

p
= 0.004). At 7 yr, the OS by treatment arm is 85.7% versus
81.5%, a similar magnitude of difference in favor, once again,
of the use of an LDR brachytherapy boost.
Disturbingly, Johnson et al
[1]report that the use of LDR
prostate brachytherapy as a boost is declining in the USA,
from29% in 2004 to 14% in 2012. There are many reasons for
this, including more favorable reimbursement in the USA
for other forms of radiotherapy such as intensity-modulat-
ed radiation therapy, the fact that declining use of a
modality is self-perpetuating in that there are fewer and
fewer training opportunities, concerns about liability for
treatment-related toxicity, and increasing use of robotic
prostatectomy. The results of Ascende-RT were first
presented in 2015 and published in 2017. Dissemination
of these results is expected to create renewed interest in
brachytherapy. To meet these demands, the American
Society of Therapeutic Radiation and Oncology has offered a
Prostate Brachytherapy Simulation Workshop for the past
2 yr as part of the Annual Meeting, and the American
Brachytherapy Society now offers a Brachytherapy Simula-
tion Workshop in addition to the Brachytherapy Schools. If
the addition of a brachytherapy boost is indeed indispens-
able in the optimal management of unfavorable prostate
cancer, meeting the training demands of a nation so that
optimal treatment can be offered to all who require it will
be a major challenge.
Much fanfare in recent years has focused on the harms of
screening, resulting in overdiagnosis and overtreatment of
nonlethal prostate cancer, such that policy-makers appear
to have lost sight of the real threat of unfavorable prostate
cancer, a potentially lethal disease. Optimal treatment of
these men, to prevent the otherwise inevitable progression
to castrate-resistant disease and the ensuing cascade of
extremely costly palliative interventions, is of paramount
concern.
Conflicts of interest:
Research funding from Ferring Pharmaceuticals.
Advisory Board member for Varian Medical Systems. Scientific Advisor
for Concure Breast Microseed. Speaker Honorarium from Abbott. Former
President of the American Brachytherapy Society.
References
[1]
Johnson SB, Lester-Coll HC, Kelly JR, Kann BH, Yu JB, Nath SK. Brachytherapy boost utilization and survival in unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2017;72:738–44.
[2]
Kuban DA, Tucker SL, Dong L, et al. Long-term results of the M. D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70:67–74.[3]
Zietman AL, Bae K, Slater JD, et al. Randomized trial comparing conventional-dose with high-dose conformal radiation therapy in early-stage adenocarcinoma of the prostate: long-term results from Proton Radiation Oncology Group/American College of Radiology 95-09. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1106–11.
[4]
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 radio- therapy with 78 Gy. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:1990–6.
[5]
Stone NN, Potters L, Davis BJ, et al. Multicenter analysis of effect of high biologic effective dose on biochemical failure and survival outcomes in patients with Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer treated with permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;73:341–6.
[6]
Zelefsky MJ, Reuter VE, Fuks Z, Scardino P, Shippy A. Influence of local tumor control on distant metastases and cancer related mor- tality after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. J Urol 2008;179:1368–73.[7]
Morris WJ, Tyldesley S, Rodda S, et al. Androgen Suppression Com- binedwith Elective Nodal and Dose Escalated Radiation Therapy (the ASCENDE-RT Trial): an analysis of survival endpoints for a random- ized trial comparing a low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost to a dose- escalated external beam boost for high- and intermediate-risk pros- tate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017;98:275–85.
E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 2 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 7 4 5 – 7 4 6
746