Purpose: Radiotherapy (RT) remains a cornerstone of curative treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, dose escalation to improve tumor control is often constrained by the proximity of the rectum, which increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicities. Biodegradable rectal spacers inserted between the prostate and rectum have emerged as an effective approach to reduce rectal radiation exposure. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on indications, contraindications, procedural standards, and clinical management for biodegradable rectal spacer insertion during prostate cancer RT. Materials and Methods: This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of international guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology, American Society for Radiation Oncology), and expert consensus among radiation oncologists, radiologists, and urologists with clinical experience in spacer insertion. The strength of each recommendation and the level of evidence were classified according to the modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Results: Spacer insertion is conditionally recommended (Grade C, Level I) for patients receiving definitive external-beam RT without rectal invasion. It reduces the high-dose rectal irradiation volume (V70–75) by >50%, decreases acute GI toxicity, and helps maintain bowel-related quality of life. However, the benefit for late severe toxicity (grade 2 or higher) remains debated in recent meta-analyses. Contraindications include rectal invasion, anatomical inaccessibility, infection, and material hypersensitivity. Procedures should be performed under local anesthesia in a sterile environment by trained physicians. Short-course antibiotics and simulator-based training, including completion of multiple supervised cases, are advised. Conclusion Biodegradable rectal spacer insertion is clinically validated and effective in reducing acute rectal toxicity. Although pivotal trials demonstrated a favorable procedural safety profile, real-world postmarket data include reports of rare but severe procedural complications. This guideline provides standardized recommendations tailored to Korean clinical practice while remaining consistent with international standards, emphasizing the importance of operator training and careful patient selection.

Background: Long-term use of bisphosphonate is a risk factor for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs). Femoral bowing is known to be associated with AFFs. However, whether femoral bowing quickens the occurrence of AFF is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine whether AFF occurs earlier in patients with severe femoral bowing than in those without severe bowing. Methods: One hundred and sixty-four patients (186 AFFs) from January 2006 to December 2022 were included in this study.According to severity of femoral bowing, patients were divided into 2 groups: severe bowing group (26 femurs) and minimal to moderate bowing group (160 femurs). Age, sex, and completeness and location of AFF were compared between the 2 groups. We compared the time of AFF occurrence after bisphosphonate therapy using cumulative percentage between the 2 groups. Results: Age and sex were similar between the 2 groups, while body mass index (BMI) was lower (22.5 ± 3.0 kg/m 2 vs. 24.5 ± 3.5 kg/m 2 , p = 0.003) in the severe bowing group. The duration of bisphosphonate use was shorter in the severe bowing group than in the minimal to moderate bowing group (3.3 ± 3.8 years vs. 5.0 ± 4.0 years, p = 0.048). In the severe bowing group, 85% of AFFs were diaphyseal in contrast to the 46% in the minimal to moderate bowing group (p < 0.001). Cumulative percentage plot of AFFs in the severe bowing group was left-shifted compared to the minimal to moderate bowing group. Conclusions At the time of AFF diagnosis, the severe bowing group exhibited shorter duration of bisphosphonate use, lower BMI, and a higher incidence of diaphyseal location. Shortening the duration of bisphosphonate therapy may be advisable in patients with severe femoral bowing.

Background: Long-term use of bisphosphonate is a risk factor for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs). Femoral bowing is known to be associated with AFFs. However, whether femoral bowing quickens the occurrence of AFF is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine whether AFF occurs earlier in patients with severe femoral bowing than in those without severe bowing. Methods: One hundred and sixty-four patients (186 AFFs) from January 2006 to December 2022 were included in this study.According to severity of femoral bowing, patients were divided into 2 groups: severe bowing group (26 femurs) and minimal to moderate bowing group (160 femurs). Age, sex, and completeness and location of AFF were compared between the 2 groups. We compared the time of AFF occurrence after bisphosphonate therapy using cumulative percentage between the 2 groups. Results: Age and sex were similar between the 2 groups, while body mass index (BMI) was lower (22.5 ± 3.0 kg/m 2 vs. 24.5 ± 3.5 kg/m 2 , p = 0.003) in the severe bowing group. The duration of bisphosphonate use was shorter in the severe bowing group than in the minimal to moderate bowing group (3.3 ± 3.8 years vs. 5.0 ± 4.0 years, p = 0.048). In the severe bowing group, 85% of AFFs were diaphyseal in contrast to the 46% in the minimal to moderate bowing group (p < 0.001). Cumulative percentage plot of AFFs in the severe bowing group was left-shifted compared to the minimal to moderate bowing group. Conclusions At the time of AFF diagnosis, the severe bowing group exhibited shorter duration of bisphosphonate use, lower BMI, and a higher incidence of diaphyseal location. Shortening the duration of bisphosphonate therapy may be advisable in patients with severe femoral bowing.

Background: Long-term use of bisphosphonate is a risk factor for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs). Femoral bowing is known to be associated with AFFs. However, whether femoral bowing quickens the occurrence of AFF is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine whether AFF occurs earlier in patients with severe femoral bowing than in those without severe bowing. Methods: One hundred and sixty-four patients (186 AFFs) from January 2006 to December 2022 were included in this study.According to severity of femoral bowing, patients were divided into 2 groups: severe bowing group (26 femurs) and minimal to moderate bowing group (160 femurs). Age, sex, and completeness and location of AFF were compared between the 2 groups. We compared the time of AFF occurrence after bisphosphonate therapy using cumulative percentage between the 2 groups. Results: Age and sex were similar between the 2 groups, while body mass index (BMI) was lower (22.5 ± 3.0 kg/m 2 vs. 24.5 ± 3.5 kg/m 2 , p = 0.003) in the severe bowing group. The duration of bisphosphonate use was shorter in the severe bowing group than in the minimal to moderate bowing group (3.3 ± 3.8 years vs. 5.0 ± 4.0 years, p = 0.048). In the severe bowing group, 85% of AFFs were diaphyseal in contrast to the 46% in the minimal to moderate bowing group (p < 0.001). Cumulative percentage plot of AFFs in the severe bowing group was left-shifted compared to the minimal to moderate bowing group. Conclusions At the time of AFF diagnosis, the severe bowing group exhibited shorter duration of bisphosphonate use, lower BMI, and a higher incidence of diaphyseal location. Shortening the duration of bisphosphonate therapy may be advisable in patients with severe femoral bowing.

Background: Long-term use of bisphosphonate is a risk factor for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs). Femoral bowing is known to be associated with AFFs. However, whether femoral bowing quickens the occurrence of AFF is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine whether AFF occurs earlier in patients with severe femoral bowing than in those without severe bowing. Methods: One hundred and sixty-four patients (186 AFFs) from January 2006 to December 2022 were included in this study.According to severity of femoral bowing, patients were divided into 2 groups: severe bowing group (26 femurs) and minimal to moderate bowing group (160 femurs). Age, sex, and completeness and location of AFF were compared between the 2 groups. We compared the time of AFF occurrence after bisphosphonate therapy using cumulative percentage between the 2 groups. Results: Age and sex were similar between the 2 groups, while body mass index (BMI) was lower (22.5 ± 3.0 kg/m 2 vs. 24.5 ± 3.5 kg/m 2 , p = 0.003) in the severe bowing group. The duration of bisphosphonate use was shorter in the severe bowing group than in the minimal to moderate bowing group (3.3 ± 3.8 years vs. 5.0 ± 4.0 years, p = 0.048). In the severe bowing group, 85% of AFFs were diaphyseal in contrast to the 46% in the minimal to moderate bowing group (p < 0.001). Cumulative percentage plot of AFFs in the severe bowing group was left-shifted compared to the minimal to moderate bowing group. Conclusions At the time of AFF diagnosis, the severe bowing group exhibited shorter duration of bisphosphonate use, lower BMI, and a higher incidence of diaphyseal location. Shortening the duration of bisphosphonate therapy may be advisable in patients with severe femoral bowing.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.