Dear Readers,
I cordially invite you to explore our first issue of 2026, JCB 1/2026 (January-March) that features twelve incredibly diverse manuscripts and topics: a letter to the editor, seven clinical papers, two case reports, and two important reviews.
Since 2009, we have been publishing fully open-access articles available electronically and downloadable, so there is no need for hard copies. Our publisher decided to switch from six to four journal issues per year. It means I will have the opportunity to write a word to our readers a bit less frequently. However, we are in constant contact through our social media, i.e., jocb.eu, FB, LinkedIn, and X platform. The final important information is that the author(s) of the submitted and accepted article(s) are required to pay an article processing charge (APC) of 350 EUR/1,500 PLN for papers submitted after April 25, 2026. The APC only applies if the article is accepted for publication after peer review and possible revision of the manuscript. There are no other charges involved.
As you are probably aware, Generation Beta, children born between 2025 and 2039, are the offspring of younger Millennials and older Generation Z. This is the first generation to be completely immersed in artificial intelligence (AI), advanced robotics, and virtual reality from birth. Related to that, upon the issue’s closure, Sarath Vijayan et al. (USA) submitted an up-to-date systematic review of the use of AI in brachytherapy. The studies reviewed demonstrated that AI may produce clinically acceptable planning data in significantly less time than presently required. Although current literature remains largely retrospective, AI has the potential to reduce human effort and increase efficiency in repetitive tasks, so we should focus on identifying the best areas in our daily practice to adopt AI-based improvements. Refer also to [1-4].
I wish to highlight the second special review article, a milestone for the Polish Brachytherapy Society (PBS). Artur J. Chyrek et al. (Poland) presented clinical recommendations, which are the first national expert consensus of the PBS on radical HDR-BT for prostate cancer. Emerged from a multidisciplinary panel of Polish radiation oncologists with extensive experience in prostate brachytherapy, the guidelines provide a comprehensive, evidence-informed framework to harmonize clinical practice, support decision-making, and improve comparability of outcomes across Polish centers. All interested individuals are invited to familiarize themselves with our recommendations, and to kindly provide feedback.
The opening article is a letter to the editor submitted by Jiayi Chen (China), who discusses and comments on our previous submission on HDR-BT for eyelid carcinoma, implant techniques, and review [5]. I admit, the named articles deserved wider recognition.
As mentioned above, the following seven clinical papers are extremely diverse in content. In the first one, Alexander Gitt-Hölscher et al. (Germany) analyzed the oncological outcomes of adjuvant APBI, delivered by multicatheter interstitial HDR-BT in patients with selected early-stage invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). In a cohort of 47 patients, they achieved 100% local control at a median follow-up of 47 months, with no cases of significant treatment sequelae. In the second article, Sérgio C. B. Esteves et al. (Brazil) evaluated oncologic outcomes and treatment-related toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with uLDR-BT, either as monotherapy or combined with EBRT and/or ADT. They added data on durable oncologic control with a low incidence of clinically significant toxicity across different risk groups of over 800 patients. The third clinical paper by Ayesha Iqbal Maniyar et al. (India) is a report on initial clinical experience with the TULIP “Add-On” hybrid intracavitary + interstitial (IC + IS) BT applicator in locally advanced carcinoma cervix, and comparing its dosimetric performance with conventional IC-BT. As concluded, their practical, resource-adaptive technique that combines the simplicity of IC-BT with dosimetric advantages of IS approaches, is particularly valuable for patients with residual parametrial disease post-EBRT. In the fourth paper, Sule Parlar et al. (Turkey) conducted a comparative dosimetric study of single- versus multi-channel (MC) cylindrical applicators in vaginal BT. Based on their research, MC applicators with a larger diameter have the potential to reduce the need for small-volume, high-dose areas in vaginal mucosa. In the following fifth article, Leonel Varela Cagetti et al. (France) sought to determine whether the choice of boost technique matters in courses of radiochemotherapy for anal canal cancers. As shown in the study, compared with EBRT, an interstitial BT boost may result in a favorable GI toxicity profile with a low impact on fecal incontinence. The sixth submission by Anis Bandyopadhyay et al. (India), enriches our knowledge on computed tomography-based customized surface mould HDR-BT for non-melanoma skin cancer of the scalp and face. The authors’ experience confirmed that proper treatment optimization reduces late toxicity and improves cosmetic outcome. In the seventh and final clinical manuscript, Wei Nie et al. (USA, Canada) presented a novel patient-specific solution for HDR-BT of Merkel cell carcinoma. Their patient-specific 3D-printed applicator was successfully used to treat skin lesions unsuitable for conventional techniques. As they noted, reduced air gaps improved conformity, and the semi-rigid, translucent resin enhanced the setup’s reproducibility. It reminds us of our previous publication on 3D printing techniques that emerged a few years ago [6].
The last two papers are case reports. The first by Cody R. Kilar et al. (USA), is a case series on the dosimetric evaluation of superficial radionuclide-based HDR-BT for deep keratinocyte carcinoma (thickness > 5 mm). As they claimed, a 1 cm source-to-skin distance applicator optimized the dose distribution for thicker lesions, while maintaining acceptable toxicity and cosmesis. The latter, by Sandeep Gurav et al. (India), described the use of an innovative surface mould BT technique in an edentulous hard palate carcinoma. As stated by the authors, one size does not fit all, their technique ensured reliable prosthetic retention, precise catheter placement, and optimal dose delivery, thus resulting in favorable oncologic and functional outcomes.
Sincerely yours, Assoc. Prof. Adam Chicheł, MD, PhD Editor-in-Chief Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy