1
|
Meijer D, van Leeuwen PJ, Eppinga WS, Vanneste BG, Meijnen P, Daniels LA, van den Bergh RC, Lont AP, Bodar YJ, Ettema RH, de Bie KC, Oudshoorn FH, Nieuwenhuijzen JA, van der Poel HG, Donswijk ML, Heymans MW, Oprea-Lager DE, Schaake EE, Vis AN. Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Nomogram Predicting the Outcome of Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy in Patients without Metastases on Restaging Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography. EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 61:37-43. [PMID: 38384437 PMCID: PMC10879939 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/25/2024] [Indexed: 02/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and objective Owing to the greater use of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), patient selection for local salvage radiation therapy (sRT) has changed. Our objective was to determine the short-term efficacy of sRT in patients with BCR after RARP, and to develop a novel nomogram predicting BCR-free survival after sRT in a nationwide contemporary cohort of patients who underwent PSMA PET/CT before sRT for BCR of PCa, without evidence of metastatic disease. Methods All 302 eligible patients undergoing PCa sRT in four reference centers between September 2015 and August 2020 were included. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis using a backward elimination procedure to develop a nomogram for predicting biochemical progression of PCa, defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥0.2 ng/ml above the post-sRT nadir within 1 yr after sRT. Key findings and limitations Biochemical progression of disease within 1 yr after sRT was observed for 56/302 (19%) of the study patients. The final predictive model included PSA at sRT initiation, pathological grade group, surgical margin status, PSA doubling time, presence of local recurrence on PSMA PET/CT, and the presence of biochemical persistence (first PSA result ≥0.1 ng/ml) after RARP. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.64-0.79). Using our nomogram, patients with a predicted risk of >20% had a 30.8% chance of developing biochemical progression within 1 yr after sRT. Conclusions Our novel nomogram may facilitate better patient counseling regarding early oncological outcome after sRT. Patients with high risk of biochemical progression may be candidates for more extensive treatment. Patient summary We developed a new tool for predicting cancer control outcomes of radiotherapy for patients with recurrence of prostate cancer after surgical removal of their prostate. This tool may help in better counseling of these patients with recurrent cancer regarding their early expected outcome after radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dennie Meijer
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pim J. van Leeuwen
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wietse S.C. Eppinga
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ben G.L. Vanneste
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Philip Meijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Laurien A. Daniels
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Anne P. Lont
- Department of Urology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - Yves J.L. Bodar
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rosemarijn H. Ettema
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Katelijne C.C. de Bie
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jakko A. Nieuwenhuijzen
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Henk G. van der Poel
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten L. Donswijk
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn W. Heymans
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Daniela E. Oprea-Lager
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eva E. Schaake
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - André N. Vis
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sciarra A, Santarelli V, Salciccia S, Moriconi M, Basile G, Santodirocco L, Carino D, Frisenda M, Di Pierro G, Del Giudice F, Gentilucci A, Bevilacqua G. How the Management of Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Will Be Modified by the Concept of Anticipation and Incrementation of Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:764. [PMID: 38398155 PMCID: PMC10886975 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16040764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2024] [Revised: 02/06/2024] [Accepted: 02/10/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary treatments for prostate cancer (PC) is an extremely heterogeneous phase and at least a stratification into low- and high-risk cases for early progression in metastatic disease is necessary. At present, PSA-DT represents the best parameter to define low- and high-risk BCR PC, but real precision medicine is strongly suggested to define tailored management for patients with BCR. Before defining management, it is necessary to exclude the presence of low-volume metastasis associated with PSA progression using new-generation imaging, preferably with PSMA PET/CT. Low-risk BCR cases should be actively observed without early systemic therapies. Early treatment of low-risk BCR with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can produce disadvantages such as the development of castration resistance before the appearance of metastases (non-metastatic castration-resistant PC). Patients with high-risk BCR benefit from early systemic therapy. Even with overall survival (OS) as the primary treatment endpoint, metastasis-free survival (MFS) should be used as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials, especially in long survival stages of the disease. The EMBARK study has greatly influenced the management of high-risk BCR, by introducing the concept of anticipation and intensification through the use of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) and ADT combination therapy. In high-risk (PSA-DT ≤ 9 months) BCR cases, the combination of enzalutamide with leuprolide significantly improves MFS when compared to leuprolide alone, maintaining an unchanged quality of life in the asymptomatic phase of the disease. The possibility of using ARSIs alone in this early disease setting is suggested by the EMBARK study (arm with enzalutamide alone) with less evidence than with the intensification of the combination therapy. Continued use versus discontinuation of enzalutamide plus leuprolide intensified therapy upon reaching undetectable PSA levels needs to be better defined with further analysis. Real-world analysis must verify the significant results obtained in the context of a phase 3 study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Sciarra
- Department Materno Infantile e Scienze Urologiche, Sapienza University, Viale Policlinico 155, 00161 Rome, Italy; (V.S.); (S.S.); (M.M.); (G.B.); (L.S.); (D.C.); (M.F.); (G.D.P.); (F.D.G.); (A.G.); (G.B.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sabbagh A, Tilki D, Feng J, Huland H, Graefen M, Wiegel T, Böhmer D, Hong JC, Valdes G, Cowan JE, Cooperberg M, Feng FY, Mohammad T, Shelan M, D'Amico AV, Carroll PR, Mohamad O. Multi-institutional Development and External Validation of a Machine Learning Model for the Prediction of Distant Metastasis in Patients Treated by Salvage Radiotherapy for Biochemical Failure After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus 2024; 10:66-74. [PMID: 37507248 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2023] [Revised: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 07/13/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Up to 40% of patients with prostate cancer may develop biochemical recurrence after surgery, with salvage radiation therapy (SRT) being the only curative option. In 2016, Tendulkar et al. (Contemporary update of a multi-institutional predictive nomogram for salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:3648-54) published a nomogram to predict distant metastasis in a cohort of patients treated with SRT with pre-SRT prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 0.5 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy. In modern practice, SRT is delivered at lower PSA values. OBJECTIVE To train and externally validate a machine learning model to predict the risk of distant metastasis at 5 yr in a contemporary cohort of patients receiving SRT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We trained a machine learning model on data from 2418 patients treated with SRT at one institution, with a median PSA value of 0.27 ng/ml. External validation was done in 475 patients treated at two different institutions. Patients with cM1, pN1, or pT4 disease were excluded, as were patients with PSA >2 ng/ml or PSA 0, and patients with radiation dose <60 or ≥80 Gy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Model performance was assessed using calibration and time-dependent area under the receiver operating curve (tAUC). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Our model had better calibration and showed improved discrimination (tAUC = 0.72) compared with the Tendulkar model (tAUC = 0.60, p < 0.001). The main limitations of this study are its retrospective design and lack of validation on patients who received hormone therapy. CONCLUSIONS The updated model can be used to provide more individualized risk assessments to patients treated with SRT at low PSA values, improving decision-making. PATIENT SUMMARY Up to 40% of patients with prostate cancer may develop biochemical recurrence after surgery, with salvage radiation therapy as the only potentially curative option. We trained and validated a machine learning model using clinical and surgical data to predict a patient's risk of distant metastasis at 5 yr after treatment. Our model outperformed the reference tool and can improve clinical decision-making by providing more personalized risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Sabbagh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Derya Tilki
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital-Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Jean Feng
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Hartwig Huland
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital-Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital-Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radio Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Dirk Böhmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - Julian C Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Gilmer Valdes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Janet E Cowan
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Matthew Cooperberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Felix Y Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Anthony V D'Amico
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Peter R Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Champion A, Zwhalen DR, Oehler C, Taussky D, Kroeze SGC, Burger IA, Benzaquen D. Can PSMA PET/CT help in dose-tailoring in post-prostatectomy radiotherapy? Front Oncol 2023; 13:1268309. [PMID: 37799463 PMCID: PMC10548198 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1268309] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 09/04/2023] [Indexed: 10/07/2023] Open
Abstract
There are few randomized trials to evaluate the use of PSMA-PET in the planning of post-prostatectomy radiotherapy. There are two unresolved questions 1) should we increase the dose to lesions visible on PSMA-PET 2) can we reduce dose in the case of a negative PSMA-PET. In this review, we summarize and discuss the available evidence in the literature. We found that in general, there seems to be an advantage for dose-increase, but ta large recent study from the pre-PSMA era didn't show an advantage for dose escalation. Retrospective studies have shown that conventional doses to PSMA-PET-positive lesions seem sufficient. On the other hand, in the case of a negative PSMA-PET, there is no evidence that dose-reduction is possible. In the future, the combination of PSMA-PET with genomic classifiers could help in better identify patients who might benefit from either dose- de-or -increase. We further need to identify intraindividual references to help identify lesions with higher aggressiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Christoph Oehler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Taussky
- Radiation Oncology, Hôpital de La Tour, Meyrin, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Stephanie G. C. Kroeze
- Department of Radiation Oncology Kantonsspital Aarau and Baden, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Irene A. Burger
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden, Switzerland
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Falagario UG, Abbadi A, Remmers S, Björnebo L, Bogdanovic D, Martini A, Valdman A, Carrieri G, Menon M, Akre O, Eklund M, Nordström T, Grönberg H, Lantz A, Wiklund P. Biochemical Recurrence and Risk of Mortality Following Radiotherapy or Radical Prostatectomy. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2332900. [PMID: 37695584 PMCID: PMC10495864 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.32900] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 07/22/2023] [Indexed: 09/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Stratifying patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary treatment for prostate cancer based on the risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) is essential for determining the need for further testing and treatments. Objective To evaluate the association of BCR after radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy and its current risk stratification with PCSM. Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based cohort study included a total of 16 311 male patients with 10 364 (64%) undergoing radical prostatectomy and 5947 (36%) undergoing radiotherapy with curative intent (cT1-3, cM0) and PSA follow-up in Stockholm, Sweden, between 2003 and 2019. Follow-up for all patients was until death, emigration, or end of the study (ie, December 31, 2018). Data were analyzed between September 2022 and March 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes of the study were the cumulative incidence of BCR and PCSM. Patients with BCR were stratified in low- and high-risk according to European Association of Urology (EAU) criteria. Exposures Radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy. Results A total of 16 311 patients were included. Median (IQR) age was 64 (59-68) years in the radical prostatectomy cohort (10 364 patients) and 69 (64-73) years in the radiotherapy cohort (5947 patients). Median (IQR) follow-up for survivors was 88 (55-138) months and 89 (53-134) months, respectively. Following radical prostatectomy, the 15-year cumulative incidences of BCR were 16% (95% CI, 15%-18%) for the 4024 patients in the low D'Amico risk group, 30% (95% CI, 27%-32%) for the 5239 patients in the intermediate D'Amico risk group, and 46% (95% CI, 42%-51%) for 1101 patients in the high D'Amico risk group. Following radiotherapy, the 15-year cumulative incidences of BCR were 18% (95% CI, 15%-21%) for the 1230 patients in the low-risk group, 24% (95% CI, 21%-26%) for the 2355 patients in the intermediate-risk group, and 36% (95% CI, 33%-39%) for the 2362 patients in the high-risk group. The 10-year cumulative incidences of PCSM after radical prostatectomy were 4% (95% CI, 2%-6%) for the 1101 patients who developed low-risk EAU-BCR and 9% (95% CI, 5%-13%) for 649 patients who developed high-risk EAU-BCR. After radiotherapy, the 10-year PCSM cumulative incidences were 24% (95% CI, 19%-29%) for the 591 patients in the low-risk EAU-BCR category and 46% (95% CI, 40%-51%) for the 600 patients in the high-risk EAU-BCR category. Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest the validity of EAU-BCR stratification system. However, while the risk of dying from prostate cancer in low-risk EAU-BCR after radical prostatectomy was very low, patients who developed low-risk EAU-BCR after radiotherapy had a nonnegligible risk of prostate cancer mortality. Improving risk stratification of patients with BCR is pivotal to guide salvage treatment decisions, reduce overtreatment, and limit the number of staging tests in the event of PSA elevations after primary treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ugo Giovanni Falagario
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Urology and Kidney Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Ahmad Abbadi
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Sebastiaan Remmers
- Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lars Björnebo
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Darko Bogdanovic
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Alberto Martini
- Department of Urology, Division of Surgery, The Univeristy of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - Alexander Valdman
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Giuseppe Carrieri
- Department of Urology and Kidney Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Mani Menon
- Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Olof Akre
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Martin Eklund
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Tobias Nordström
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Henrik Grönberg
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Anna Lantz
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Departments of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Peter Wiklund
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Archer P, Marvaso G, Detti B, Colombo F, Francolini G, Vandendorpe B, Thananayagam MA, Baty M, De Crevoisier R, Alongi F, Nicosia L, Scher N, Toledano A, Di Muzio N, Fodor A, Zilli T, Franzese C, Scorsetti M, Shelan M, Triggiani L, Aymes E, Le Deley MC, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Pasquier D. Salvage Stereotactic Reirradiation for Local Recurrence in the Prostatic Bed After Prostatectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study. Eur Urol Oncol 2023; 6:303-310. [PMID: 37012102 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2022] [Revised: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/11/2023] [Indexed: 04/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Management of local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) in the prostatic bed after radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy remains challenging. OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) reirradiation in this setting and evaluate prognostic factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We conducted a large multicenter retrospective series that included 117 patients who were treated with salvage SBRT for local recurrence in the prostatic bed after RP and radiotherapy in 11 centers across three countries. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Progression-free survival (PFS; biochemical, clinical, or both) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Biochemical recurrence was defined as prostate-specific antigen nadir +0.2 ng/ml, confirmed by a second increasing measure. The cumulative incidence of late toxicities was estimated using the Kalbfleisch-Prentice method by considering recurrence or death as a competing event. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The median follow-up was 19.5 mo. The median SBRT dose was 35 Gy. The median PFS was 23.5 mo (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 17.6-33.2). In the multivariable models, the volume of the recurrence and its contact with the urethrovesical anastomosis were significantly associated with PFS (hazard ratio [HR]/10 cm3 = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.08-1.96; p = 0.01 and HR = 3.35; 95% CI, 1.38-8.16; p = 0.008, respectively). The 3-yr cumulative incidence of grade ≥2 late GU or GI toxicity was 18% (95% CI, 10-26). In the multivariable analysis, a recurrence in contact with the urethrovesical anastomosis and D2% of the bladder were significantly associated with late toxicities of any grade (HR = 3.65; 95% CI, 1.61-8.24; p = 0.002 and HR/10 Gy = 1.88; 95% CI, 1.12-3.16; p = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Salvage SBRT for local recurrence in the prostate bed may offer encouraging control and acceptable toxicity. Therefore, further prospective studies are warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY We found that salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy after surgery and radiotherapy allows for encouraging control and acceptable toxicity in locally relapsed prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Archer
- Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Beatrice Detti
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Francesca Colombo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulio Francolini
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | | | | | - Manon Baty
- Department of Radiotherapy, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France
| | | | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy; University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Luca Nicosia
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy
| | - Nathaniel Scher
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hartmann Institute of Radiotherapy, Levallois-Perret, France; Integrative Oncology, Rafael Institute, Levallois-Perret, France
| | - Alain Toledano
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hartmann Institute of Radiotherapy, Levallois-Perret, France; Integrative Oncology, Rafael Institute, Levallois-Perret, France
| | - Nadia Di Muzio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Faculty of Medicine, Vita-Salute S. Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrei Fodor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele-Milan, Italy; Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele-Milan, Italy; Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Luca Triggiani
- Radiation Oncology Department, University and Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy
| | - Estelle Aymes
- Methodology and Biostatistic Unit, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
| | | | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - David Pasquier
- Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France; Univ. Lille, Centre de recherche en informatique, Signal et automatique de Lille, Cristal UMR 9189, Lille, France.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhong J, Hoskin P. Salvage Reirradiation Options for Treating Local Recurrence After Previous Prostatectomy and Radiotherapy: Where Do We Stand? Eur Urol Oncol 2023; 6:311-312. [PMID: 37179143 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Accepted: 04/04/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Jim Zhong
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK; Leeds Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, The Christie Hospital, Manchester, UK
| | - Peter Hoskin
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, The Christie Hospital, Manchester, UK; Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bögemann M, Shore ND, Smith MR, Tammela TLJ, Ulys A, Vjaters E, Polyakov S, Jievaltas M, Luz M, Alekseev B, Lebret T, Schostak M, Verholen F, Le Berre MA, Srinivasan S, Ortiz J, Mohamed AF, Sarapohja T, Fizazi K. Efficacy and Safety of Darolutamide in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Stratified by Prostate-specific Antigen Doubling Time: Planned Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 ARAMIS Trial. Eur Urol 2023; 83:212-221. [PMID: 36089529 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.07.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2021] [Revised: 07/01/2022] [Accepted: 07/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have a high risk of progression to metastatic disease, particularly if their prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) is ≤6 mo. However, patients remain at a high risk with a PSADT of >6 mo. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of darolutamide versus placebo in patients stratified by PSADT >6 or ≤6 mo. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A planned subgroup analysis of a global multicenter, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 trial in men with nmCRPC and PSADT ≤10 mo was conducted. INTERVENTION Patients were randomized 2:1 to oral darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, while continuing androgen-deprivation therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival (MFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and times to pain progression, first cytotoxic chemotherapy, and symptomatic skeletal events. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using validated prostate-relevant tools. Safety was recorded throughout the study. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 1509 patients enrolled, 469 had PSADT >6 mo (darolutamide n = 286; placebo n = 183) and 1040 had PSADT ≤6 mo (darolutamide n = 669; placebo n = 371). Baseline characteristics were balanced between subgroups. Darolutamide significantly prolonged MFS versus placebo in both subgroups (unstratified hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: PSADT >6 mo, 0.38 [0.26-0.55]; PSADT ≤6 mo, 0.41 [0.33-0.52]). OS and other efficacy and QoL endpoints favored darolutamide with significant improvement over placebo in both subgroups. The incidence of adverse events, including events commonly associated with androgen receptor inhibitors (fractures, falls, hypertension, and mental impairment), and discontinuations due to adverse events were low and similar to placebo. Limitations include small subgroup populations. CONCLUSIONS In patients with nmCRPC and PSADT >6 mo (maximum 10 mo), darolutamide provided a favorable benefit/risk ratio, characterized by significant improvements in MFS, OS, and other clinically relevant endpoints; maintenance of QoL; and favorable tolerability. PATIENT SUMMARY In patients with prostate cancer that has stopped responding to standard hormonal therapy (indicated by an increase in prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels), there is a risk that the cancer will spread to other parts of the body. This risk is highest when the time it takes for the PSA level to double (ie, "PSA doubling time" [PSADT]) is less than 6 mo. However, there is still a risk that the cancer will spread even if the PSADT is longer than 6 mo. In a group of patients whose PSADT was more than 6 mo but no more than 10 mo, treatment with darolutamide slowed the cancer spread and allowed them to live longer than patients who received placebo (inactive drug). Darolutamide treatment did not cause many side effects and helped maintain patients' quality of life without disruptions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin Bögemann
- Department of Urology, Münster University Medical Center, Münster, Germany.
| | - Neal D Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Atlantic Urology Clinics, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Matthew R Smith
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Teuvo L J Tammela
- Tampere University Hospital and Tampere University, Tampere, Finland
| | - Albertas Ulys
- Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Egils Vjaters
- Department of Urology, Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
| | - Sergey Polyakov
- Department of Urology, N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Centre, Minsk, Belarus
| | - Mindaugas Jievaltas
- Department of Urology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Medical Academy, Kaunas, Lithuania
| | - Murilo Luz
- Hospital Erasto Gaertner, Curitiba, Brazil
| | - Boris Alekseev
- Hertsen Moscow Oncology Research Institute, Moscow, Russia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Karim Fizazi
- Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wegener D, Aebersold DM, Grimm MO, Hammerer P, Froehner M, Graefen M, Boehmer D, Zips D, Wiegel T. Postoperative Radiotherapy of Prostate Cancer: Adjuvant versus Early Salvage. Biomedicines 2022; 10:biomedicines10092256. [PMID: 36140357 PMCID: PMC9496034 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10092256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Revised: 09/05/2022] [Accepted: 09/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Results of three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) and early salvage radiotherapy (eSRT) of prostate carcinoma and a subsequent meta-analysis of the individual patient data from these RCTs were recently published. The results suggest that early eSRT is as effective and potentially less toxic than ART. Therefore, eSRT should be considered the standard of care. However, due to limitations in the RCTs, ART remains a valid treatment option in patients with the combination of high-risk features such as Gleason Score (GS) 8–10, positive surgical margins (R1) and pathological T-stage 3 or 4 (pT3/4). This article provides a critical appraisal of the RCTs and the rationale for recommendations adopted in the current national guidelines regarding patients with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy (RP): ART should be offered in case of pT3/pT4 and R1 and Gleason Score 8–10; ART can be offered in case of pT3/pT4 and R0 and Gleason Score 8–10 as well as in case of multifocal R1 (including pT2) and Gleason Score 8–10. In any case, the alternative treatment option of eSRT in case of rising PSA should be discussed with the patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Wegener
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +49-070-7129-86143
| | - Daniel M. Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
| | - Marc-Oliver Grimm
- Department of Urology, Jena University Hospital, 07743 Jena, Germany
| | - Peter Hammerer
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Braunschweig, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Michael Froehner
- Department of Urology, Zeisigwaldkliniken Bethanien Chemnitz, 09130 Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini Clinic, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Dirk Boehmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité University Medicine Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Daniel Zips
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tuebingen, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Özman O, Veerman H, Schaake E, van der Poel H. External Validation of the Nomograms for Salvage Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy. BJU Int 2022; 129:587-590. [DOI: 10.1111/bju.15692] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2021] [Accepted: 01/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Oktay Özman
- Department of Urology Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital The Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam the Netherlands
| | - Hans Veerman
- Department of Urology Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital The Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam the Netherlands
- Prostate Cancer Network the Netherlands
| | - Eva Schaake
- Department of Radiation Oncology Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital The Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam the Netherlands
| | - Henk van der Poel
- Department of Urology Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital The Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam the Netherlands
- Prostate Cancer Network the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Is Associated with Improved Oncological Outcome in Men Treated with Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol 2022; 5:146-152. [DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2021] [Revised: 12/21/2021] [Accepted: 01/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
|
12
|
Bratt O. Has the time come for routine use of PET/CT for guiding treatment of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy? RE: JaniAB, et al. 18F-fluciclovine-PET/CT imaging versus conventional imaging alone to guide postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer (EMPIRE-1): a single centre, open-label, phase 2/3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2021 May 22;55:1895-1904. Scand J Urol 2021; 55:420-421. [PMID: 34633894 DOI: 10.1080/21681805.2021.1942192] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Ola Bratt
- Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Science, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|