Image-Guided Radiotherapy and Prostate Cancer

Reference work entry


The role of imaging in medicine is in constant flux and utilization now extends well beyond its initial intent as a diagnostic modality. In the field of radiation oncology, imaging has historically been employed to define the treatment field or target at the time of radiation planning. With improvements in imaging and greater accessibility, the incorporation of daily imaging into treatment has improved accuracy and precision of radiation delivery. Early prostate cancer is a very treatable disease, but requires high doses of radiation for optimal local control. Current standard treatment dose is well beyond the tolerance of adjacent normal tissues. Dose escalation for the treatment of prostate cancer is achieved by shrinking field sizes in addition to accurate and precise delivery of radiation. Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) involves imaging prior to daily treatment to compensate for organ motion and daily setup errors. The ability to shrink fields and escalate dose has greatly improved outcomes in definitive radiation therapy for early prostate cancer improving local control without increasing treatment-related morbidity.


Prostate Cancer Dose Escalation Fiducial Marker Radiation Delivery Rectal Volume 


  1. 1.
    Emami B, Lyman J, Brown A, et al. Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation. IJROBP. 1991;21:109–22.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marks LB, Yorke ED, Jackson A, et al. Use of normal tissue complication probability models in the clinic. IJROBP. 2010;76(3):S10–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kuban DA, Tucker SL, Dong L, et al. Long-term results of the MD Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer. IJROBP. 2008;70:67–75.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zeitman AL, DeSilvio ML, Slater JD, et al. Comparison of conventional-dose vs. high-dose conformal radiation therapy in clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: a randomized control trial. JAMA. 2005;294:1233–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sathya JR, Davis IR, Julian JA, et al. Randomized trial comparing iridium implant plus external beam radiation therapy with external beam radiation therapy alone in node-negative locally advanced cancer of the prostate. JCO. 2005;23:1192–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peeters ST, Heemsbergen WD, Koper PC, et al. Dose–response in radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: results of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy. JCO. 2006;24:1990–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shipley WU, Verhey LJ, Munzenrider JE, et al. Advanced prostate cancer: the results of a randomized comparative trial of high dose irradiation boosting with conformal protons compared with conventional irradiation using photons alone. IJROBP. 1995;32:3–12.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dearnaley DP, Sydes MR, Graham JD, et al. Escalated-dose versus standard-dose conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer: first results from the MRC RT01 randomized controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:475–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beckendorf V, Guerif S, Le Prise E, et al. The GETUG 70 Gy vs. 80 Gy randomized trial for localized prostate cancer: feasibility and acute toxicity. IJROBP. 2004;60:1056–65.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Viani GA, Stefano EJ, Afonso SL. Higher-than-conventional radiation doses in localized prostate cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. IJROBP. 2009;74(5):1405–18.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brabbins D, Kestin L, Yan D, et al. Improvements in clinical outcomes with prostate radiotherapy at a single institute in the PSA era (abstr). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;69(suppl):1100–9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hanks GE, Kramer S, Diamond JJ, et al. Patterns of care outcome survey: national outcome data for six disease sites. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5(4):349–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lawton CA, Won M, Pilepich MV, et al. Long-term treatment sequelae following external beam irradiation for adenocarcinoma of the prostate: analysis of RTOG studies 7506 and 7706. IJROBP. 1991;21(4):935–9.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghilezan MJ, Jaffray DA, Siewerdsen JH, et al. Prostate gland motion assessed with cine-magnetic resonance imaging (CINE-MRI). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62(2):406–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Crevoisier R, Tucker SL, Dong L, et al. Increased risk of biochemical and local failure in patients with distended rectum on the planning CT for prostate cancer radiotherapy. IJROBP. 2005;62:965–73.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heemsbergen WD, Hoogeman MS, Witte MG, et al. Increased risk of biochemical and clinical failure for prostate patients with a large rectum at radiotherapy planning: results from the Dutch Trial of 68 Gy versus 78 Gy. IJROBP. 2007;67:1418–24.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Balter JM, Sandler HM, Lam K, et al. Measurement of prostate movement over the course of routine radiotherapy using implanted markers. IJROBP. 1995;31(1):113–8.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chandra A, Dong L, Huang E. Experience of ultrasound-based daily prostate localization. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56:73–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kitamura K, Shirato H, Seppenwoolde Y, et al. Three-dimensional intrafractional movement of prostate measured during real-time tumor tracking radiotherapy in supine and prone treatment positions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:1117–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huang E, Dong L, Chandra A, et al. Intrafraction prostate motion during IMRT for prostate cancer. IJROBP. 2002;53(2):261–8.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Su Z, Zhang L, Murphy M, et al. Analysis of prostate patient setup and tracking data: potential intervention strategies. IJROBP. 2010;81(3):880–7.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tanyi JA, He T, Summers PA, et al. Assessment of planning target volume margins for intensity-modulated radiotherapy of the prostate gland: role of daily inter- and intrafraction motion. IJROBP. 2010;78(5):1579–85.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kupelian P, Willoughby T, Mahadevan A, et al. Multi-institutional clinical experience with the Calypso System in localization and continuous, real-time monitoring of the prostate gland during external radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:1088–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Haisen LS, Chetty IJ, Enke CA, et al. Dosimetric consequences of intrafraction prostate motion. IJROBP. 2008;71(3):801–12.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schallenkamp JM, Herman MG, Kruse JJ, et al. Prostate position relative to pelvic bony anatomy based on intraprostatic gold markers and electronic portal imaging. IJROBP. 2005;63:800–11.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khosa R, Nangia S, Chufal KS, et al. Daily online localization using implanted fiducial markers and its impact on planning target volume for carcinoma prostate. J Cancer Res Ther. 2010;6(2):172–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Skarsgard D, Cadman P, El-Gayed A, et al. Planning target volume margins for prostate radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging and implanted fiducial markers. Radiat Oncol. 2010;10(5):52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Igdem S, Akpinar H, Alco G, et al. Implantation of fiducial markers for image guidance in prostate radiotherapy: patient-reported toxicity. Br J Radiol. 2009;82(983):941–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moman MR, van der Heide UA, Kotte AN, et al. Long-term experience with transrectal and transperineal implantations of fiducial gold markers in the prostate for position verification in external beam radiotherapy, feasibility, toxicity and quality of life. Radiother Oncol. 2010;96(1):38–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ullman KL, Ning H, Susil RC, et al. Intra- and inter-radiation therapist reproducibility of daily isocenter verification using prostatic fiducial markers. Radiat Oncol. 2006;28(1):2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Langen KM, Zhang Y, Andrews RD, et al. Initial experience with megavoltage (MV) CT guidance for daily prostate alignments. IJROBP. 2005;62:1517–24.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moseley DJ, White EA, Wiltshire KL, et al. Comparison of localization performance with implanted fiducial markers and cone-beam computed tomography for on-line image-guided radiotherapy of the prostate. IJROBP. 2007;67:942–53.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kupelian PA, Langen KM, Willoughby TR, et al. Image-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: treating a moving target. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2008;18:58–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shi W, Li JG, Zlotecki RA, et al. Evaluation of kV cone-beam CT performance for prostate IGRT: a comparison of automatic grey-value alignment to implanted fiducial-marker alignment. Am J Clin Oncol. 2011;34(1):16–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Serago CF, Chungbin SJ, Buskirk SJ, et al. Initial experience with ultrasound localization for positioning prostate cancer patients for external beam radiotherapy. IJROBP. 2002;53:1130–8.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Artignan X, Smitsmans MH, Lebesque JV, et al. Online ultrasound image guidance for radiotherapy of prostate cancer: impact of image acquisition on prostate displacement. IJROBP. 2004;59:595–601.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Johnson H, Hilts M, Beckham W, et al. 3D ultrasound for prostate localization in radiation therapy: a comparison with implanted fiducial markers. Med Phys. 2008;35(6):2403–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Scarbrough TJ, Golden NM, Ting JY, et al. Comparison of ultrasound and implanted seed marker prostate localization methods: implications for image-guided radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65(2):378–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Serago CF, Buskirk SJ, Igel TC, et al. Comparison of daily megavoltage electronic portal imaging or kilovoltage imaging with marker seeds to ultrasound imaging or skin marks for prostate localization and treatment positioning in patients with prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65(5):1585–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fuller CD, Thomas CR, Schwartz S, et al. Method comparison of ultrasound and kilovoltage x-ray fiducial imaging for prostate radiotherapy targeting. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51(19):4981–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ng AK, Kenney LB, Gilbert ES, et al. Secondary malignancies across the age spectrum. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2010;20(1):67–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kupelian PA, Langen KM, Willoughby TR, et al. Image-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: treating a moving target. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2008;18(1):58–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Fowler JF. The radiobiology of prostate cancer including new aspects of fractionated radiotherapy. Acta Oncol. 2005;44(3):265–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    START Trialists’ Group, Bentzen SM, Agrawal RK, et al. The UK Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy (START) Trial A of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: a randomized trial. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9(4):331–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lloyd-Davies RW, Collins CD, Swan AV. Carcinoma of prostate treated by radical external beam radiotherapy using hypofractionation. Twenty-two years’ experience (1962–1984). Urology. 1990;36(2):107–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dasu A. Is the alpha/beta value for prostate tumours low enough to be safely used in clinical trials. Clin Oncol. 2007;19(5):289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Madsen BL, Hsi RA, Pham HT, et al. Stereotactic hypofractionated accurate radiotherapy of the prostate (SHARP), 33.5 Gy in five fractions for localized disease: first clinical trial results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67(4):1099–105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    King CR, Brooks JD, Gill H, et al. Long-term outcomes from a prospective trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy for low-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82(2):877–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Katz AJ, Santoro M, Ashley R, et al. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for organ-confined prostate cancer. BMC Urol. 2010;10:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiation OncologyTufts Medical Center and Rhode Island HospitalBostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiation OncologyRhode Island HospitalProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations