Moderate versus extreme hypofractionated radiotherapy: a toxicity comparative analysis in low- and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients

PSA reduction as predictor of biochemical relapse in low and favourable intermediate prostate cancer treated with radical radiotherapy

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy (RT) is standard treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, particularly PSA reduction (PSAr) after RT, are emerging as significant prognostic indicators for biochemical control. This retrospective multi-institutional study explores the correlation between PSAr and biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS). This retrospective multi-institutional study explores the correlation between PSAr and biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS).

METHODS

251 low-to-intermediate risk PCa patients treated with RT only were analyzed. Isoeffective RT schedules were: 39 fractions × 2 Gy, 28 × 2.55 Gy, 16 × 3.5 Gy, 5 × 7 Gy. Main objective was BRFS, defined as the time from PSA nadir (PSAn) to PSAn plus 2 ng/ml. PSAr was defined as the percentage of total PSA reduction from baseline. The optimal PSAr cut-off value was defined as 90%. Patients were stratified by PSAr, baseline PSA, Gleason Score (GS), and RT schedules.

RESULTS

GS was 3 + 3 in 120 (48%) patients and 3 + 4 in 131 (52%) patients. After a median follow-up of 36 months (30-48), 2 and 5-year BRFS were 97.3% and 95.2%, respectively, in patients with PSAr ≥ 90% and 89.5%, 61.5% in patients with PSAr < 90% (p = 0.00). In the responder population, median time to PSAr 90% was 24 months and the median time to PSAn was 28.7 months (20-38). At univariate and multivariate analyses, PSAr was the only significant predictor of BRFS [HR 6.519 (95% IC 1.9-22.2), p = 0.003].

CONCLUSIONS

PSAr could be a reliable prognostic factor for long-term biochemical control. This study underscores the potential of PSAr as a tool for risk stratification and personalized follow-up strategies in PCa management.

Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies).

RESULTS

A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.

Prostate volume variation during 1.5T MR-guided adaptive stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and correlation with treatment toxicity

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate prostate volume change during daily-adaptive prostate SBRT on 1.5 T MR-linac and to correlate it with treatment toxicity.

METHODS

a series of patients affected by low-to-intermediate risk prostate cancer was treated by 5-fraction SBRT within a prospective study (Prot. n° 23748). Total dose was 35 Gy and 36.25 Gy delivered every day or on alternate days. Treatment toxicity was recorded with the following patient reported outcomes (PROMs): IPSS, ICIQ-SF, and EPIC-26.

RESULTS

254 patients were included in the analysis. Baseline median CTV volume was 55 cc (range 15.3-163.3). Mean prostate volume were 58.9 cc, and 62.7 cc at first and last fraction respectively (mean volume increase 6.4 %; p = <0.0001). We observed prostate swelling (mean 15.4 % increase) in 50 % of cases, stable volume (≤5% volume change) in 39 % of patients, and prostate shrinkage in 11 % of cases (mean 12.2 % reduction). Baseline CTV > 55 cc showed a trend towards higher CTV shrinkage (-10.5 % versus -14.5 %; p = 0.052). We found no correlation between CTV change and PROMs. Prostate swelling was generally compensated by the planned PTV expansion, even though the mean setup volume dropped from 47.4 cc to 38.9 cc at last fraction, with few cases not covered by initial setup margins.

CONCLUSION

The present study reported a significant prostate volume change during prostate SBRT on 1.5T MR-linac. We observed both prostate swelling in half of cases and few cases of prostate shrinkage. No correlations were found with PROMs in this population treatment with daily-adaptive strategy.

PSMA-PET/CT-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) in the Treatment of Uncomplicated Non-Spinal Bone Oligometastases from Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has a consolidated role in the treatment of bone oligometastases from prostate cancer (PCa). While the evidence for spinal oligometastases SBRT was robust, its role in non-spinal-bone metastases (NSBM) is not standardized. In fact, there was no clear consensus about dose and target definition in this setting. The aim of our study was to evaluate efficacy, toxicity, and the pattern of relapse in SBRT delivered to NSBM from PCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2016 to 2021, we treated a series of oligo-NSBM from PCa with ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/CT-guided SBRT. The primary endpoint was local progression-free survival (LPFS). The secondary endpoints were toxicity, the pattern of intraosseous relapse, distant progression-free survival (DPFS), polimetastases-free survival (PMFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

a total of 150 NSBM in 95 patients were treated with 30-35 Gy in five fractions. With a median follow-up of 26 months, 1- and 3 years LPFS was 96.3% and 89%, respectively. A biologically effective dose (BED) ≥ 198 Gy was correlated with improved LPFS (p = 0.007). Intraosseous relapse occurred in eight (5.3%) cases. Oligorecurrent disease was associated with a better PMFS compared to de novo oligometastatic disease (p = 0.001) and oligoprogressive patients (p = 0.007). No grade ≥ 3 toxicity occurred.

CONCLUSION

SBRT is a safe and effective tool for NSBM from PCa in the oligometastatic setting. Intraosseous relapse was a relatively rare event. Predictive factors of the improved outcomes were defined.

A pilot study of MRI radiomics for high-risk prostate cancer stratification in 1.5 T MR-guided radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To investigate the potential value of MRI radiomics obtained from a 1.5 T MRI-guided linear accelerator (MR-LINAC) for D'Amico high-risk prostate cancer (PC) classification in MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT).

METHODS

One hundred seventy-six consecutive PC patients underwent 1.5 T MRgRT treatment were retrospectively enrolled. Each patient received one or two pretreatment T₂ -weighted MRI scans on a 1.5 T MR-LINAC. The endpoint was to differentiate high-risk from low/intermediate-risk PC based on D'Amico criteria using MRI-radiomics. Totally 1023 features were extracted from clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV). Intraclass correlation coefficient of scan-rescan repeatability, feature correlation, and recursive feature elimination were used for feature dimension reduction. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression was employed for model construction. Receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis was used for model performance assessment in both training and testing data.

RESULTS

One hundred and eleven patients fulfilled all criteria were finally included: 76 for training and 35 for testing. The constructed MRI-radiomics models extracted from CTV and PTV achieved the AUC of 0.812 and 0.867 in the training data, without significant difference (P = 0.083). The model performances remained in the testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 85.71%, 64.29%, and 77.14% for the PTV-based model; and 71.43%, 71.43%, and 71.43% for the CTV-based model. The corresponding AUCs were 0.718 and 0.750 (P = 0.091) for CTV- and PTV-based models.

CONCLUSION

MRI-radiomics obtained from a 1.5 T MR-LINAC showed promising results in D'Amico high-risk PC stratification, potentially helpful for the future PC MRgRT. Prospective studies with larger sample sizes and external validation are warranted for further verification.

Linac-based versus MR-guided SBRT for localized prostate cancer: a comparative evaluation of acute tolerability

AIM

This study aims to compare acute toxicity of prostate cancer (PCa) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) delivered by MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) with 1.5-T MR-linac or by volumetric modulated arc (VMAT) with conventional linac.

METHODS

Patients with low-to-favorable intermediate risk class PCa were treated with exclusive SBRT (35 Gy in five fractions). Patients treated with MRgRT were enrolled in an Ethical Committee (EC) approved trial (Prot. n° 23,748), while patients treated with conventional linac were enrolled in an EC approved phase II trial (n° SBRT PROG112CESC). The primary end-point was the acute toxicity. Patients were included in the analysis if they had at least 6 months of follow-up for the primary end-point evaluation. Toxicity assessment was performed according to CTCAE v5.0 scale. International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS) was also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included in the analysis. Seventy-two (53.3%) were treated with MR-linac and 63 (46.7%) with conventional linac. The median initial PSA before RT was 6.1 ng/ml (range 0.49-19). Globally, acute G1, G2, and G3 toxicity occurred in 39 (28.8%), 20 (14.5%), and 5 (3.7%) patients. At the univariate analysis, acute G1 toxicity did not differ between MR-linac and conventional linac (26.4% versus 31.8%), as well as G2 toxicity (12.5% versus 17.5%; p = 0.52). Acute G2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity occurred in 7% and 12.5% of cases in MR-linac and conventional linac group, respectively (p = 0.06), while acute G2 genitourinary toxicity occurred in 11% and 12.8% in MR-linac and conventional linac, respectively (p = 0.82). The median IPSS before and after SBRT was 3 (1-16) and 5 (1-18). Acute G3 toxicity occurred in two cases in the MR-linac and three cases in the conventional linac group (p = n.s.).

CONCLUSION

Prostate SBRT with 1.5-T MR-linac is feasible and safe. Compared to conventional linac, MRgRT might to potentially reduce the overall G1 acute toxicity at 6 months, and seems to show a trend toward a lower incidence of grade 2 GI toxicity. A longer follow-up is necessary to assess the late efficacy and toxicity.

Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance-Guided Adaptive and Non-Adaptive Radiotherapy on Combination MR-Linear Accelerators: Current Practice and Future Directions

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an effective radiation therapy technique that has allowed for shorter treatment courses, as compared to conventionally dosed radiation therapy. As its name implies, SBRT relies on daily image guidance to ensure that each fraction targets a tumor, instead of healthy tissue. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers improved soft-tissue visualization, allowing for better tumor and normal tissue delineation. MR-guided RT (MRgRT) has traditionally been defined by the use of offline MRI to aid in defining the RT volumes during the initial planning stages in order to ensure accurate tumor targeting while sparing critical normal tissues. However, the ViewRay MRIdian and Elekta Unity have improved upon and revolutionized the MRgRT by creating a combined MRI and linear accelerator (MRL), allowing MRgRT to incorporate online MRI in RT. MRL-based MR-guided SBRT (MRgSBRT) represents a novel solution to deliver higher doses to larger volumes of gross disease, regardless of the proximity of at-risk organs due to the (1) superior soft-tissue visualization for patient positioning, (2) real-time continuous intrafraction assessment of internal structures, and (3) daily online adaptive replanning. Stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) has enabled the safe delivery of ablative doses to tumors adjacent to radiosensitive tissues throughout the body. Although it is still a relatively new RT technique, SMART has demonstrated significant opportunities to improve disease control and reduce toxicity. In this review, we included the current clinical applications and the active prospective trials related to SMART. We highlighted the most impactful clinical studies at various tumor sites. In addition, we explored how MRL-based multiparametric MRI could potentially synergize with SMART to significantly change the current treatment paradigm and to improve personalized cancer care.

Implementation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Radiation Therapy in Routine Care: Opportunities and Challenges in the United States

Purpose

Magnetic resonance image (MRI)-guided radiation therapy with the 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-Linac) is a rapidly evolving and emerging treatment. The MR-Linac literature mainly focused on clinical and technological factors in technology implementation, but it is relatively silent on health care system-related factors. Consequently, there is a lack of understanding of opportunities and barriers in implementing the MR-Linac from a health care system perspective. This study addresses this gap with a case study of the US health care system.

Methods and Materials

An exploratory, qualitative research design was used. Data collection consisted of 23 semistructured interviews ranging from clinical experts at the radiation therapy and radiology department to insurance commissioners in 7 US hospitals. Analysis of opportunities and barriers was guided by the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability framework for new medical technologies in health care organizations.

Results

Opportunities included high-precision MR-guidance during radiation therapy with potential continued technical advances and better patient outcomes. MR-Linac also offers opportunities for research, professional, and economic development. Barriers included the lack of empirical evidence of clinical effectiveness, technological complexity, and large staffing and structural investments. Furthermore, the presence of patients with disadvantaged socioeconomic background, and the lack of appropriate reimbursement as well as regulatory conditions can hinder technology implementation.

Conclusions

Our study confirms the current literature on implementing the MR-Linac, but also reveals additional challenges for the US health care system. Alongside the well-known clinical and technical factors, also professional, socioeconomic, market, and governing influences affect technology implementation. These findings highlight new connections to facilitate technology uptake and provide a richer start to understanding its long-term effect.

A Prospective Study of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) with Concomitant Whole-Pelvic Radiotherapy (WPRT) for High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Patients Using 1.5 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Guidance: The Preliminary Clinical Outcome

Background: Conventionally fractionated whole-pelvic nodal radiotherapy (WPRT) improves clinical outcome compared to prostate-only RT in high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PC). MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (MRgSBRT) with concomitant WPRT represents a novel radiotherapy (RT) paradigm for HR-PC, potentially improving online image guidance and clinical outcomes. This study aims to report the preliminary clinical experiences and treatment outcome of 1.5 Tesla adaptive MRgSBRT with concomitant WPRT in HR-PC patients. Materials and methods: Forty-two consecutive HR-PC patients (72.5 ± 6.8 years) were prospectively enrolled, treated by online adaptive MRgSBRT (8 Gy(prostate)/5 Gy(WPRT) × 5 fractions) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and followed up (median: 251 days, range: 20−609 days). Clinical outcomes were measured by gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Scale v. 5.0, patient-reported quality of life (QoL) with EPIC (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) questionnaire, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses. Results: All MRgSBRT fractions achieved planning objectives and dose specifications of the targets and organs at risk, and they were successfully delivered. The maximum cumulative acute GI/GU grade 1 and 2 toxicity rates were 19.0%/81.0% and 2.4%/7.1%, respectively. The subacute (>30 days) GI/GU grade 1 and 2 toxicity rates were 21.4%/64.3% and 2.4%/2.4%, respectively. No grade 3 toxicities were reported. QoL showed insignificant changes in urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal domain scores during the follow-up period. All patients had early post-MRgSBRT biochemical responses, while biochemical recurrence (PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL) occurred in one patient at month 18. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study that showed the clinical outcomes of MRgSBRT with concomitant WPRT in HR-PC patients. The early results suggested favorable treatment-related toxicities and encouraging patient-reported QoLs, but long-term follow-up is needed to confirm our early results.

Radiotherapy-related toxicity for localized prostate cancer: meta-analysis comparing conventional or moderately hypofractionated vs. ultrahypofractionated protocols

BACKGROUND

To compare toxicities in relation to standard radiation treatments [conventional fractionation RT (CRT) and moderate hypofractionated RT (MRT)] with ultrahypofractionated RT (URT) in the treatment of patients with localized PCa.

METHODS

A searched was performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and LILACS to January 2020 for studies comparing URT to CRT and/or MRT in relation to genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in the treatment of patients with localized PCa. URT, MRT and CRT were defined as protocols delivering a daily dose of ≥5 Gy, 2.4-4.9 Gy, and <2.4 Gy per fractions regardless total dose, respectively.

RESULTS

Eight studies with 2929 patients with localized PCa were included in the analysis. These eight studies did not find any difference between URT and MRT/CRT groups in relation to acute GU toxicity (21.0% × 23.8%, RD -0.04; 95% CI -0.13, 0.06; p = 0.46; I² = 89%) and acute GI toxicity (4.9% × 6.9%, RD -0.03; 95% CI -0.07, 0.01; p = 0.21; I² = 79%). Six studies did not find any difference between URT and MRT/CRT groups in relation to late GU toxicity (3.9% × 4.7%, RD -0.01; 95% CI -0.03, 0.00; p = 0.16; I² = 19%) and late GI toxicity (2.1% × 3.5%, RD -0.01; 95% CI -0.03, 0.00; p = 0.05; I² = 22%).

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that acute GU/GI and late GU/GI toxicity are similar between URT and standard protocols. More studies with longer follow-ups directed to oncology outcomes are warranted before any recommendation on this topic.

Postoperative moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy in prostate cancer: a mono-institutional propensity-score-matching analysis between adjuvant and early-salvage radiotherapy

AIM

To evaluate the impact of moderately hypofractionated postoperative radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of 304 surgically resected PCa patients were analyzed. One hundred and five patients underwent adjuvant RT (aRT), 77 early-savage RT (esRT), and 123 salvage RT (sRT). Biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity were analyzed. A propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to account for potential confounders between aRT and esRT groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 33 months. Three-year BRFS and PFS were 82 and 85.2%, respectively, in the overall population. At the multivariate analysis, Gleason score and hormone therapy were factors independently correlated with BRFS and PFS. After PSM, there was no difference in BRFS and PFS between aRT and esRT patients. Severe toxicity was represented by grade 3 urinary incontinence (3.5%) and urgency (1%), and aRT correlated with increased any-grade acute toxicity. Severe grade 3 gastrointestinal late toxicity occurred in 1.3% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative moderately hypofractionated RT achieved acceptable disease control rate and demonstrated no increased or unexpected toxicity. Future prospective studies should evaluate the role of postoperative RT in patients with unfavorable disease characteristics.

1.5T Magnetic Resonance-Guided Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Preliminary Clinical Results of Clinician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (MRgSBRT) offers the potential for achieving better prostate cancer (PC) treatment outcomes. This study reports the preliminary clinical results of 1.5T MRgSBRT in localized PC, based on both clinician-reported outcome measurement (CROM) and patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM).

METHODS

Fifty-one consecutive localized PC patients were prospectively enrolled with a median follow-up of 199 days. MRgSBRT was delivered in five fractions of 7.25-8 Gy with daily online adaptation. Clinician-reported gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) adverse events based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Scale v. 5.0 were assessed. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Questionnaire was collected at baseline, 1 month, and every 3 months thereafter. Serial prostate-specific antigen measurements were longitudinally recorded.

RESULTS

The maximum cumulative clinician-reported grade ≥ 2 acute GU and GI toxicities were 11.8% (6/51) and 2.0% (1/51), respectively, while grade ≥ 2 subacute GU and GI toxicities were 2.3% (1/43) each. Patient-reported urinary, bowel, and hormonal domain summary scores were reduced at 1 month, then gradually returned to baseline levels, with the exception of the sexual domain. Domain-specific subscale scores showed similar longitudinal changes. All patients had early post-MRgSBRT biochemical responses.

CONCLUSIONS

The finding of low toxicity supports the accumulation of clinical evidence for 1.5T MRgSBRT in localized PC.

Non-Adaptive MR-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate SBRT: Less Time, Equal Results

BACKGROUND

The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is widely utilized for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Magnetic-resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) was introduced in 2014 and has recently been implemented in SBRT for prostate cancer as it provides an opportunity for smaller margins and adaptive daily planning. Currently, the only publications of MRgRT for prostate SBRT describe European clinical experiences which utilized adaptive planning. However, adaptive planning adds significantly to the time required for daily treatment.

OBJECTIVES

Since prostate SBRT has demonstrated acceptable toxicity for several years, we did not consider daily adaptation critical to the process of prostate SBRT. After Institutional Review Board approval, we analyzed and now report our experience using MRgRT without adaptation.

METHODS

Between 25 September 2019 and 21 December 2020, 35 consecutive patients were treated with MRgRT prostate SBRT at our center. Patients treated with MRgRT included favorable intermediate risk (43%) and unfavorable intermediate risk (54%), and only one patient had low-risk prostate cancer. Nine patients (25%) received adjuvant leuprolide for a median of 4.5 months (range 4-6 m). Our clinical pathway allows for a maximum prostate gland volume of 60 cc; median prostate volume of this cohort was 35.0 cc (range 17-58.4 cc). Median pre-treatment PSA was 6.30 (range 2.55-16.77). Each patient was treated with 36.25 Gy delivered in five fractions over 2 weeks with urethral sparing to a maximal dose of 35 Gy. Target volumes included the prostate gland and proximal seminal vesicles with a 3 mm margin.

RESULTS

Median follow-up as of 26 May 2021 was 11.97 months (range 4.37-19.80). First follow-up data are available for all patients, with a median of 1.10 month from completion of treatment (0.63-3.40). The median PSA at first visit was 2.75 (range 0.02-9.00) with a median AUA symptom score of 9 (range 1-24). Second follow-up data are available for 34 patients at a median of 4.45 months (range 2.57-8.90). At second follow-up, the median PSA was 1.60 (range 0.02-5.40) with a median AUA symptom score of 6 (range 1-33). Seventeen patients had third follow-up data with a median of 9.77 months (range 4.70-12.33) after SBRT. The median PSA was 1.13 (range 0.02-4.73) with an AUA score of 9 (2-22) at the third follow-up. We observed a statistically significant decrease in PSA between pre-treatment and at first follow-up (p < 0.005). The most common toxicity was grade 2 urethritis, managed in all cases by tamsulosin. One patient developed grade 2 tenesmus relieved by topical steroids. No cases of grade ≥ 3 toxicity were seen in our patient population.

CONCLUSIONS

By avoiding the extra time required for plan adaptation, MRgRT without daily adaptation allows for successful prostate SBRT with manageable toxicity. We continue to reserve our limited adaptive treatment slots for preoperative pancreatic and ultra-central lung SBRT patients, which require time-intensive respiratory gating and adaptive planning.

Phase II study of stereotactic body radiotherapy with hydrogel spacer for prostate cancer: acute toxicity and propensity score-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of a hydrogel spacer in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has not been clarified. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of SBRT in combination with a hydrogel spacer for prostate cancer.

METHODS

This is a prospective single-center, single-arm phase II study. Prostate cancer patients without lymph node or distant metastasis were eligible. All patients received a hydrogel spacer insertion, followed by SBRT of 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions with volumetric modulated arc therapy. The primary endpoint was physician-assessed acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity within 3 months. The secondary endpoints were physician-assessed acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity, patient-reported outcomes evaluated by the EPIC and FACT-P questionnaires, and dosimetric comparison. We used propensity score-matched analyses to compare patients with the hydrogel spacer with those without the spacer. The historical data of the control without a hydrogel spacer was obtained from our hospital's electronic records.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled between February 2017 and July 2018. A hydrogel spacer significantly reduced the dose to the rectum. Grade 2 acute GI and GU toxicity occurred in seven (18%) and 17 (44%) patients. The EPIC bowel and urinary summary score declined from the baseline to the first month (P < 0.01, < 0.01), yet it was still significantly lower in the third month (P < 0.01, P = 0.04). For propensity score-matched analyses, no significant differences in acute GI and GU toxicity were observed between the two groups. The EPIC bowel summary score was significantly better in the spacer group at 1 month (82.2 in the spacer group and 68.5 in the control group).

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT with a hydrogel spacer had the dosimetric benefits of reducing the rectal doses. The use of the hydrogel spacer did not reduce physician-assessed acute toxicity, but it improved patient-reported acute bowel toxicity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration: UMIN-CTR, UMIN000026213. Registered 19 February 2017, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000029385 .

Daily dosimetric variation between image-guided volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy and MR-guided daily adaptive radiotherapy for prostate cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy

AIM

To evaluate differences between MR-guided daily-adaptive RT (MRgRT) and image-guided RT (IGRT) with or without fiducial markers in prostate cancer (PCa) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in terms of dose distribution on critical structures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two hundred treatment sessions in 40 patients affected by low and intermediate PCa were evaluated. The prescribed dose was 35 Gy in 5 fractions delivered on alternate days. MRgRT patients (10) were daily recontoured, re-planned, and treated with IMRT technique. IGRT patients without (20) and with (10) fiducials were matched on soft tissues or fiducials and treated with VMAT technique. Respective CBCTs were retrospectively delineated and the prescribed plan was overlaid for dosimetric analysis. The daily dose for rectum, bladder, and prostate was registered.

RESULTS

MRgRT resulted in a significantly lower rate of constraints violation as compared to IGRT without fiducials, especially for rectum V28Gy, rectum V32Gy, rectum V35Gy, rectum Dmax, and bladder Dmax. IGRT with fiducials reported high accuracy levels, comparable to MRgRT. MRgRT and IGRT with fiducials reported no significant prostate CTV underdosage, while IGRT without fiducials was associated with occasional cases of prostate CTV under dosage.

CONCLUSION

MR-guided daily-adaptive SBRT seems a feasible and accurate strategy for treating prostate cancer with ablative doses. IGRT with the use of fiducials provides a comparable level of accuracy and acceptable real-dose distribution over treatment fractions. Future study will provide additional data regarding the tolerability and the clinical outcome of this new technological approach.

Rectal spacer hydrogel in 1.5T MR-guided and daily adapted SBRT for prostate cancer: dosimetric analysis and preliminary patient-reported outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The main aim of the current analysis was to explore the hypothetical advantages using rectal spacer during 1.5T MR-guided and daily adapted prostate cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) compared to a no-rectal spacer hydrogel cohort of patients.

METHODS

The SBRT-protocol consisted of a 35 Gy schedule delivered in 5 fractions. Herein, we present a dosimetric analysis between spacer and no-spacer patients. Furthermore, treatment tolerability and feasibility were preliminarily assessed according to clinicians-reported outcomes at the end of treatment and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in both arms. Toxicity and quality of life were assessed at baseline and after treatment using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v. 5.0, International Prostatic Symptoms Score, ICIQ-SF, IIEF-5, and EORTC-QLQ-C30 and PR-25 questionnaires.

RESULTS

120 plans (pre- and daily adaptive SBRT planning) were analyzed in 20 patients (10 patients in spacer group and 10 patients in no-spacer group) treated using 1.5T MR-guided adaptive SBRT. Statistically significant dosimetric advantages were observed in favor of the spacer insertion, improving the planning target volume coverage in terms of V33.2Gy >95% and planning target volume 37.5 Gy <2% mainly during daily-adapted SBRT. Also, rectum V32, V28 and V18Gy and bladder V35Gy <1 cc were significantly reduced in the spacer cohort. Concerning the PROMS, all questionnaires showed no difference between the pre- and post-SBRT evaluation in both arms, excepting the physical functioning item of EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire that was declined in the no-spacer group.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results strongly suggest the adoption of perirectal spacer due to dosimetric advantages not only for rectal sparing but also for target coverage. Longer follow-up is required to validate the clinical impact in terms of clinicians-reported toxicity and PROMs.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This the first experience reporting preliminary data concerning the potential dosimetric impact of rectal hydrogel spacer on MR-guided SBRT for prostate cancer.

Short fractionation radiotherapy for early prostate cancer in the time of COVID-19: long-term excellent outcomes from a multicenter Italian trial suggest a larger adoption in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in low-risk Prostate Cancer patients as preferred treatment option in emergency health conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From April 2013 to September 2015, 28 patients with low-risk prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled. The SBRT prescribed dose was 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, twice a week. Primary endpoints were acute and late toxicity. Secondary endpoints were biochemical recurrence free survival (bRFS) and overall survival.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 65.5 months (range 52-81). No acute G3 or G4 toxicity was recorded. Acute G1 or G2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurred in 43% and acute G1-G2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in 14%. Late G1 and G3 GU toxicity in 18% and 3.5%, respectively. The G3 toxicity was not directly attributable to radiotherapy. Late G1 GI toxicity occurred in 18%. 5yy bRFS was 96.5% (95% CI 82.3-99.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for early prostate cancer reported safe toxicity profile and a good clinical outcome at the median follow-up of 5 years. It may be an useful option if radiotherapy is required in emergency medical conditions.

Prostate-specific antigen dynamics after neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy and carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Background

This study aimed to explain the dynamics of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in patients with prostate cancer who were treated with carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) and neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT).

Methods

Eighty-five patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received CIRT and neoadjuvant ADT from December 2015 to December 2017 were analyzed in the present study. The total dose of CIRT was set at 51.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) delivered in 12 fractions over 3 weeks. The PSA bounce was defined as a ≥0.4 ng/ml increase of PSA levels from the nadir, followed by any decrease. PSA failure was defined using the Phoenix criteria.

Results

The median patient age was 68 (range, 48–81) years. The median follow-up duration was 33 (range, 20–48) months. The clinical T stage was T1c, T2a, and T2b in 27, 44, and 14 patients, respectively. The Gleason score was 6 in 3 patients and 7 in 82 patients. The median pretreatment PSA level was 7.37 (range, 3.33–19.0) ng/ml. All patients received neoadjuvant ADT for a median of 6 (range, 2–117) months. PSA bounces were observed in 39 patients (45.9%), occurring a median of 12 (range, 6–30) months after CIRT. PSA failure was observed in eight patients (9.4%), occurring a median of 21 (range, 15–33) months after CIRT. The 3-year PSA failure-free survival rate was 88.5%. No clinical recurrence was observed during the follow-up period. Younger age and lower T stage were significant predictors of PSA bounce. Younger age was a significant predictor of PSA failure.

Conclusions

In this study, we identified the significant predictors of the occurrence of PSA bounce and failure. Further follow-up is needed to reveal the clinical significance of PSA dynamics.

Prostate re-irradiation: current concerns and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

To date, the optimal management of locally relapsed prostate cancer patients after an initial course of radiotherapy remains a matter of debate. In recent years, local approaches have been proposed as a therapeutic option, which may potentially delay the initiation of hormone therapy. In the case of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), re-irradiation has been supported by growing evidence in the literature, mostly represented by extreme hypofractionated schedules delivered with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

AREAS COVERED

We performed a systematic review of the literature using the PICO methodology to explore the available evidence regarding the use of EBRT in the setting of locally relapsed prostate cancer, both in terms of safety, tolerability and preliminary clinical outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Current literature data report the use of EBRT and particularly of SBRT for the safe and feasible re-treatment of locally recurrent prostate cancer after an initial treatment course of radiotherapy. When extreme hypofractionation is adopted, only occasional grade ≥3 late adverse events are reported. Despite the current lack of high-level evidence and the short follow-up, preliminary clinical outcomes are promising and allow clinicians to hypothesize further prospective studies to evaluate SBRT as an alternative to the early initiation of androgen-deprivation therapy.

Problems and Promises of Introducing the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Linear Accelerator Into Routine Care: The Case of Prostate Cancer

The new radiotherapy high field, 1.5 Tesla MRI-guided linear accelerator (MR-Linac) is being clinically introduced. Sensing and evaluating opportunities and barriers at an early stage will facilitate its eventual scale-up. This study investigates the opportunities and barriers to the implementation of MR-Linac into prostate cancer care based on 43 semi-structured interviews with Dutch oncology care professionals, hospital and division directors, patients, payers and industry. The analysis was guided by the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability framework of new medical technologies and services. Opportunities included: the acquirement of (1) advanced MRI-guided radiotherapy technology with (2) the potential for improved patient outcomes and (3) economic benefits, as well as (4) professional development and (5) a higher hospital quality profile. Barriers included: (1) technical complexities, (2) substantial staffing and structural investments, (3) the current lack of empirical evidence of clinical benefits, (4) professional silos, and (5) the presence of patient referral patterns. While our study confirms the expected technical and clinical prospects from the literature, it also reveals economic, organizational, and socio-political challenges.

Impact of hydrogel peri-rectal spacer insertion on prostate gland intra-fraction motion during 1.5 T MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy

Background

The assessment of organ motion is a crucial feature for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Rectal spacer may represent a helpful device in order to outdistance rectal wall from clinical target, but its impact on organ motion is still a matter of debate. MRI-Linac is a new frontier in radiation oncology as it allows a superior visualization of the real-time anatomy of the patient and the current highest level of adaptive radiotherapy.

Methods

We present data regarding a total of 100 fractions in 20 patients who underwent MRI-guided prostate SBRT for low-to-intermediate risk prostate cancer with or without spacer. Translational and rotational shifts were computed on the pre- and post-treatment MRI acquisitions referring to the delivery position for antero-posterior, latero-lateral and cranio-caudal direction, and assessed using the Mann-Whitney U-Test.

Results

All patients were treated with a five sessions schedule (35 Gy/5fx) using MRI-Linac for a median fraction treatment time of 50 min (range, 46–65). In the entire study sample, median rotational displacement was 0.1° in cranio-caudal, − 0.002° in latero-lateral and 0.01° in antero-posterior direction; median translational shift was 0.11 mm in cranio-caudal, − 0.24 mm in latero-lateral and − 0.22 mm in antero-posterior. A significant difference between spacer and no-spacer patients in terms of rotational shifts in the antero-posterior direction (p = 0.033) was observed; also for translational shifts a positive trend was detected in antero-posterior direction (p = 0.07), although with no statistical significance. We observed statistically significant differences in the pre-treatment planning phase in favor of the spacer cohort for several rectum dose constraints: rectum V32Gy < 5% (p = 0.001), V28 Gy < 10% (p = 0.001) and V18Gy < 35% (p = 0.039). Also for bladder V35 Gy < 1 cc, the use of spacer provided a dosimetric advantage compared to the no-spacer subpopulation (p = 0.04). Furthermore, PTV V33.2Gy > 95% was higher in the spacer cohort compared to the no-spacer one (p = 0.036).

Conclusion

In our experience, the application of rectal hydrogel spacer for prostate SBRT resulted in a significant impact on rotational antero-posterior shifts contributing to limit prostate intra-fraction motion. Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to confirm this ideally favorable effect and to assess any potential impact on clinical outcomes.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer - 5-year efficacy results

BACKGROUND

The use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as the primary treatment modality in clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) is emerging. The aim of the study was to analyze the long-term results of PCa patients treated with SBRT.

METHODS

This non-selected, real-life patient cohort included 213 patients with localized PCa treated with a robotic SBRT device during 2012-2015.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 64 months (range, 10-85 months), and all risk-groups were represented as 47 (22.1%), 56 (26.3%) and 110 (51.6%) patients were classified into D'Amico risk stratification of low, intermediate and high-risk groups, respectively. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was administered to 64.3% of the patients. At cut-off, the biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) was 100, 87.5 and 80.0% for patients at low, intermediate and high-risk (p = 0.004), and 92.5, 84.2 and 66.7% for patients with Gleason score ≤ 6, 7 and ≥ 8, respectively (p = 0.001). The actuarial 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 97.9, 96.4 and 88.6% in the low, intermediate and high-risk groups, respectively, and at the cut-off, the disease-specific survival (DSS) rate of the whole cohort was high (99.1%), as only two high-risk patients died due to PCa.

CONCLUSION

Our present results of SBRT delivered with CyberKnife produced excellent long-term bRFS, OS and DSS outcomes among patients with localized PCa. We conclude that SBRT provides an efficient and convenient treatment option for patients with localized PCa, irrespective of the risk-group.

Preliminary result of carbon-ion radiotherapy using the spot scanning method for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) for prostate cancer was initiated at Kanagawa Cancer Center in 2015. The present study analyzed the preliminary clinical outcomes of CIRT for prostate cancer.

METHODS

The clinical outcomes of 253 patients with prostate cancer who were treated with CIRT delivered using the spot scanning method between December 2015 and December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The irradiation dose was set at 51.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) delivered in 12 fractions over 3 weeks. Biochemical relapse was defined using the Phoenix definition. Toxicities were assessed according to CTCAE version 4.0.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 70 (47-86) years. The median follow-up duration was 35.3 (4.1-52.9) months. According to the D'Amico classification system, 8, 88, and 157 patients were classified as having low, intermediate, and high risks, respectively. Androgen deprivation therapy was administered in 244 patients. The biochemical relapse-free rate in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups at 3 years was 87.5, 88.0, and 97.5%, respectively (P = 0.036). Grade 2 acute urinary toxicity was observed in 12 (4.7%) patients. Grade 2 acute rectal toxicity was not observed. Grade 2 late urinary toxicity and grade 2 late rectal toxicity were observed in 17 (6.7%) and 3 patients (1.2%), respectively. Previous transurethral resection of the prostate was significantly associated with late grade 2 toxicity in univariate analysis. The predictive factor for late rectal toxicity was not detected.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated that CIRT using the spot scanning method for prostate cancer produces favorable outcomes.

1.5 T MR-guided and daily adapted SBRT for prostate cancer: feasibility, preliminary clinical tolerability, quality of life and patient-reported outcomes during treatment

Background

Unity Elekta is a unique magnetic resonance (MR)-linac that conjugates a 1.5 Tesla MR unit with a 7 MV flattening filter free accelerator.A prospective observational study for the clinical use of Elekta Unity is currently ongoing in our department. Herein, we present our preliminary report on the feasibility, quality of life, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) for localized prostate cancer (PC) treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

Methods

The SBRT protocol consisted of a 35 Gy schedule delivered in 5 fractions within 2 weeks. Toxicity and quality of life (QoL) were assessed at baseline and after treatment using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0, International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), ICIQ-SF, IIEF-5, and EORTC-QLQ-C30 and PR-25 questionnaires.

Results

Between October 2019 and January 2020, 25 patients with localized PC were recruited. The median age was 68 years (range, 54–82); 4 were low risk, 11 favorable intermediate risk (IR) and 10 unfavorable IR. Median iPSA was 6.8 ng/ml (range, 1–19), and 9 of these patients (36%) received concurrent androgen deprivation therapy. Median prostate volume was 36 cc (range, 20–61); median baseline IPSS was 5 (range, 0–10). Median time for fraction was 53 min (range, 34–86); adaptive strategy with daily critical structure and target re-contouring and daily replanning (adapt to shape) was performed in all cases. No grade ≥ 3 adverse event was observed, three patients (12%) reported grade 2 acute genitourinary toxicity (urinary frequency, urinary tract pain and urinary retention), while only one patient reported mild rectal pain. No relevant deteriorations were reported in PROMs.

Conclusion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first experience reporting feasibility, clinician-reported outcome measurements, and PROMs for 1.5 T MR-guided adaptive SBRT for localized prostate cancer. The preliminary data collected here report optimal safety and excellent tolerability, as also confirmed by PROMs questionnaires. Moreover, the data on technical feasibility and timing of online daily adapted planning and delivery are promising. More mature data are warranted.

Trial registration

Date of approval April 2019 and numbered MRI/LINAC n°23,748.

Post-HIFU locally relapsed prostate cancer: high-dose salvage radiotherapy guided by molecular imaging

PURPOSE

To evaluate tolerance and biochemical control rates of salvage external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in patients with local relapse from prostate cancer (PC) after high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) as primary treatment.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients presented biochemical failure of PC. Salvage EBRT to the residual prostate was performed with moderate hypofractionation schedule (MHRT) in 28 fractions (n = 16) or with extreme hypofractionation schedule (SBRT) in 5 fractions (n = 8) by means of image-guided volumetric modulation arc therapy. In case of MHRT, the median dose was 71.4 Gy, whereas in case of SBRT it was 32.5 Gy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 28 months. The median PSA nadir was 0.26 ng/mL. In case of MHRT, the median PSA nadir was 0.15 ng/mL and occurred within a median time of 19 months. In case of SBRT, the median PSA nadir was 0.64 ng/mL and occurred within a median time of 8 months. No G3 higher acute or late toxicity after EBRT was observed. Only three patients presented with G2 acute GI toxicity (actinic proctitis). Twelve patients experienced acute G1 GU toxicity: 8/16 of men treated with MHRT and 4/8 of men treated with SBRT. Complete local control of disease was achieved in 23/24 patients (96%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm the feasibility and the low toxicity of salvage EBRT with both schedules of treatment after HIFU failure. The findings of low acute toxicity and good biochemical control rates are encouraging, but a larger number of patients and a longer follow-up are needed to confirm these results.

The urethral position may shift due to urethral catheter placement in the treatment planning for prostate radiation therapy

PURPOSE

To determine the best method to contour the planning organ at risk volume (PRV) for the urethra, this study aimed to investigate the displacement of a Foley catheter in the urethra with a soft and thin guide-wire.

METHODS

For each patient, the study used two sets of computed tomography (CT) images for radiation treatment planning (RT-CT): (1) set with a Foley urethral catheter (4.0 mm diameter) plus a guide-wire (0.46 mm diameter) in the first RT-CT and (2) set with a guide-wire alone in the second CT recorded 2 min after the first RT-CT. Using three fiducial markers in the prostate for image fusion, the displacement between the catheter and the guide-wire in the prostatic urethra was calculated. In 155 consecutive patients treated between 2011 and 2017, 5531 slices of RT-CT were evaluated.

RESULTS

Assuming that ≥3.0 mm of difference between the catheter and the guide-wire position was a significant displacement, the urethra with the catheter was displaced significantly from the urethra with the guide-wire alone in > 20% of the RT-CT slices in 23.2% (36/155) of the patients. The number of patients who showed ≥3.0 mm anterior displacement with the catheter in ≥20% RT-CT slices was significantly larger at the superior segment (38/155) than at the middle (14/155) and inferior segments (18/155) of the prostatic urethra (p < 0.0167).

CONCLUSIONS

The urethral position with a Foley catheter is different from the urethral position with a thin and soft guide-wire in a significant proportion of the patients. This should be taken into account for the PRV of the urethra to ensure precise radiotherapy such as in urethra-sparing radiotherapy.