High dose versus conventional dose in external beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of long-term follow-up

Stereotactic Body Radiation Adoption Impacts Prostate Cancer Treatment Patterns

OBJECTIVE

To investigate stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) adoption for prostate cancer. As evidence supporting SBRT mounts, its utilization and impact relative to other prostate cancer treatments is unknown.

METHODS

We used SEER-Medicare to identify patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2008 to 2017. We then identified physician networks by identifying the primary treating physician of each patient based on primary treatment, then linking each physician to a practice. We examined trends in prostate cancer treatment between networks performing SBRT or not using chi-squared tests and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

There were 35,972 patients who received treatment for prostate cancer at 234 physician networks. Of these patients, 30,635 were treated in a non-SBRT network (n = 190), while 5337 received treatment in a SBRT network (n = 44). Patients who received care in an SBRT network were more likely to live in metropolitan areas ≥1 million (70% vs 46%, P <.001), have a higher median income >$60,000 (62% vs 42%, P <.001), and live in the northeast (35% vs 12%) or west (40% vs 38%, P <.001) compared to non-SBRT networks. In SBRT networks, more patients received IMRT (31% vs 23%), and fewer patients received prostatectomy (16% vs 23%) or active surveillance (15% vs 19%) compared to non-SBRT networks. Black men were 45% less likely to receive SBRT (OR=0.55, CI: 0.36-0.85) compared to White men.

CONCLUSION

SBRT utilization is increasing relative to other prostate cancer treatments. Prostate cancer treatment mix is different in networks that offer SBRT, and SBRT is less available to some patient groups, raising concern for novel treatment inequity.

Biological and clinical significance of radiomics features obtained from magnetic resonance imaging preceding pre-carbon ion radiotherapy in prostate cancer based on radiometabolomics

Introduction

We aimed to investigate the feasibility of metabolomics to explain the underlying biological implications of radiomics features obtained from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) preceding carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) in patients with prostate cancer and to further explore the clinical significance of radiomics features on the prognosis of patients, based on their biochemical recurrence (BCR) status.

Methods

Metabolomic results obtained using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry of urine samples, combined with pre-RT radiomic features extracted from MRI images, were evaluated to investigate their biological significance. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was subsequently conducted to examine the correlation between these biological implications and clinical BCR status. Statistical and metabolic pathway analyses were performed using MetaboAnalyst and R software.

Results

Correlation analysis revealed that methionine alteration extent was significantly related to four radiomic features (Contrast, Difference Variance, Small Dependence High Gray Level Emphasis, and Mean Absolute Deviation), which were significantly correlated with BCR status. The area under the curve (AUC) for BCR prediction of these four radiomic features ranged from 0.704 to 0.769, suggesting that the higher the value of these four radiomic features, the greater the decrease in methionine levels after CIRT and the lower the probability of BCR. Pre-CIRT MRI radiomic features were associated with CIRT-suppressed metabolites.

Discussion

These radiomic features can be used to predict the alteration in the amplitude of methionine after CIRT and the BCR status, which may contribute to the optimization of the CIRT strategy and deepen the understanding of PCa.

Dose-escalated radiotherapy for clinically localized and locally advanced prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, brachytherapy, active surveillance, hormonal therapy, and watchful waiting. For external beam radiation therapy, oncological outcomes may be expected to improve as the dose of radiotherapy (RT) increases. However, radiation-mediated side effects on surrounding critical organs may also increase.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of dose-escalated RT in comparison with conventional dose RT for curative treatment of clinically localized and locally advanced prostate cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases including trial registries and other sources of grey literature, up until 20 July 2022. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-arm randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of definitive RT in men with clinically localized and locally advanced prostate adenocarcinoma. RT was dose-escalated RT (equivalent dose in 2 Gy [EQD2] ≥ 74 Gy, lesser than 2.5 Gy per fraction) versus conventional RT (EQD2 < 74 Gy, 1.8 Gy or 2.0 Gy per fraction). Two review authors independently classified studies for inclusion or exclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE guidance to rate the certainty of the evidence of RCTs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine studies with 5437 men in an analysis comparing dose-escalated RT versus conventional dose RT for the treatment of prostate cancer. The mean participant age ranged from 67 to 71 years. Almost all men had localized prostate cancer (cT1-3N0M0). Primary outcomes Dose-escalated RT probably results in little to no difference in time to death from prostate cancer (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.04; I2 = 0%; 8 studies; 5231 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Assuming a risk of death from prostate cancer of 4 per 1000 at 10 years in the conventional dose RT group, this corresponds to 1 fewer men per 1000 (1 fewer to 0 more) dying of prostate cancer in the dose-escalated RT group. Dose-escalated RT probably results in little to no difference in severe RT toxicity of grade 3 or higher late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.25; I2 = 0%; 8 studies; 4992 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); 23 more men per 1000 (10 more to 40 more) in the dose-escalated RT group assuming severe late GI toxicity as 32 per 1000 in the conventional dose RT group. Dose-escalated RT probably results in little to no difference in severe late genitourinary (GU) toxicity (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.63; I2 = 0%; 8 studies; 4962 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); 9 more men per 1000 (2 fewer to 23 more) in the dose-escalated RT group assuming severe late GU toxicity as 37 per 1000 in the conventional dose RT group. Secondary outcomes Dose-escalated RT probably results in little to no difference in time to death from any cause (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.09; I2 = 0%; 9 studies; 5437 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Assuming a risk of death from any cause of 101 per 1000 at 10 years in the conventional dose RT group, this corresponds to 2 fewer men per 1000 (11 fewer to 9 more) in the dose-escalated RT group dying of any cause. Dose-escalated RT probably results in little to no difference in time to distant metastasis (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.22; I2 = 45%; 7 studies; 3499 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Assuming a risk of distant metastasis of 29 per 1000 in the conventional dose RT group at 10 years, this corresponds to 5 fewer men per 1000 (12 fewer to 6 more) in the dose-escalated RT group developing distant metastases. Dose-escalated RT may increase overall late GI toxicity (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.55; I2 = 85%; 7 studies; 4328 participants; low-certainty evidence); 92 more men per 1000 (14 more to 188 more) in the dose-escalated RT group assuming overall late GI toxicity as 342 per 1000 in the conventional dose RT group. However, dose-escalated RT may result in little to no difference in overall late GU toxicity (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.29; I2 = 51%; 7 studies; 4298 participants; low-certainty evidence); 34 more men per 1000 (9 fewer to 82 more) in the dose-escalated RT group assuming overall late GU toxicity as 283 per 1000 in the conventional dose RT group. Based on long-term follow-up (up to 36 months), dose-escalated RT may result or probably results in little to no difference in the quality of life using 36-Item Short Form Survey; physical health (MD -3.9, 95% CI -12.78 to 4.98; 1 study; 300 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and mental health (MD -3.6, 95% CI -83.85 to 76.65; 1 study; 300 participants; low-certainty evidence), respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to conventional dose RT, dose-escalated RT probably results in little to no difference in time to death from prostate cancer, time to death from any cause, time to distant metastasis, and RT toxicities (except overall late GI toxicity). While dose-escalated RT may increase overall late GI toxicity, it may result, or probably results, in little to no difference in physical and mental quality of life, respectively.

Hyaluronic acid spacer in prostate cancer radiotherapy: dosimetric effects, spacer stability and long-term toxicity and PRO in a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Perirectal spacers may be beneficial to reduce rectal side effects from radiotherapy (RT). Here, we present the impact of a hyaluronic acid (HA) perirectal spacer on rectal dose as well as spacer stability, long-term gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity and patient-reported outcome (PRO).

METHODS

In this phase II study 81 patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer received transrectal injections with HA before external beam RT (78 Gy in 39 fractions). The HA spacer was evaluated with MRI four times; before (MR0) and after HA-injection (MR1), at the middle (MR2) and at the end (MR3) of RT. GI and GU toxicity was assessed by physician for up to five years according to the RTOG scale. PROs were collected using the Swedish National Prostate Cancer Registry and Prostate cancer symptom scale questionnaires.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in rectal V70% (54.6 Gy) and V90% (70.2 Gy) between MR0 and MR1, as well as between MR0 to MR2 and MR3. From MR1 to MR2/MR3, HA thickness decreased with 28%/32% and CTV-rectum space with 19%/17% in the middle level. The cumulative late grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity at 5 years was 5% and the proportion of PRO moderate or severe overall bowel problems at 5 years follow-up was 12%. Cumulative late grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity at 5 years was 12% and moderate or severe overall urinary problems at 5 years were 10%.

CONCLUSION

We show that the HA spacer reduced rectal dose and long-term toxicity.

Functional imaging-guided carbon ion irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost for localized prostate cancer: study protocol for a phase II randomized controlled clinical trial

Background

Due to the physical dose distribution characteristic of “Bragg peak” and the biological effect as a kind of high linear energy transfer ray, heavy ion therapy has advantages over conventional photon therapy in both efficacy and safety. Based on the evidence that prostate cancer lesions before treatment are the most common sites of tumor residual or recurrence after treatment, simultaneous integrated boost radiation therapy for prostate cancer has been proven to have the advantage of improving efficacy without increasing toxicities.

Methods

This study is a prospective phase II randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of functional imaging-guided carbon ion irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost for localized prostate cancer. One hundred and forty patients with localized prostate cancer will be randomized into carbon ion radiotherapy group and simultaneous integrated boost carbon ion radiotherapy group at a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint is to compare the incidence of treatment-related grade 2 and higher acute toxicities between the two groups according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) version 4.03. Secondary endpoints are late toxicities, biochemical relapse-free survival, overall survival, progression-free survival, and quality of life.

Discussion

This study adopts functional imaging-guided simultaneous integrated boost of carbon ion radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer, aiming to evaluate the differences in the severity and incidence of acute toxicities in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with carbon ion radiotherapy and simultaneous integrated boost carbon ion radiotherapy, in order to optimize the carbon ion treatment strategy for localized prostate cancer.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05010343. Retrospectively registered on 18 August 2021

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy versus Brachytherapy: Relative Strengths of Two Highly Efficient Options for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a valid option for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In randomized trials, it was found not inferior to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). It also compares favorably to brachytherapy (BT) even if level 1 evidence is lacking. However, BT remains a strong competitor, especially for young patients, as series with 10-15 years of median follow-up have proven its efficacy over time. SBRT will thus have to confirm its effectiveness over the long-term as well. SBRT has the advantage over BT of less acute urinary toxicity and, more hypothetically, less sexual impairment. Data are limited regarding SBRT for high-risk disease while BT, as a boost after EBRT, has demonstrated superiority against EBRT alone in randomized trials. However, patients should be informed of significant urinary toxicity. SBRT is under investigation in strategies of treatment intensification such as combination of EBRT plus SBRT boost or focal dose escalation to the tumor site within the prostate. Our goal was to examine respective levels of evidence of SBRT and BT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicity and quality of life, and to discuss strategies of treatment intensification.

Long-Term Outcomes of Dose-Escalated Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer

This retrospective study aimed to provide some clinical outcomes regarding effectiveness, toxicity, and quality of life in PCa patients treated with dose-escalated moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT). Patients received HFRT to a total dose of 66 Gy in 22 fractions (3 Gy/fraction) delivered via volume modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in 2011-2016. Treatment effectiveness was measured by the biochemical failure-free survival rate. Toxicity was assessed according to the criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and quality of life according to the criteria of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). In this regard, quality of life (QoL) was measured longitudinally, at a median of 2 and 5 years after RT. Enrolled patients had low-risk (40.2%), intermediate-risk (47.5%), and high-risk (12.3%) PCa. Median follow-up was 75 months. The biochemical failure-free survival rate was 94.2%. The incidence of acute grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity was 9.84% and 28.69%, respectively. The incidence rate of late grade 2 or higher GI and GU toxicity was 1.64% and 4.10%, respectively. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) scores showed that the majority of patients maintained their QoL. HFRT to 66 Gy with VMAT was associated with adequate biochemical control, low toxicity and good reported GU and GI quality of life.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer after rectal surgery: a single hospital long-term safety analysis

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy is a treatment option for prostate cancer patients after rectal surgery; however, the toxicity profile of radiotherapy for such patients has not been elucidated. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term toxicities and efficacy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with prostate cancer who had undergone rectal surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with prostate cancer after rectal surgery, who were definitively treated with IMRT between January 2000 and December 2019 at our institution. The planned total dose was 70-78 Gy in 2-Gy fraction, and the dose to the rectal anastomosis was limited to 70 Gy. The acute and late toxicities and survival outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 71 years, with a median follow-up of 86 months. The median time from surgery to IMRT was 93.5 months. The median prostate-specific antigen value was 13.17 ng/ml. The median total dose was 74 Gy, and the median maximum dose to rectal anastomosis was 66.97 Gy. The 8-year biochemical recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 70.2% and 90.0%, respectively. The incidence rates of grade 2 acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 14.3% and 0%, respectively. No grade ≥ 3 acute or late toxicities were observed when the rectal anastomosis dose was limited to 70 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis suggested that IMRT for patients with prostate cancer after rectal surgery may be safe and effective with rectal dose constraint of D_max < 70 Gy if more than 5 years have passed after surgery.

Simulation study using the spots deletion technique in spot scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancers

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects on the dose distribution and beam delivery time in spot scanning proton beam therapy (PBT) incorporating the spot deletion technique. A spot scanning plan was created for 30 patients with prostate cancer. The plan was then modified via two processes: Spots with lower weighting depositions were deleted (process A) and spots that were distant from the clinical target volume (CTV) were deleted (process B). The dose distribution to the organs at risk (OAR), the expanded CTV (exCTV), which was defined by a uniform expansion of the CTV by a radius of 5 mm, and the beam delivery time were compared among initial and modified plans. The V_{50Gy [relative biological effectiveness (RBE)]} to the rectum and bladder, and V_{60 Gy(RBE)} to the urethral bulb, inhomogeneity index (INH) of the exCTV showed a difference (P=1.1x10^-14, P=6.4x10^-14, P=2.7x10^-7, P=3.2x10^-17), although only changes by process B were significant. Modified plan by process B showed the V_{50 Gy(RBE)} to the rectum and bladder decreased by -2.4±1.6 and -2.3±1.4%, and the V_{60 Gy (RBE)} to the urethral bulb decreased by -15.9±19.4%. The INH of the exCTV increased by 0.05±0.03%. On the other hand, modification of the initial plan by process A did not affect the dose of the OAR, exCTV or beam delivery time. In spot scanning PBT, modification of the initial radiotherapy plan by systemic deletion of spots distant from the CTV could result in a dose reduction to the OAR.

Separation effect and development of implantation technique of hydrogel spacer for prostate cancers

PURPOSE

The purpose was to improve the placement of a hydrogel spacer in prostate cancer patients receiving radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred and sixty patients with prostate cancer were classified into 3 groups as follows: group 1, no spacer (n = 30); group 2, spacer placed using conventional technique (n = 100); and group 3, spacer placed using new technique (n = 30). When placing the spacer, the tip of the needle was placed at the middle of the prostate gland (group 2) or at a level corresponding to a cranial:caudal ratio of 6:4 and as close to the prostate gland as possible (group 3). The separation effect was then examined and compared among the groups.

RESULTS

The separation in group 2 was larger than that in group 1 from the base to the apex (4 mm) level of the prostate, while the separation in group 3 was larger than that in group 2 from the middle to the apex (4 mm) level of the prostate. The separation values for the middle to the apex, the spacer thickness from the apex (10 mm) level to the apex, the rectal exclusion from the middle to the apex, and the laterality were correlated with the 50 and 60 Gray relative biological effectiveness (Gy(RBE)) rectal dose (p = 4.1 × 10^-9 - 0.046). The separation vales were strongly correlated with the spacer thickness at the apex (10 mm) and apex (4 mm) (p = 1.1 × 10^-18 - 1.8 × 10^-17). The rectal volumes at 10-60 Gy(RBE) differed among the groups (p = 5.1 × 10^-19 - 5.4 × 10^-3). The rectal volumes in group 2 were smaller than those in group 1 at all dose levels, while those in group 3 were smaller than those in group 2 at dose levels of 30-50 Gy(RBE).

CONCLUSIONS

The separation, spacer thickness and rectal exclusion from the middle to the apex of the prostate and the laterality of the hydrogel spacer affected the reduction in the rectal dose. The rectal dose can be further reduced by implanting a spacer on the caudal and the prostate side.

[Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: Results, limits and prospects]

Still an emerging approach a few years ago, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has ranked as a valid option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Inherent properties of prostatic adenocarcinoma (low α/β) make it the perfect candidate. We propose a critical review of the literature trying to put results into perspective to identify their strengths, limits and axes of development. Technically sophisticated, the stereotactic irradiation of the prostate is well tolerated. Despite the fact that median follow-up of published data is still limited, ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy seems very efficient for the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancers. Data seem satisfying for high-risk cancers as well. New developments are being studied with a main interest in treatment intensification for unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk cancers. Advantage is taken of the sharp dose gradient of stereotactic radiotherapy to offer safe reirradiation to patients with local recurrence in a previously irradiated area.

Degarelix as a neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for acute urinary tract toxicity associated with external beam radiotherapy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

In prostate cancer treatment, lower urinary tract symptoms significantly improve with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antagonists use compared with agonists. However, it is unclear whether luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antagonists can decrease acute urinary tract toxicity during external beam radiotherapy. This study aimed to assess whether luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antagonists used as neoadjuvant therapy reduced acute urinary tract toxicity during external beam radiotherapy compared with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists.

METHODS

The study included 78 patients who underwent intensity-modulated radiation therapy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer between April 2013 and January 2020. Irradiation was initiated after 3-6 months of neoadjuvant therapy. Androgen deprivation therapy was given to the intermediate-risk group for 6 months and the high-risk group for 2-3 years. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity grading scale was used to evaluate the urinary tract system toxicity. Relevant clinical factors were used in matching patients based on propensity scores to enable comparison between the groups.

RESULTS

Each group had 27 matched patients. There was no reduction in urinary tract toxicity with the use of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormon antagonists (P = 0.624). For patients with an International Prostate Symptom Score of ≥11 at the start of treatment, 18 patients in each group were matched. Significantly lower scores were observed in the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormon antagonist group (P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormon antagonists may reduce acute urinary tract toxicity during prostate cancer external beam radiotherapy compared with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormon agonists, in particular in patients with moderate to severe symptoms at the start of treatment.

Laparoscopic closure of the pouch of Douglas by a peritoneal running suture. A minimally invasive and prosthetic-free technique to prevent excessive dose delivery to the small bowel during pelvic irradiation for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Prostate radiotherapy relies on the delivery of high doses that can be obstructed when a small bowel loop descends in the pelvis. We present a laparoscopic minimally invasive prosthetic-free technique closing the Douglas' pouch with a peritoneal running suture to cordon off the bowel from the pelvis and hence allow optimal irradiation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prostate cancer patients referred for radiotherapy and whose planning-CT revealed a bowel loop trapped in the pelvis were proposed the procedure, followed by a new planning-CT. This proof-of-concept study reports postoperative follow-up and dosimetric benefits.

RESULTS

The procedure was performed in ten patients (2016-2020) as a same-day surgery for nine. Median operative time was 34 min (range 22-50) and no relevant intraoperative complication occurred. The third patient of the series presented a small bowel hernia through the peritoneal suture at the 15th postoperative day requiring a laparotomic desincarceration without major consequences. Regarding the small bowel, median D1cc (dose to 1 cc) was 65.5 Gy and 55.5 Gy (p = 0.005) before and after procedure. Median V60 (volume receiving ≥60 Gy) was 10.2 cc and 0.0 cc (p = 0.005). In the immediate vicinity of the small bowel (5 mm), median D1cc was 68.3 Gy and 57.7 Gy (p = 0.005). Radiotherapy was safely delivered to all patients.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic closure of the Douglas' pouch by a peritoneal suture is an efficient technique to cordon off inconvenient ectopic small bowel loops. It prevents excessive bowel irradiation and hence facilitates curative prostate radiotherapy. The technique could be applied to other pelvic malignancies.

Androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: A randomised phase III trial

BACKGROUND

The role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with radiotherapy (RT) in intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC) remains controversial, particularly in patients receiving dose-escalated RT (DERT). We compared outcomes between patients with IRPC treated with ADT and two different doses of RT vs. RT alone.

METHODS

From December 2000 to September 2010, 600 patients with IRPC were randomised to a three-arm trial consisting of 6 months of ADT plus RT 70 Gy (ADT + RT70) vs. ADT plus a DERT of 76 Gy (ADT + DERT76) vs. DERT of 76 Gy alone (DERT76). Primary end-point was biochemical failure (BF), and secondary end-points were overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RT toxicity was assessed by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria.

FINDINGS

With a median follow-up of 11.3 years (interquartile range: 10.9-11.7), patients receiving DERT76 alone, compared with patients receiving ADT + RT70 and ADT + DERT76, had higher rates of BF (32%, 18% and 14%, respectively, p < 0.001), higher rates of prostate cancer progression (12%, 4.5% and 3.3%, respectively, p = 0.001) and more deaths due to prostate cancer (6.5%, 3.0% and 1.5%, respectively, p = 0.03) with no significant difference seen between ADT + RT70 and ADT + DERT76. There was no significant difference in OS between the 3 arms. A higher dose of RT (76 Gy) increased late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity grade ≥ II compared with lower dose (70 Gy) (16% vs 5.3%, p < 0.001) with no statistical difference for late genitourinary toxicity.

INTERPRETATION

In IRPC, the addition of 6 months of ADT to RT70 or DERT76 significantly improves BF and appears to decrease the risk of death from prostate cancer compared with DERT76 alone with no difference in OS. In the setting of IRPC, ADT plus RT 70 Gy yields effective disease control with a better GI toxicity profile. Clinicaltrials.gov#NCT00223145.

Patterns of practice of androgen deprivation therapy combined to radiotherapy in favorable and unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer. Results of The PROACT Survey from the French GETUG Radiation Oncology group

PURPOSE

The intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) group is heterogeneous in terms of prognosis. For unfavorable or favorable IR PCa treated by radiotherapy, the optimal strategy remains to be defined. In routine practice, the physician's decision to propose hormonal therapy (HT) is controversial. The PROACT survey aimed to evaluate pattern and preferences of daily practice in France in this IR population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A web questionnaire was distributed to French radiotherapy members of 91 centers of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Uro-Genitales (GETUG). The questionnaire included four sections concerning: (i) the specialists who prescribe treatments and multidisciplinary decisions (MTD) validation; (ii) the definition of IR subsets of patients; (iii) radiotherapy parameters; (iv) the pattern of practice regarding cardiovascular (CV) and (iv) metabolic evaluation. A descriptive presentation of the results was used.

RESULTS

Among the 82 responses (90% of the centers), HT schedules and irradiation techniques were validated by specific board meetings in 54% and 45% of the centers, respectively. Three-fourths (76%) of the centers identified a subset of IR patients for a dedicated strategy. The majority of centers consider PSA>15 (77%) and/or Gleason 7 (4+3) (87%) for an unfavorable IR definition. Overall, 41% of the centers performed systematically a CV evaluation before HT prescription while 61% consider only CV history/status in defining the type of HT. LHRH agonists are more frequently prescribed in both favorable (70%) and unfavorable (98%) IR patients. Finally, weight (80%), metabolic profile (70%) and CV status (77%) of patients are considered for follow-up under HT.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first survey on HT practice in IR PCa. The PROACT survey indicates that three-quarters of the respondents identify subsets of IR-patients in tailoring therapy. The CV status of the patient is considered in guiding the HT decision, its duration and type of drug.

Moderately HRT vs. CRT for localized prostate cancer using image-guided VMAT with SIB: evaluation of acute and late toxicities

Purpose

This retrospective study aims at investigating the effects of moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (HRT) on acute and late toxicities as well as on early biochemical control and therapeutic efficiency compared to conventional radiation therapy (CRT) in prostate cancer.

Patients and methods

We analyzed 55 HRT patients irradiated with the total dose of 60 Gy in 20 fractions delivered over 4 weeks. These patients were compared to a control group of 55 patients who received CRT with a total of <78 Gy in 37–39 fractions delivered over circa 8 weeks. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) was conducted using daily image-guided (cone beam CT) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and a simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) for both groups to protect the rectum. Acute toxicities were evaluated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5, whereas chronic toxicities were assessed in accordance with LENT-SOMA. Patient traits were compared by implementing t‑tests and Wilcoxon–Whitney tests for continuous variables, whereas discrete characteristics were evaluated by applying two-tailed Fisher’s exact tests. In addition, we calculated average treatment effects (ATE). Thereby, propensity score matching (PSM) based on nearest-neighbor matching considering age, comorbidities, and risk stratification as covariates was applied. The statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 14.2 (StataCorp LLC, TX, USA).

Results

As confirmed by the descriptive tests, the ATE revealed that the intensity and occurrence of urinary frequency (p = 0.034) and proctitis (p = 0.027) significantly decreased for the HRT group, whereas all other acute toxicities did not differ significantly between the HRT and CRT groups. For late toxicities, neither statistical tests nor ATE estimation showed significant differences. Also, no significant difference was found regarding the decrease in prostate specific antigen (PSA) after a median follow-up of 13 months (range 2–28 months), which indicates biochemical freedom from progression.

Conclusion

HRT offers several medical and economic advantages and should therefore be considered as a useful alternative to CRT.

Influence of the technique and comorbidities in hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To analyze the differences in toxicity and biochemical relapse-free survival with hypofractionated radiotherapy with three-dimensional radiotherapy (3D-CRT) or volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer taking into account comorbidity measured using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

METHODS

From January 2011 to June 2016, 451 patients with prostate cancer were treated with 60 Gy (20 daily fractions). VMAT or 3D-CRT was used. Distribution by stage: 17% low-risk, 27.2% intermediate-risk; 39.2% high-risk, 16.6% very high-risk. Mean CCI was 3.4.

RESULTS

With a median follow up of 51 months, most patients did not experience any degree of acute GI toxicity (80.9%) compared to 19.1%, who experienced some degree, mainly G-I /II. In the multivariate analysis, only technique was associated with acute GI toxicity ≥ G2. Patients treated with VMAT had greater acute GI toxicity compared with those who received 3D-CRT (23.9% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.005). With respect to acute GU toxicity, 72.7% of patients experienced some degree, fundamentally G-I/II. Neither age, CCI, nor androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were associated with greater toxicity. Overall survival at 2, 5 and 7 years was 97%, 88% and 83% respectively. The only factor with statistical significance was CCI, with a greater number of events in individuals with a CCI ≥ 4 (p < 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer is an effective, well-tolerated treatment even for elderly patients with no associated comorbidity. Longer follow up is needed in order to report data on late toxicity.

Hypofractionation for clinically localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Using hypofractionation (fewer, larger doses of daily radiation) to treat localized prostate cancer may improve convenience and resource use. For hypofractionation to be feasible, it must be at least as effective for cancer-related outcomes and have comparable toxicity and quality of life outcomes as conventionally fractionated radiation therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy compared to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy for men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and trials registries from 1946 to 15 March 2019 with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors. Searches were not limited by language or publication status. We reran all searches within three months (15th March 2019) prior to publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled comparisons which included men with clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma where hypofractionated radiation therapy (external beam radiation therapy) to the prostate using hypofractionation (greater than 2 Gy per fraction) compared with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy to the prostate delivered using standard fractionation (1.8 Gy to 2 Gy per fraction).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used Review Manager 5 for data analysis and meta-analysis. We used the inverse variance method and random-effects model for data synthesis of time-to-event data with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported. For dichotomous data, we used the Mantel-Haenzel method and random-effects model to present risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI. We used GRADE to assess evidence quality for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies with 8278 men in our analysis comparing hypofractionation with conventional fractionation to treat prostate cancer.Primary outcomesHypofractionation may result in little or no difference in prostate cancer-specific survival [PC-SS] (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.39; studies = 8, participants = 7946; median follow-up 72 months; low-certainty evidence). For men in the intermediate-risk group undergoing conventional fractionation this corresponds to 976 per 1000 men alive after 6 years and 0 more (44 fewer to 18 more) alive per 1000 men undergoing hypofractionation.We are uncertain about the effect of hypofractionation on late radiation therapy gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.78; studies = 4, participants = 3843; very low-certainty evidence).Hypofractionation probably results in little or no difference to late radiation therapy genitourinary (GU) toxicity (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18; studies = 4, participants = 3843; moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 262 per 1000 late GU radiation therapy toxicity events with conventional fractionation and 13 more (18 fewer to 47 more) per 1000 men when undergoing hypofractionation.Secondary outcomesHypofractionation results in little or no difference in overall survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07; 10 studies, 8243 participants; high-certainty evidence). For men in the intermediate-risk group undergoing conventional fractionation this corresponds to 869 per 1000 men alive after 6 years and 17 fewer (54 fewer to 17 more) participants alive per 1000 men when undergoing hypofractionation.Hypofractionation may result in little to no difference in metastasis-free survival (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.76; 5 studies, 4985 participants; low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 981 men per 1000 men metastasis-free at 6 years when undergoing conventional fractionation and 5 more (58 fewer to 19 more) metastasis-free per 1000 when undergoing hypofractionation.Hypofractionation likely results in a small, possibly unimportant reduction in biochemical recurrence-free survival based on Phoenix criteria (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.13; studies = 5, participants = 2889; median follow-up 90 months to 108 months; moderate-certainty evidence). In men of the intermediate-risk group, this corresponds to 804 biochemical-recurrence free men per 1000 participants at six years with conventional fractionation and 42 fewer (134 fewer to 37 more) recurrence-free men per 1000 participants with hypofractionationHypofractionation likely results in little to no difference to acute GU radiation therapy toxicity (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.11; 4 studies, 4174 participants at 12 to 18 weeks' follow-up; moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 360 episodes of toxicity per 1000 participants with conventional fractionation and 11 more (18 fewer to 40 more) per 1000 when undergoing hypofractionation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that moderate hypofractionation (up to a fraction size of 3.4 Gy) results in similar oncologic outcomes in terms of disease-specific, metastasis-free and overall survival. There appears to be little to no increase in both acute and late toxicity.

Particle therapy for prostate cancer: The past, present and future

Although prostate cancer control using radiotherapy is dose‐dependent, dose–volume effects on late toxicities in organs at risk, such as the rectum and bladder, have been observed. Both protons and carbon ions offer advantageous physical properties for radiotherapy, and create favorable dose distributions using fewer portals compared with photon‐based radiotherapy. Thus, particle beam therapy using protons and carbon ions theoretically seems suitable for dose escalation and reduced risk of toxicity. However, it is difficult to evaluate the superiority of particle beam radiotherapy over photon beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer, as no clinical trials have directly compared the outcomes between the two types of therapy due to the limited number of facilities using particle beam therapy. The Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology organized a joint effort among research groups to establish standardized treatment policies and indications for particle beam therapy according to disease, and multicenter prospective studies have been planned for several common cancers. Clinical trials of proton beam therapy for intermediate‐risk prostate cancer and carbon‐ion therapy for high‐risk prostate cancer have already begun. As particle beam therapy for prostate cancer is covered by the Japanese national health insurance system as of April 2018, and the number of facilities practicing particle beam therapy has increased recently, the number of prostate cancer patients treated with particle beam therapy in Japan is expected to increase drastically. Here, we review the results from studies of particle beam therapy for prostate cancer and discuss future developments in this field.

Dose escalation for prostate stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR): Late outcomes from two prospective clinical trials

PURPOSE

Optimal prostate SABR dose-fractionation is unknown. This study compares long-term outcomes from two prospective trials.

METHODS

Study1 patients had low-risk PCa and received 35 Gy/5. Study2 patients had low/intermediate-risk PCa and received 40 Gy/5. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined as nadir + 2.

RESULTS

114 patients were included (study1, n = 84; study2, n = 30). Median follow-up was 9.6 years and 6.9 years. Median nPSA was 0.4 and 0.1 ng/ml. Nine patients had BF (8 in study1, 1 in study2); two were managed with ADT and four had local salvage. The BF rate was 2.5% and 12.8% at 5 and 10 years for study1 and 3.3% at 5 years for study 2. BF probability was 0% if PSA <0.4 at 4 years, and 20.5% at 10 years if PSA ≥0.4 (p = 0.02). Nine patients died, none of PCa. No patient has metastases or castrate-resistance. At 10 years, OS and CSS were 90.4% (p = 0.25) and 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-escalated prostate SABR was associated with lower nPSAs but no difference in BF, OS, CSS or MFS. PSA <0.4 at 4 years was a predictor of biochemical control. Half of patients with BF were successfully salvaged. Given that this is a favorable-risk cohort, longer follow-up will be needed to see if the lower nPSA translates into lower BF rates.

Phase 1/2 Dose-Escalation Study of the Use of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy to Treat the Prostate and Pelvic Nodes in Patients With Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the feasibility of dose escalation and hypofractionation of pelvic lymph node intensity modulated radiation therapy (PLN-IMRT) in prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In a phase 1/2 study, patients with advanced localized PCa were sequentially treated with 70 to 74 Gy to the prostate and dose-escalating PLN-IMRT at doses of 50 Gy (cohort 1), 55 Gy (cohort 2), and 60 Gy (cohort 3) in 35 to 37 fractions. Two hypofractionated cohorts received 60 Gy to the prostate and 47 Gy to PLN in 20 fractions over 4 weeks (cohort 4) and 5 weeks (cohort 5). All patients received long-course androgen deprivation therapy. Primary outcome was late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity at 2 years after radiation therapy for all cohorts. Secondary outcomes were acute and late toxicity using other clinician/patient-reported instruments and treatment efficacy.

RESULTS

Between August 9, 2000, and June 9, 2010, 447 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 90 months. The 2-year rates of grade 2+ bowel/bladder toxicity were as follows: cohort 1, 8.3%/4.2% (95% confidence interval 2.2%-29.4%/0.6%-26.1%); cohort 2, 8.9%/5.9% (4.1%-18.7%/2.3%-15.0%); cohort 3, 13.2%/2.9% (8.6%-20.2%/1.1%-7.7%); cohort 4, 16.4%/4.8% (9.2%-28.4%/1.6%-14.3%); cohort 5, 12.2%/7.3% (7.6%-19.5%/3.9%-13.6%). Prevalence of bowel and bladder toxicity seemed to be stable over time. Other scales mirrored these results. The biochemical/clinical failure-free rate was 71% (66%-75%) at 5 years for the whole group, with pelvic lymph node control in 94% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the safety and tolerability of PLN-IMRT. Ongoing and planned phase 3 studies will need to demonstrate an increase in efficacy using PLN-IMRT to offset the small increase in bowel side effects compared with prostate-only IMRT.

Significance of prostate-specific antigen kinetics after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy with androgen deprivation therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the relationship between biochemical recurrence and post-radiation prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics in patients with localized prostate cancer treated by radiotherapy with various durations of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

METHODS

We reviewed our single-institution, retrospectively maintained data of 144 patients with T1c-T3N0M0 prostate cancer who underwent three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) between December 2005 and December 2015 and 113 patients were fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In this cohort, 3D-CRT was delivered with a dose in the range from 70.0 to 72.0 Gy with ADT. All patients received ADT as concurrent regimens. Biochemical recurrence was defined on the basis of the following: "PSA nadir + 2.0 ng/ml or the clinical judgement of attending physicians". Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Cox regression analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 54.0 months. The median duration of ADT was 17 months (interquartile range, 10-24 months). There was a trend toward statistical significant correlation between post-radiation PSA decline rate of ≥ 90% and PSA recurrence (p = 0.056). The same correlation could be observed in D'Amico high-risk patients (p = 0.036). However, it was not observed between PSA nadir and PSA recurrence (p = 0.40) in univariate analysis. Furthermore, multivariate analysis showed that post-radiation PSA decline rate of ≥ 90% was a significant predictor of biochemical recurrence in patients who received radiotherapy with various durations of ADT (p = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-radiation PSA decline rate of ≥ 90% was a prognostic factor for biochemical recurrence in localized prostate cancer patients received 3D-CRT with various durations of ADT.

Clinical outcome and toxicity evaluation of simultaneous integrated boost pelvic IMRT/VMAT at different dose levels combined with androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer patients

Background

The role of dose escalation in patients receiving long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is still a controversial issue. The aim of the current study was to evaluate whether dose escalation for ≥76–80 Gy had any advantage in terms of biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), or overall survival outcomes over the dose levels from 70 to <76 Gy.

Patients and methods

The study included a cohort of 24 patients classified with high- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer. All patients received ADT, starting at 4–6 months before radiation therapy and continued for a total period of 12–24 months in high-risk patients. The treatment plan was given in two phases. In the first phase, the nodal planning target volume (PTV) and the prostate PTV received 48.6 and 54 Gy, respectively, over 27 fractions. The treatment was applied through intensity-modulated radiation therapy or volumetric modulated arc therapy with a simultaneous integrated boost technique.

Results

More than half of the patients were in T3–T4 stage, 79.1% of the patients were in the high-risk category, and all patients received ADT. The rate of acute grade II gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities in all patients were 41.7% and 62.5%, respectively. The rate of freedom from grade II rectal toxicity at 2 years was 89% and 83% for patients treated with dose levels <76 and ≥76 Gy, respectively. The rate of BDFS at 2 years was 90% and 85% for doses <76 and ≥76 Gy, respectively. The DMFS at 2 years was 100% and 76% for dose levels <76 and ≥76 Gy, respectively.

Conclusion

In the current study, there were no significant differences in the BDFS and DMFS between patients treated with a dose of <76 and ≥76 Gy, including elective pelvic lymph nodes irradiation combined with ADT.

Targeting MicroRNAs in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy

Radiotherapy is one of the most important treatment options for localized early-stage or advanced-stage prostate cancer (CaP). Radioresistance (relapse after radiotherapy) is a major challenge for the current radiotherapy. There is great interest in investigating mechanisms of radioresistance and developing novel treatment strategies to overcome radioresistance. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small, non-coding RNAs that regulate gene expression at the post-transcriptional level, participating in numerous physiological and pathological processes including cancer invasion, progression, metastasis and therapeutic resistance. Emerging evidence indicates that miRNAs play a critical role in the modulation of key cellular pathways that mediate response to radiation, influencing the radiosensitivity of the cancer cells through interplaying with other biological processes such as cell cycle checkpoints, apoptosis, autophagy, epithelial-mesenchymal transition and cancer stem cells. Here, we summarize several important miRNAs in CaP radiation response and then discuss the regulation of the major signalling pathways and biological processes by miRNAs in CaP radiotherapy. Finally, we emphasize on microRNAs as potential predictive biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets to improve CaP radiosensitivity.

Evidenced-based clinical practice guideline for prostate cancer (summary: Japanese Urological Association, 2016 edition)

These guidelines cover a wide range of topics from prostate cancer epidemiology to palliative care. Questions arising in daily clinical practice have been extracted and formulated as clinical questions. In the 4 years since the previous edition, there have been major changes - for example, robot-assisted prostatectomy has rapidly come into widespread use, and new hormones and anticancer drugs have been developed for castration-resistant prostate cancer. In response to these developments, the number of fields included in this guideline was increased from 11 in the 2012 edition to 16, and the number of clinical questions was increased from 63 to 70. The number of papers identified in searches of the existing literature increased from 4662 in the first edition, published in 2006, to 10 490 in the 2012 edition. The number of references has reached 29 448 just during this review period, indicating the exponential increase in research on the topic of prostate cancer. Clinical answers have been prepared based on the latest evidence. Recommendation grades for the clinical answers were determined by radiologists, pathologists, and other specialists in addition to urologists in order to reflect the recent advances and diversity of prostate cancer treatment. Here, we present a short English version of the original guideline, and overview its key clinical issues.

Effects of definitive and salvage radiotherapy on the distribution of lymphocyte subpopulations in prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy (RT) is an established treatment for patients with primary and recurrent prostate cancer. Herein, the effects of definitive and salvage RT on the composition of lymphocyte subpopulations were investigated in patients with prostate cancer to study potential immune effects.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 33 prostate cancer patients were treated with definitive (n = 10) or salvage RT (n = 23) after biochemical relapse. The absolute number of lymphocytes and the distribution of lymphocyte subpopulations were analyzed by multiparameter flow cytometry before RT, at the end of RT, and in the follow-up period.

RESULTS

Absolute lymphocyte counts decreased significantly after RT in both patient groups and a significant drop was observed in the percentage of B cells directly after RT from 10.1 ± 1.3 to 6.0 ± 0.7% in patients with definitive RT and from 9.2 ± 0.8 to 5.8 ± 0.7% in patients with salvage RT. In contrast, the percentages of T and natural killer (NK) cells remained unaltered directly after RT in both patient groups. However, 1 year after RT, the percentage of CD3⁺ T cells was significantly lower in patients with definitive and salvage RT. The percentage of regulatory T cells was slightly upregulated in primary prostate cancer patients after definitive RT, but not after salvage RT.

CONCLUSION

Definitive and salvage RT exert similar effects on the composition of lymphocyte subpopulations in prostate cancer patients. Total lymphocyte counts are lower in both patient groups compared to healthy controls and further decreased after RT. B cells are more sensitive to definitive and salvage RT than T and NK cells.

Comparison of different contouring definitions of the rectum as organ at risk (OAR) and dose-volume parameters predicting rectal inflammation in radiotherapy of prostate cancer: which definition to use?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this retrospective planning study was to find a contouring definition for the rectum as an organ at risk (OAR) in curative three-dimensional external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) with a predictive correlation between the dose-volume histogram (DVH) and rectal toxicity.

METHODS

In a pre-study, the planning CT scans of 23 patients with PCa receiving definitive EBRT were analyzed. The rectum was contoured according to 13 different definitions, and the dose distribution was correlated with the respective rectal volumes by generating DVH curves. Three definitions were identified to represent the most distinct differences in the shapes of the DVH curves: one anatomical definition recommended by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and two functional definitions based on the target volume. In the main study, the correlation between different relative DVH parameters derived from these three contouring definitions and the occurrence of rectal toxicity during and after EBRT was studied in two consecutive collectives. The first cohort consisted of 97 patients receiving primary curative EBRT and the second cohort consisted of 66 patients treated for biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy. Rectal toxicity was investigated by clinical investigation and scored according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Candidate parameters were the volume of the rectum, mean dose, maximal dose, volume receiving at least 60 Gy (V₆₀), area under the DVH curve up to 25 Gy and area under the DVH curve up to 75 Gy in dependence of each chosen rectum definition. Multivariable logistic regression considered other clinical factors such as pelvine lymphatics vs local target volume, diabetes, prior rectal surgery, anticoagulation or haemorrhoids too.

RESULTS

In Cohort 1 (primary EBRT), the mean rectal volumes for definitions "RTOG", planning target volume "(PTV)-based" and "PTV-linked" were 100 cm³ [standard deviation (SD) 43 cm³], 60 cm³ (SD 26 cm³) and 74 cm³ (SD 31 cm³), respectively (p < 0.01; analysis of variance). The mean rectal doses according to these definitions were 35 Gy (SD 8 Gy), 48 Gy (SD 4 Gy) and 44 Gy (SD 5 Gy) (p < 0.01). In Cohort 2 (salvage EBRT), the mean rectal volumes were 114 cm³ (SD 47 cm³), 64 cm³ (SD 26 cm³) and 81 cm³ (SD 30 cm³) (p < 0.01) and the mean doses received by the rectum were 36 Gy (SD 8 Gy), 49 Gy (SD 5 Gy) and 44 Gy (SD 5 Gy) (p < 0.01). Acute or subacute rectal inflammation occurred in 69 (71.9%) patients in Cohort 1 and in 43 (70.5%) in Cohort 2. We did not find a correlation between all investigated DVH parameters and rectal toxicity, irrespective of the investigated definition. By adding additional variables in multivariate analysis, the predictive ability was substantially improved. Still, there was essentially no difference in the probability of predicting rectal inflammation occurrence between the tested contouring definitions.

CONCLUSION

The RTOG anatomy-based recommendations are questionable in comparison with functional definitions, as they result in higher variances in several relative DVH parameters. Moreover, the anatomy-based definition is no better and no worse in the predictive value concerning clinical end points. Advances in knowledge: Functional definitions for the rectum as OAR are easier to apply, faster to contour, have smaller variances and do not offer less information than the anatomy-based RTOG definition.

Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer might have high radiation-fraction sensitivity that would give a therapeutic advantage to hypofractionated treatment. We present a pre-planned analysis of the efficacy and side-effects of a randomised trial comparing conventional and hypofractionated radiotherapy after 5 years follow-up.

METHODS

CHHiP is a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial that recruited men with localised prostate cancer (pT1b-T3aN0M0). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to conventional (74 Gy delivered in 37 fractions over 7·4 weeks) or one of two hypofractionated schedules (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3·8 weeks) all delivered with intensity-modulated techniques. Most patients were given radiotherapy with 3-6 months of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen suppression. Randomisation was by computer-generated random permuted blocks, stratified by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group and radiotherapy treatment centre, and treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure; the critical hazard ratio (HR) for non-inferiority was 1·208. Analysis was by intention to treat. Long-term follow-up continues. The CHHiP trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN97182923.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 18, 2002, and June 17, 2011, 3216 men were enrolled from 71 centres and randomly assigned (74 Gy group, 1065 patients; 60 Gy group, 1074 patients; 57 Gy group, 1077 patients). Median follow-up was 62·4 months (IQR 53·9-77·0). The proportion of patients who were biochemical or clinical failure free at 5 years was 88·3% (95% CI 86·0-90·2) in the 74 Gy group, 90·6% (88·5-92·3) in the 60 Gy group, and 85·9% (83·4-88·0) in the 57 Gy group. 60 Gy was non-inferior to 74 Gy (HR 0·84 [90% CI 0·68-1·03], pNI=0·0018) but non-inferiority could not be claimed for 57 Gy compared with 74 Gy (HR 1·20 [0·99-1·46], pNI=0·48). Long-term side-effects were similar in the hypofractionated groups compared with the conventional group. There were no significant differences in either the proportion or cumulative incidence of side-effects 5 years after treatment using three clinician-reported as well as patient-reported outcome measures. The estimated cumulative 5 year incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or worse bowel and bladder adverse events was 13·7% (111 events) and 9·1% (66 events) in the 74 Gy group, 11·9% (105 events) and 11·7% (88 events) in the 60 Gy group, 11·3% (95 events) and 6·6% (57 events) in the 57 Gy group, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Hypofractionated radiotherapy using 60 Gy in 20 fractions is non-inferior to conventional fractionation using 74 Gy in 37 fractions and is recommended as a new standard of care for external-beam radiotherapy of localised prostate cancer.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Can we avoid high levels of dose escalation for high-risk prostate cancer in the setting of androgen deprivation?

Aim

Both dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (DE-EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. However, there is little evidence specifically evaluating DE-EBRT for patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving ADT, particularly for EBRT doses >74 Gy. We aimed to determine whether DE-EBRT >74 Gy improves outcomes for patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving long-term ADT.

Patients and methods

Patients with high-risk prostate cancer were treated on an institutional protocol prescribing 3–6 months neoadjuvant ADT and DE-EBRT, followed by 2 years of adjuvant ADT. Between 2006 and 2012, EBRT doses were escalated from 74 Gy to 76 Gy and then to 78 Gy. We interrogated our electronic medical record to identify these patients and analyzed our results by comparing dose levels.

Results

In all, 479 patients were treated with a 68-month median follow-up. The 5-year biochemical disease-free survivals for the 74 Gy, 76 Gy, and 78 Gy groups were 87.8%, 86.9%, and 91.6%, respectively. The metastasis-free survivals were 95.5%, 94.5%, and 93.9%, respectively, and the prostate cancer-specific survivals were 100%, 94.4%, and 98.1%, respectively. Dose escalation had no impact on any outcome in either univariate or multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

There was no benefit of DE-EBRT >74 Gy in our cohort of high-risk prostate patients treated with long-term ADT. As dose escalation has higher risks of radiotherapy-induced toxicity, it may be feasible to omit dose escalation beyond 74 Gy in this group of patients. Randomized studies evaluating dose escalation for high-risk patients receiving ADT should be considered.

Can we avoid dose escalation for intermediate-risk prostate cancer in the setting of short-course neoadjuvant androgen deprivation?

Background

Both dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (DE-EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve the outcomes in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Despite this, there are only few reports evaluating DE-EBRT for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer receiving neoadjuvant ADT, and virtually no studies investigating dose escalation >74 Gy in this setting. We aimed to determine whether DE-EBRT >74 Gy improved the outcomes for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received neoadjuvant ADT.

Findings

In our institution, patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with neoadjuvant ADT and DE-EBRT, with doses sequentially increasing from 74 Gy to 76 Gy and then to 78 Gy between 2006 and 2012. We identified 435 patients treated with DE-EBRT and ADT, with a median follow-up of 70 months. For the 74 Gy, 76 Gy, and 78 Gy groups, five-year biochemical disease-free survival rates were 95.0%, 97.8%, and 95.3%, respectively; metastasis-free survival rates were 99.1%, 100.0%, and 98.6%, respectively; and prostate cancer-specific survival rate was 100% for all three dose levels. There was no significant benefit for dose escalation either on univariate or multivariate analysis for any outcome.

Conclusion

There was no benefit for DE-EBRT >74 Gy in our cohort of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Given the higher risks of toxicity associated with dose escalation, it may be feasible to omit dose escalation in this group of patients. Randomized studies evaluating dose de-escalation should be considered.

Ten-year outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for intermediate- and high-risk patients with T1c-T2N0M0 prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

We aimed to analyze the 10-year outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (HT) for patients with intermediate- and high-risk T1c-T2N0M0 prostate cancer.

METHODS

Fifty patients with T1c-T2N0M0 prostate cancer, who were treated with high-dose IMRT combined with neoadjuvant HT, were evaluated. Of these patients, 19 and 31 were classified into the intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively. Neoadjuvant HT was administered over a median duration of 6 months; 74 and 78 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction were essentially delivered to the intermediate- and high-risk cases, respectively. Adjuvant HT was not administered to any of the patients after the completion of IMRT.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up period of 118 months, the 10-year prostate-specific antigen failure-free survival, prostate-specific antigen failure-free, salvage hormonal therapy-free, prostate cancer-specific survival, and overall survival rates were 70.2 %, 78.7 %, 89.2 %, 100 %, and 88.8 %, respectively. No grade 3 or higher acute or late toxicities were observed. The 10-year likelihoods of developing grade 2 late urinary and rectal toxicities were 13.7 % and 4.2 %, respectively. Compared with the outcomes of a cohort of historical controls who were locally irradiated with 70 Gy by three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, the prostate-specific antigen failure-free rate was significantly better in the IMRT groups (78.7 % vs. 53.4 % at 10 years; p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose IMRT combined with neoadjuvant HT achieved not only high prostate-specific antigen control, but also excellent survival outcomes with acceptable morbidities, for a Japanese cohort of intermediate- and high-risk T1c-T2N0M0 prostate cancer patients, and these results warrant further investigation.

Image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy of prostate cancer: Analysis of interfractional errors and acute toxicity

Purpose

The aim of the study was to estimate interfractional deviations in patient and prostate position, the impact of the frequency of online verification on the treatment margins, and to assess acute radiation reactions of high-dose external beam image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) of localized prostate cancer.

Patients and methods

IG-IMRT was performed by daily online verification of implanted fiducial prostate markers using a megavoltage electronic portal imaging device (EPID). A total of 1011 image-guided treatment fractions from 23 consecutive unselected prostate cancer patients were analyzed. The median total dose was 79.2 Gy (range 77.4–81.0 Gy). Acute radiation reactions were assessed weekly during radiotherapy using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v.4.03.

Results

A relevant combined patient set-up and prostate motion population random error of 4–5 mm was observed. Compared to daily IGRT, image guidance every other day required an expansion of the CTV–PTV (clinical target volume–planning target volume) margin of 8.1, 6.6, and 4.1 mm in the longitudinal, vertical, and lateral directions, thereby, increasing the PTV by approximately 30–40 %. No grade 3 or 4 acute radiation reactions were observed with daily IG-IMRT.

Conclusion

A high dose with surprisingly low acute toxicity can be applied with daily IG-IMRT using implanted fiducial prostate markers. Daily image guidance is clearly superior to image guidance every other fraction concerning adequate target coverage with minimal margins.

Outcomes of Ventral Onlay Buccal Mucosa Graft Urethroplasty in Patients after Radiotherapy

PURPOSE

We evaluated stricture-free survival and functional outcomes of buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty in patients with urethral stricture disease after radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed our urethroplasty database for patients with a radiotherapy history who underwent buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty between January 2009 and October 2013. We reviewed patient charts and the institutional, standardized, nonvalidated questionnaires administered to each patient postoperatively. Study end points included 1) the success rate, 2) continence status, 3) erectile function and 4) patient satisfaction postoperatively. Success was defined as stricture-free survival.

RESULTS

Of 38 men included in the study prostate cancer was the most common indication for radiotherapy in 35 (92.1%). External beam radiotherapy was performed in 24 cases (64.9%), brachytherapy was done in 8 (21.6%) and a combination of the 2 treatments was performed in 6 (13.5%). Strictures were in the bulbar/bulbomembranous urethra and had a median length of 3.0 cm (range 1.0 to 8.0). The overall success rate was 71.1% at a median followup of 26.5 months (range 1.0 to 50.0). Median time to stricture recurrence was 17.0 months (range 3.0 to 44.0). De novo urinary incontinence was observed in 4 patients (10.5%). Erectile function remained mostly unchanged compared to preoperative status. Study limitations include the small sample size and the lack of validated questionnaires.

CONCLUSIONS

At short-term to mid-term followup the success rate of ventral onlay buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty in patients with radiotherapy history seems acceptable. However, patients must be counseled about the increased risk of urinary incontinence. Longer followup is warranted to address long-term outcomes.