equivalent doses, while significantly reducing the time of treatment. Hospitals that use BT may benefit from the significant cost reduction associated with one-time anesthesia and application of isotopes (shorter in-patient treatment time). Obtaining such good prostate cancer treatment results depends on selecting the right patients for treatment. In recent years, since the end of 20th century, many recommendations were published by different Societies, which are now guidelines for prostate cancer BT (listed in References). There are also strong rationale for using this method. Nowadays, BT (both techniques, HDR and ultra LDR) is recommended as a sole treatment (even without additional hormonal therapy) in low-risk group, intermediate risk-group (well promising part), and in high-risk group additionally with EBRT [17].
Brachytherapy of prostate cancer (this concerns both techniques, HDR-BT and ultra LDR-BT) is used more frequently, as it is associated with a smaller risk of potency and urination disorders. Moreover, it is better tolerated by patients burdened with different concomitant diseases, especially cardiological diseases, which disqualify the patient from surgical treatment. This method is also used in patients who do not consent to surgery, since for many men, the possibility to return to daily activities, including their jobs, is a significant factor.
Breast cancer
Treatment of breast cancer with brachytherapy usually involves a five-day treatment course with either PDR (in-patient) or HDR (out-patient) brachytherapy, rather than six weeks as with traditional radiation treatment, following a lumpectomy. This offers excellent cure rates without the need of mastectomy. It is called partial breast irradiation (PBI) or accelerated PBI (APBI).
Breast conservation treatment (BCT) has been established as an effective treatment alternative to mastectomy for early stage breast cancer. BCT consists of breast conserving surgery (BCS) for tumor removal (lumpectomy), followed by EBRT to the whole breast. Although this treatment approach offers many advantages over mastectomy and provides in-breast cancer control rates that approach 95-100% with good to excellent cosmetic results in nearly all patients, six weeks of daily treatment has proved prohibitive for some patients. As a result, some women refuse EBRT (putting themselves at higher risk for recurrence), or choose mastectomy and have the breast unnecessarily removed. In such cases, six weeks of daily treatment becomes inconvenient or impossible, include working women, elderly patients, and those who live a significant distance from a treatment center.
Breast BT as the sole method of radiation following lumpectomy is a new treatment approach that offers equivalent local control, breast conservation, and improved convenience of treatment delivery [18,19,20]. Although most women with breast cancer are appropriate candidates for standard BCT and can be treated with lumpectomy and EBRT, only a subgroup of these women will be appropriate candidates for breast BT. However, even with strict selection criteria, it is estimated that 71,000 women each year in USA would be appropriate candidates for breast brachytherapy [21,22,23].
BT is also frequently used as a boost for increase of dose given into tumor bed (in one fraction), or in treatment of local recurrence after mastectomy.
Gynecological tumors
Gynecological cancers refer to cancers of the ovary, fallopian tubes, body of the uterus, cervix, vagina, and vulva. They comprise a heterogeneous group of cancers treated with differing strategies. Depending on the site of origin, brachytherapy (BT) has a diverse role in the management of these cancers [24]. BT has important place in cancer treatments, especially in cervical, endometrial, vaginal and vulvar cancers. Beside of skin cancer, gynecological cancer has a longest history (since the beginning of 20th century) in using BT as a treatment option. Radium was first discovered in 1889 and was initially used for the treatment of skin cancers. Since the 1900s, brachytherapy has been used in the treatment of cervical cancer, and has been shown to be an essential component of cervical cancer management. Data from the US Patterns of Care Study in 1973 and 1978 showed that combined use of intracavitary BT and EBRT lead to a 4 year in-field failure rate of 17% compared to 47% without brachytherapy (p < 0.001), and a 4 year survival of 70% compared to 37% (p < 0.001) for all stages of disease [25]. Nowadays, there are sufficient data that BT is independently associated with an improved cancer specific survival and overall survival, and clinical outcome evidence for alternative methods is deeply lacking in comparison [26]. Planning studies have shown that IMRT is not able to achieve target volume doses as high as image-guided brachytherapy, when dose constraints (D1cc and D2cc) to the bladder, sigmoid, and rectum are adhered to [27].
Advancements in cervical brachytherapy have included the switch to image guided brachytherapy (IGBT) with the use of computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The GEC-ESTRO (Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie [GEC] and European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology [ESTRO]) guidelines were published in 2005 and again in 2016 [28,29,30,31]. This was a move away from prescribing to point A and as an alternative, prescribing the dose to an ‘at-risk’ volume (predominantly, the high-risk clinical target volume [HR-CTV]). The evaluation of dose to organs at risk (OAR) has also shifted away from the ICRU 38 reference points to a dose volume histogram (DVH) based approach [32]. This allows brachytherapy plans to more accurately define where dose will be, rather than predicting where it may be. ICRU 89 further defines and formalizes the principles of the GEC ESTRO guidelines [33]. Image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) improves dosimetric and clinical results of definitive chemoradiation in inoperable cervical cancer [34,35]. Utilization of novel intracavitary/interstitial applicators, personalized adjustment of application technique, and high quality sectional imaging are pre-requisites for dose optimization. American Brachytherapy Society published guidelines in 2012 [36,37].
Currently, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the recommended gold-standard modality for IGABT because of its high soft-tissue depiction quality. However, high cost and complexity of MRI are the main impediments for its widespread use, especially in developing countries where cervical cancer is endemic. Consequently, development of alternative imaging solutions in the context of IGABT is fundamental to the efforts of expanding access to the state of the art of cancer treatments and improving women’s health on global scale. In addition, real-time imaging for insertion guidance and optimization of IGABT workflow is of interest for all centers in general.
Retrospective comparison of IGBT and conventional brachytherapy (CBT) at single institutions has shown that IGBT results in a reduction in local recurrence, and this subsequently has a beneficial impact on survival [38,39] and toxicity. Therefore, image-guided brachytherapy should ideally be the standard of care at every institution.
Head and neck tumors
The use of brachytherapy in the treatment of head and neck cancers causes practitioners hesitation, owing to the proximity to vital structures, including the carotid arteries, the jugular veins, other major blood vessels, and in some cases, the brain. There is a limited amount of clinical data available, but there are several safe and efficacious ways to use brachytherapy in the treatment of head and neck cancers [40,41,42]. Brachytherapy (BT) alone or in combination with external beam (EBRT) and chemotherapy leads to local dose escalation over the possibilities of up-to-date EBRT technologies. Major advantages of modern brachytherapy are the use of imaging in BT target definition, the implementation of stepping source technology with the potential for intensity modulation, and developments in medical and physics quality assurance (QA) [43]. Modern BT is playing an important and successful role in the multidisciplinary treatment of head and neck cancer. It can be used as a sole treatment for several T1/T2 cancers, and it is also effective in complementary to EBRT as a local dose escalation method, combined with surgery as a small volume radiation with high geographic accuracy. In technically feasible cases, BT offers a valuable treatment choice also for salvage treatments.
Skin cancer
Radiation therapy has been used to treat NMSC for more than 100 years, and different techniques include superficial X-rays, orthovoltage X-rays, megavoltage photons, electron beam irradiation, and HDR brachytherapy. Radiotherapy (RT), in particular a well-planned brachytherapy (BT), is often the treatment of choice in cases of skin cancer, which cannot be surgically removed without serious cosmetic defects and the necessity for reconstructive procedures [44,45,46]. There are many techniques of radiation that can be used to treat skin cancers. In external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), partial or photon radiation obtained from linear accelerators is used. In contrast, brachytherapy uses the energy of photons or particles coming from the decay of radioactive isotopes located in the tumor (BT interstitial) or in its immediate proximity (BT superficial) [47,48,49].
The basis for HDR-BT (or PDR-BT) of NMSC is TNM clinical classification. For this reason, in the preparatory proceedings, clinical stage should be assessed, accurate measurements made, lesions documented photographically if possible, and in case of the suspicions of deep infiltration of the eye, ear or other structures, computed tomography should be considered.
BT is a valued method due to the excellent results and very good cosmetic effects after cancer treatment located unfavorably [50,51,52]. Brachytherapy is a method recommended in situations where changes are localized on anatomical curves and near critical organs (nasal bridge, periorbital region, and skin of the chest). It also allows treatment of large tumors with minimal detriment of healthy tissues and a high probability of cure without adverse local complications. In many clinical situations, BT is the only possibility we can offer after recurrence previously treated with RT.
The newest technique introduced especially in skin tumors is electronic brachytherapy. High-dose-rate (HDR) electronic brachytherapy (EBT) using surface applicators for the treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer is a relatively new technique [53,54,55,56,57]. EBT was developed in the last decade to provide patients with a shorter treatment schedule and physicians with a more convenient form of brachytherapy that does not require radioactive isotopes or dedicated treatment vaults.
Basic indications for BT are: 1) radical sole (mono) brachytherapy of T1-2N0 tumors (primary lesions, recurrences after surgery and/or radiotherapy); 2) adjuvant therapy after non-radical surgery; 3) as a boost in larger tumors (T2-T3) or in TxN1 cases after EBRT to the primary tumor and lymph nodes; 4) palliative treatment.
Lung cancer
The use of brachytherapy in the treatment of lung cancer dates to the 1920s, though the applications varied widely. Brachytherapy is one of the most efficient methods in the overcoming difficulties in breathing caused by endobronchial obstruction in palliative treatment of lung cancer. Depending on the location of the lesion, in some cases, brachytherapy is a treatment of choice. Because of the uncontrolled local or recurrent disease, patients may have significant symptoms: cough, dyspnea, hemoptysis, obstructive pneumonia, or atelectasis. In many patients, these symptoms are primarily attributable to endobronchial obstruction. Efforts to relieve this obstructive process are worthwhile because patients may experience a significantly improved quality of life. However, many of these patients have a poor performance status and have received multiple other therapies. As a result, treatment options are often limited.
Brachytherapy (BT) plays an important role in the palliative treatment of obstructive disease, sometimes in conjunction with endobronchial laser therapy or stent implantation. Removal of endobronchial obstruction leads to quick improvement of clinical status and quality of life (QoL) [58,59]. Depending on the location of the lesion, in some cases brachytherapy is a treatment of choice [60,61]. In order to palliate symptoms and improve the quality of the remaining life for these patients, it is preferable to use a method that is relatively easy to perform and has minimal complications. Removal of the tumor mass by endoscopic biopsy forceps combined with cryosurgery, electrocautery, or laser ablation can achieve only limited clearance and short-term palliation, because the tumor kinetic is not altered. Therefore, HDR-BT is the option of treatment endobronchial tumors, which can increase the efficiency of the control of malignant airway obstruction and the duration of palliation. By placing a radioactive source near or in the tumor, a high-dose of radiation is given to the tumor, with the dose fall-off in accordance of the inverse square law. Efforts to relieve this obstructive process are worthwhile, because patients may experience improved QoL in hours or next days after treatment. BT plays a limited but specific role in definitive treatment with curative intent in selected cases of early endobronchial disease, in selected advanced inoperable tumors combined with EBRT, or in the post-operative treatment of small residual peribronchial disease [62,63]. A relatively rare indication is interstitial BT of peripheral tumors using permanent implants [64,65]. Lack of clear consensus regarding the value of doses used in brachytherapy is the reason why different fraction doses are used in clinical treatment [66,67,68,69].
Esophageal cancer
The aim of palliative brachytherapy is to reduce dysphagia, diminish pain and bleeding, as well as improve the patient’s well-being. Endoesophageal brachytherapy makes it possible to use high doses of radiation to the tumor itself with concurrent protection of the adjoining healthy tissues due to the rapid fall in the dose, with the square of the distance from the center of the dose. The above treatment also leads to a smaller proportion of late radiation complications [70,71].
However, there have been only few reports to confirm that the number of local remissions and long-term survival rates have been increased in patients treated with EBRT combined with BT. Doses used in teletherapy were as high as 35-60 Gy, whereas those in HDR-BT ranged between 10 and 25 Gy, administered in 2-4 fractions. The combined treatment can be radical or palliative. Positive results of HDR-BT have been observed in patients who had not been treated surgically. In these patients, the radioisotope source is inserted through the mouth to the esophagus, if the applicator can be passed through the stenotic region. In general, in brachytherapy, a sufficient dose distribution in the tumor can only be achieved in tumors that are smaller than 1.5 cm in diameter, and only in patients whose esophageal lumen is kept sufficiently wide to allow passage of the applicator [72]. In some cases, BT can be combined with esophageal stenting – clinical guidelines were recently published by European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) [73].
Bile duct cancer
The majority of patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease, which is not amenable to surgical resection, resulting in poor survival. Adjuvant or definitive radiotherapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy is therefore used in many centers worldwide for better local control and with the expectation that it will have a favorable effect on survival. Intraluminal brachytherapy (ILBT) may be an important component in the multimodality approach to bile duct cancers. Combined treatment is possible in patients who are in reasonably good condition; it is usual to combine BT with EBRT [74,75,76,77,78]. Although the results available in the literature are somewhat contradictory with regard to the possible use of BT in a curative setting, some evidences indicates that BT can improve results of the treatment of unresectable extrahepatic bile duct and pancreatic cancers, if a proper subset of patients is identified, and a rational and aggressive scheme of multimodality treatment is designed. Indications for BT can be summarized as follow: 1) BT as a radical treatment: alone in small inoperable tumors or in combination with EBRT and/or chemotherapy in advanced disease for unresectable patients; 2) BT as an adjuvant treatment after non radical excision, maybe combined with EBRT; 3) palliative treatment: BT as a palliative treatment is often performed in order to facilitate the outflow of bile (irrespective of the size of the tumor, including large inoperable tumors with significant extraductal disease) [79]. For unresectable patients, the goal of treatment is prevention of locoregional disease progression to enhance quality of life and survival. In almost all cases such palliative treatment is recommended for Klatskin tumors. This group of indications occurs most frequently [80,81].
Brain tumors
Brachytherapy for recurrent malignant gliomas represented in 80-90-ties s an increasing part of indications for brachytherapy in central nervous system tumors. Indications for brachytherapy were tumors with a maximum tumor diameter of 5 cm without involvement of the corpus callosum, without brain stem involvement, not in proximity with the motor trip. Primary malignant tumors, recurrent brain tumors, metastatic brain tumors, and benign brain tumors have been considered for brachytherapy. Introduction of stereotaxic radiosurgery greatly limited the use of brachytherapy of brain tumors.
Soft-tissue sarcomas
Brachytherapy can be used alone or in combination with EBRT for soft tissue sarcomas (STS) as an effective means to enhance therapeutic ratio (ratio of effectiveness when compared to toxicity of treatment). BT remains an essential component in the treatment of STS, with data supporting the use of adjuvant BT to improve disease control following local excision. The use of BT monotherapy offers a convenient and effective treatment that spares normal tissue, which is ideal for small high-grade disease, re-irradiation, frail, and elderly patients or children. In sarcoma patients with a higher risk of recurrence (i.e., size > 5 cm, deep, high grade, recurrent, or closely resected margins), the addition of BT can improve local control (LC). In randomized trials, the addition of EBRT or BT can offer an absolute LC benefit of ~20-30% in the setting of limb preserving wide local excision (WLE).
Radiation can be administered as EBRT alone, BT alone, or as a combination of EBRT with a brachytherapy boost (EBRT-BT). In combination with EBRT, a BT boost offers a LC benefit for patients with higher risk of recurrence (> 10 cm, recurrent, or close margins) [82,83,84]. It is imperative that the radiation oncologist and surgeon work together to ensure appropriate volume coverage and catheter placement to optimize rates of control and reduce toxicity. Adjuvant BT should be delayed for several days to allow for wound healing. All dose delivery rates (HDR, LDR, and PDR) are acceptable forms of adjuvant BT, and should depend on specifics of the case and the radiation oncologist’s expertise [85].
Anorectal cancer [86]
The concept of rectal cancer management has changed rapidly over the past few years. The standard of care in rectal cancer is still surgery. However, there is an increasing interest in non-surgical approach because of recognition of surgical harm, especially in growing number of elderly patients. In addition, most of the surgical protocols are biased towards locally advanced rectal cancer, and are not appropriate for early stage rectal cancer. For limited size rectal cancer (T1, small T2), brachytherapy alone offers an alternative to radical surgery and leads to excellent results without major morbidity. In advanced rectal cancer, a proportion of patients can achieve complete clinical response after EBRT + chemotherapy that can be demonstrated on MRI after neoadjuvant treatment. A brachytherapy boost either with contact X-ray brachytherapy (Papillon) or HDR rectal endoluminal brachytherapy can increase the chance of complete clinical response.
Conclusions
The benefits of brachytherapy vary depending on the patient, their priorities, and preferences, though as a minimally invasive treatment method, the benefits of avoiding surgery are universal.
These include a quicker recovery time, less time spent in a hospital, and a reduced risk of postoperative infections. The benefits of using brachytherapy in the treatment of early stage prostate cancer are quite pronounced. There is a much lower incidence of impotence and incontinence than occurs with a radical prostatectomy, and most men resume walking within a few hours of the procedure and other normal activity within a few days. In the case of breast cancer, the course of traditional radiation treatment following a lumpectomy lasts six weeks, with daily installments given at a hospital or clinic, whereas brachytherapy treatment lasts for five days. Due to convenience of brachytherapy, more women are likely to participate in adjuvant therapy, reducing the risk of the recurrence and the possible need for a mastectomy, therefore increasing breast conservation.
Disclosure
Author reports no conflict of interest.
References
1. Curie P, Curie M: Proceedings of the Academy of Science July 18, 1898.
2. Curie E. Madame Curie: A biography by Eve Curie. Doubleday, Doran and Company, Inc. Country Life Press, Garden City, New York 1937.
3. Skowronek J, Malicki J, Piotrowski T. Values of biologically equivalent doses in healthy tissues: comparison of PDR and HDR brachytherapy techniques. Brachytherapy 2010; 9: 165-170.
4. Skowronek J. Low-dose-rate or high-dose-rate brachytherapy in treatment of prostate cancer – between options. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2013; 5: 33-41.
5. Chin J, Rumble RB, Kollmeier M et al. Brachytherapy for Patients With Prostate Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/Cancer Care Ontario Joint Guideline Update. ASCO Special Article. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35: 1737-1743.
6. Viswanathan AN, Erickson BA, Ibbott GS et al. The American College of Radiology and the American Brachytherapy Society practice parameter for the performance of low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2017; 16: 68-74.
7. Hsu I-Chow J, Yamada Y, Assimos DG et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria high-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2014; 13: 27-31.
8. Erickson BA, Bittner NHJ, Chadha M et al. The American College of Radiology and the American Brachytherapy Society practice parameter for the performance of radionuclide-based high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2017; 16: 75-84.
9. Grimm P, Billiet I, Bostwick D et al. Comparative analysis of prostate-specific antigen free survival outcomes for patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treatment by radical therapy. Results from the Prostate Cancer Results Study Group. BJU Int 2012;109 Suppl 1: 22-29.
10. Yoshioka Y, Suzuki O, Otani Y et al. High-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer: technique, rationale and perspective. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2014; 6: 91-98.
11. Kovács G, Pötter R, Loch T et al. GEC/ESTRO-EAU recommendations on temporary brachytherapy using stepping sources for localised prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2005; 74: 137-148.
12. Rivard MJ, Butler WM, Devlin PM et al. American Brachytherapy Society recommends no change for prostate permanent implant dose prescriptions using iodine-125 or palladium-103. Brachytherapy 2007; 6: 34-37.
13. Yamada Y, Rogers L, Demanes DJ et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2012; 11: 20-32.
14. Davis BJ, Horwitz EM, Lee WR et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for transrectal ultrasound-guided permanent prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2012; 11: 6-19.
15. Demanes DJ, Ghilezan MI. High-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2014; 13: 529-541.
16. Shah C, Lanni TB, Jr., Ghilezan MI et al. Brachytherapy provides comparable outcomes and improved cost-effectiveness in the treatment of low/intermediate prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2012; 11: 441-445.
17. NCCN Guidelines, https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf [Access: 26 November 2017].
18. Polgár C, Ott OJ, Hildebrandt G et al. on behalf of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO). Late side-effects and cosmetic results of accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: 5-year results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 259-268.
19. Strnad V, Ott OJ, Hildebrandt G et al. on behalf of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO). 5-year results of accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation with boost after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2016; 387: 229-238.
20. Ott OJ, Strnad V, Hildebrandt G et al. on behalf of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO). GEC-ESTRO multicenter phase 3-trial: Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus external beam whole breast irradiation: Early toxicity and patient compliance. Radiother Oncol 2016; 120: 119-123.
21. Skowronek J, Chicheł A. Brachytherapy in breast cancer - an effective alternative. Prz Menopauzalny 2014; 18: 48-55.
22. Skowronek J, Wawrzyniak-Hojczyk M, Ambrochowicz K. Brachytherapy in Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) – analysis of treatment methods. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2012; 3: 152-164.
23. Skowronek J, Bielęda G, Łaski P et al. Can we improve the dose distribution for single or multi-lumen interstitial breast balloons used for Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation? J Contemp Brachytherapy 2013; 5: 134-138.
24. Tanderup K, Ménard C, Polgar C et al. Advancements in brachytherapy. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2017; 109: 15-25.
25. Lanciano RM, Won M, Coia LR et al. Pretreatment and treatment factors associated with improved outcome in squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a final report of the 1973 and 1978 patterns of care studies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991; 20: 667-676.
26. Gill BS, Lin JF, Krivak TC et al. National Cancer Data Base analysis of radiation therapy consolidation modality for cervical cancer: the impact of new technological advancements. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 90: 1083-1090.
27. Georg D, Kirisits C, Hillbrand M et al. Image-guided radiotherapy for cervix cancer: high-tech external beam therapy versus high-tech brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 71: 1272-1278.
28. Pötter R, Haie-Meder C, Van Limbergen E et al. Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC ESTRO working group (II): Concepts and terms in 3D image-based treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy - 3D dose volume parameters and aspects of 3D image-based anatomy, radiation physics, radio. Radiother Oncol 2006; 78: 67-77.
29. Tanderup K, Lindegaard JC, Kirisits C et al. Image Guided Adaptive Brachytherapy in cervix cancer: A new paradigm changing clinical practice and outcome. Radiother Oncol 2016; 120: 365-369.
30. Sturdza A, Pötter R, Fokdal LU et al. Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: Improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study. Radiother Oncol 2016; 120: 428-433.
31. Fokdal L, Sturdza A, Mazeron R et al. Image guided adaptive brachytherapy with combined intracavitary and interstitial technique improves the therapeutic ratio in locally advanced cervical cancer: Analysis from the retroEMBRACE study. Radiother Oncol 2016; 120: 434-440.
32. Georg P, Lang S, Dimopoulos JC et al. Dose-volume histogram parameters and late side effects in magnetic resonance image-guided adaptive cervical cancer brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 79: 356-362.
33. ICRU report 89. Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Brachytherapy for Cancer of the Cervix. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda 2013.
34. Petric P, Kirisits C. Potential role of TRAns Cervical Endosonography (TRACE) in brachytherapy of cervical cancer: proof of concept. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2016; 8: 217-222.
35. Pötter R, Georg P, Dimopoulos JCA et al. Clinical outcome of protocol based image (MRI) guided adaptive brachytherapy combined with 3D conformal radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol 2011; 100: 116-123.
36. Viswanathan AN, Thomadsen B; American Brachytherapy Society Cervical Cancer Recommendations Committee; American Brachytherapy Society. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part I: general principles. Brachytherapy 2012; 11: 33-46.
37. Viswanathan AN, Beriwal S, De Los Santos JF et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part II: high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2012; 11: 47-52.
38. Pötter R, Georg P, Dimopoulos JC et al. Clinical outcome of protocol based image (MRI) guided adaptive brachytherapy combined with 3D conformal radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol 2011; 100: 116-123.
39. Rijkmans EC, Nout RA, Rutten IH et al. Improved survival of patients with cervical cancer treated with image-guided brachytherapy compared with conventional brachytherapy. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 135: 231-238.
40. Kovács G, Martinez-Monge R, Budrukkar A et al. on behalf of the GEC-ESTRO Head & Neck Working Group. GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations for head & neck brachytherapy in squamous cell carcinomas: 1st update – improvement by cross sectional imaging based treatment planning and stepping source technology. Radiother Oncol 2017; 122: 248-254.
41. Bartochowska A, Wierzbicka M, Skowronek J et al. High-dose-rate and pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy in palliative treatment of head-and-neck cancers. Brachytherapy 2012; 11: 137-143.
42. Bartochowska A, Skowronek J, Wierzbicka M et al. The role of high-dose-rate and pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy for the management of recurrent or residual stomal tumor after total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope 2013; 123: 657-661.
43. Mazeron JJ, Ardiet JM, Haie-Méder C et al. GEC-ESTRO recommendations for brachytherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Radiother Oncol 2009; 91: 150-156.
44. Alam M, Nanda S, Mittal BB et al. The use of brachytherapy in the treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer: a review. J Am Acad Dermatol 2011; 65: 377-388.
45. Delannes M, Rio E, Mirabel X et al. Brachytherapy for cutaneous and lip carcinomas. Cancer Radiother 2013; 17: 136-139.
46. Guinot JL, Perez-Calatayud J, van Limbergen E. Chapter 31: Skin cancer brachytherapy. In: van Limbergen E, Pötter R, Hoskin P, Baltas D (eds). The GEC-ESTRO Handbook of Brachytherapy 2nd edition. DOVE platform ESTRO, Brussels 2017.
47. Skowronek J. Brachytherapy in the treatment of skin cancer – an overview. Postepy Dermatol Alergol 2015; 32: 362-367.
48. Tormo A, Celada F, Rodriguez S et al. Non-melanoma skin cancer treated with HDR Valencia applicator: clinical outcomes. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2014; 6: 167-172.
49. Gauden R, Pracy M, Avery AM et al. HDR brachytherapy for superficial non-melanoma skin cancers. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2013; 57: 212-217.
50. Lukačko P, Pobijáková M, Lederleitner D et al. HDR brachytherapy for skin carcinoma of the face: treatment by customized mask – case report. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2009; 1: 186 (abstract).
51. Kowalik Ł, Łyczek J, Sawicki M et al. Individual applicator for brachytherapy for various sites of superficial malignant lesions. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2013; 5: 45-49.
52. Kuncman Ł, Kozłowski S, Pietraszek A et al. Highly conformal CT based surface mould brachytherapy for non-melanoma skin cancers of earlobe and nose. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2016; 8: 195-200.
53. Garcia-Martinez T, Chan JP, Perez-Calatayud J et al. Dosimetric characteristics of a new unit for electronic skin brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2014; 6: 45-53.
54. Bhatnagar A. Nonmelanoma skin cancer treated with electronic brachytherapy: results at 1 year. Brachytherapy 2013; 12: 134-140.
55. Garcia-Martinez T, Chan JP, Perez-Calatayud J et al. Dosimetric characteristics of a new unit for electronic skin brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2014; 6: 45-53.
56. Ballester-Sánchez R, Pons-Llanas O, Candela-Juan C et al. Electronic brachytherapy for superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma: a report of two prospective pilot trials using different doses. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2016; 8: 48-55.
57. Patel R, Strimling R, Doggett S et al. Comparison of electronic brachytherapy and Mohs micrographic surgery for the treatment of early-stage non-melanoma skin cancer: a matched pair cohort study. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2017; 9: 338-344.
58. Fijuth J. HDR endobronchial brachytherapy in palliative and combined radical treatment of lung cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2009; 4: 231-236.
59. Stewart A, Parashar B, Patel M et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for thoracic brachytherapy for lung cancer. Brachytherapy 2016; 15: 1-11.
60. Skowronek J. Lung cancer brachytherapy. In: West BS, Stanley DR (eds.). Lung cancer treatment. Nova Science, New York 2011.
61. Van Limbergen E, Skowronek J, Pötter R. Chapter 29: Bronchus cancer. In: Van Limbergen E, Pötter R, Hoskin P, Baltas D (eds.). The GEC-ESTRO Handbook of Brachytherapy. 2nd edition. DOVE platform ESTRO, Brussels 2017.
62. Marsiglia H, Baldeyrou P, Lartigau E et al. High-dose-rate brachytherapy as sole modality for early stage endobronchial carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 20: 665-672.
63. Saito M, Yokoyama A, Kurita Y et al. Treatment of roentgenographically occult endobronchial carcinoma with external beam radiotherapy and intraluminal LDR brachytherapy. A second report. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 47: 673-680.
64. Stewart AJ, Mutyala S, Holloway CL et al. Intraoperative seed placement for thoracic malignancy. A review of technique, indications, and published literature. Brachytherapy 2009; 8: 63-69.
65. Trombetta MG, Colonias A, Makishi D et al. Tolerance of the aorta using intraoperative iodine-125 interstitial brachytherapy in cancer of the lung. Brachytherapy 2008; 7: 50-54.
66. Skowronek J. Brachytherapy in the treatment of lung cancer – a valuable solution. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2015; 4: 297-311.
67. Skowronek J, Kubaszewska M, Kanikowski M et al. HDR endobronchial brachytherapy (HDRBT) in the management of advanced lung cancer – comparison of two different dose schedules. Radiother Oncol 2009; 93: 436-440.
68. Skowronek J, Piotrowski T, Młynarczyk W et al. Advanced tracheal carcinoma - a therapeutic significance of HDR brachytherapy in palliative treatment. Neoplasma 2004; 51: 313-318.
69. Skowronek J, Piorunek T, Kanikowski M et al. Definitive high-dose-rate endobronchial brachytherapy of bronchial stump for lung cancer after surgery. Brachytherapy 2013; 12: 560-566.
70. Laskar SG, Lewis S, Agarwal JP et al. Combined brachytherapy and external beam radiation: an effective approach for palliation in esophageal cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2015; 7: 453-461.
71. Fuccio L, Mandolesi D, Farioli A et al. Brachytherapy for the palliation of dysphagia owing to esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Radiother Oncol 2017; 122: 332-339.
72. Skowronek J, Piotrowski T, Zwierzchowski G. Palliative treatment with high-dose-rate intraluminal brachytherapy in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. Brachytherapy 2004; 3: 87-94.
73. Spaander MC, Baron TH, Siersema PD et al. Esophageal stenting for benign and malignant disease: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 939-948.
74. Shinohara ET, Guo M, Mitra N et al. Brachytherapy in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 78: 722-728.
75. Dobelbowe RR, Montemaggi P. Brachytherapy for pancreatic cancer: a review. Hepatogastroenterology 1996; 43: 333-337.
76. Chen Y, Wang XL, Yan ZP et al. HDR-192Ir intraluminal brachytherapy in treatment of malignant obstructive jaundice. World J Gastroenterol 2004; 10: 3506-3510.
77. Yoshioka Y, Ogawa K, Oikawa H et al. Impact of Intraluminal Brachytherapy on Survival Outcome for Radiation Therapy for Unresectable Biliary Tract Cancer: A Propensity-Score Matched-Pair Analysis. Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 89: 822-829.
78. Shin HS, Seong J, Kim WC et al. Combination of external beam irradiation and high-dose-rate intraluminal brachytherapy for inoperable carcinoma of the extrahepatic bile ducts. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 57: 105-112.
79. Skowronek J. Chapter 28: Bile duct cancer. In: Van Limbergen E, Pötter R, Hoskin P, Baltas D (eds.). The GEC-ESTRO Handbook of Brachytherapy. 2nd edition. DOVE platform ESTRO, Brussels 2017.
80. Skowronek J, Zwierzchowski G. Brachytherapy in the treatment of bile duct cancer – a tough challenge. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2017; 9: 187-195.
81. Skowronek J, Sowier A, Skrzywanek P. Trans-hepatic technique and intraluminal Pulsed Dose Rate (PDR) brachytherapy in treatment of locally advanced bile ducts and pancreas cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2009; 1: 97-104.
82. Harrison LB, Franzese F, Gaynor JJ et al. Long-term results of a prospective randomized trial of adjuvant brachytherapy in the management of completely resected soft tissue sarcomas of the extremity and superficial trunk. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 27: 259-265.
83. Pisters PW, Harrison LB, Woodruff JM et al. A prospective randomized trial of adjuvant brachytherapy in the management of low-grade soft tissue sarcomas of the extremity and superficial trunk. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 1150-1155.
84. Pisters PW, Harrison LB, Leung DH et al. Long-term results of a prospective randomized trial of adjuvant brachytherapy in soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 859-868.
85. Naghavi AO, Fernandez DC, Mesko N et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement for soft tissue sarcoma brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2017; 16: 466-489.
86. Sun Myint A, Lee CD, Gerard JP. Chapter 25: Rectal cancer brachytherapy. In: Van Limbergen E, Pötter R, Hoskin P, Baltas D (eds.). The GEC-ESTRO Handbook of Brachytherapy. 2nd edition. DOVE platform ESTRO, Brussels 2017.
