1
|
Zwahlen DR, Schröder C, Holer L, Bernhard J, Hölscher T, Arnold W, Polat B, Hildebrandt G, Müller AC, Martin Putora P, Papachristofilou A, Schär C, Hayoz S, Sumila M, Zaugg K, Guckenberger M, Ost P, Giovanni Bosetti D, Reuter C, Gomez S, Khanfir K, Beck M, Thalmann GN, Aebersold DM, Ghadjar P. Erectile function preservation after salvage radiation therapy for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after prostatectomy: Five-year results of the SAKK 09/10 randomized phase 3 trial. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 47:100786. [PMID: 38706726 PMCID: PMC11067361 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100786] [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] [Received: 02/04/2024] [Revised: 03/20/2024] [Accepted: 03/20/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Objectives To evaluate effects of dose intensified salvage radiotherapy (sRT) on erectile function in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (PC) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Materials and methods Eligible patients had evidence of biochemical failure after RP and a PSA at randomization of ≤ 2 ng/ml. Erectile dysfunction (ED) was investigated as secondary endpoint within the multicentre randomized trial (February 2011 to April 2014) in patients receiving either 64 Gy or 70 Gy sRT. ED and quality of life (QoL) were assessed using CTCAE v4.0 and the EORTC QoL questionnaires C30 and PR25 at baseline and up to 5 years after sRT. Results 344 patients were evaluable. After RP 197 (57.3 %) patients had G0-2 ED while G3 ED was recorded in 147 (42.7 %) patients. Subsequently, sexual activity and functioning was impaired. 5 years after sRT, 101 (29.4 %) patients noted G0-2 ED. During follow-up, 44.2 % of patients with baseline G3 ED showed any improvement and 61.4 % of patients with baseline G0-2 ED showed worsening. Shorter time interval between RP and start of sRT (p = 0.007) and older age at randomization (p = 0.005) were significant predictors to more baseline ED and low sexual activity in the long-term. Age (p = 0.010) and RT technique (p = 0.031) had a significant impact on occurrence of long-term ED grade 3 and worse sexual functioning. During follow-up, no differences were found in erectile function, sexual activity, and sexual functioning between the 64 Gy and 70 Gy arm. Conclusion ED after RP is a known long-term side effect with significant impact on patients' QoL. ED was further affected by sRT, but dose intensification of sRT showed no significant impact on erectile function recovery or prevalence of de novo ED after sRT. Age, tumor stage, prostatectomy and RT-techniques, nerve-sparing and observation time were associated with long-term erectile function outcome.ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT01272050.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Lisa Holer
- Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Competence Center, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Jürg Bernhard
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and Bern University, Bern, Switzerland
- International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Tobias Hölscher
- University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Corinne Schär
- Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Competence Center, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Stefanie Hayoz
- Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Competence Center, Bern, Switzerland
| | | | | | | | - Piet Ost
- Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | | | | | | | - Marcus Beck
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
| | - George N. Thalmann
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and Bern University, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Daniel M. Aebersold
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and Bern University, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Pirus Ghadjar
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and Bern University, Bern, Switzerland
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Staal FHE, Janssen J, Oprea-Lager DE, Engelen AM, van Limbergen EJ, Smeenk RJ, de Jong MAA, Budiharto TCG, Jacobs I, Haverkort DMAD, Brouwer CL, Ng Wei Siang K, Langendijk JA, Verzijlbergen JF, de Jong IJ, Noordzij W, Aluwini S. Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography-Based Clinical Target Volume Delineation Guideline for Postprostatectomy Salvage Radiation Therapy: The PERYTON Guideline. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:688-696. [PMID: 37729971 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.09.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2023] [Revised: 09/04/2023] [Accepted: 09/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) scan is the standard imaging procedure for biochemical recurrent prostate cancer postprostatectomy because of its high detection rate at low serum prostate-specific antigen levels. However, existing guidelines for clinical target volume (CTV) in prostate bed salvage external beam radiation therapy (sEBRT) are primarily based on experience-based clinical consensus and have been validated using conventional imaging modalities. Therefore, this study aimed to optimize CTV definition in sEBRT by using PSMA PET/CT-detected local recurrences (LRs). METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with suspected LR on PSMA PET/CT postprostatectomy were retrospectively enrolled in 9 Dutch centers. Anonymized scans were centrally reviewed by an expert nuclear medicine physician. Each boundary of the CTV guideline from the Groupe Francophone de Radiothérapie en Urologie (GFRU) was evaluated and adapted to improve the accuracy and coverage of the area at risk of LR (CTV) on PSMA PET/CT. The proposed CTV adaptation was discussed with the radiation oncologists of the participating centers, and final consensus was reached. To assess reproducibility, the participating centers were asked to delineate 3 new cases according to the new PERYTON-CTV, and the submitted contours were evaluated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). RESULTS After central review, 93 LRs were identified on 83 PSMA PET/CTs. The proposed CTV definition improved the coverage of PSMA PET/CT-detected LRs from 67% to 96% compared with the GFRU-CTV, while reducing the GFRU-CTV by 25%. The new CTV was highly reproducible, with a mean DSC of 0.82 (range, 0.81-0.83). CONCLUSIONS This study contributes to the optimization of CTV definition in postprostatectomy sEBRT by using the pattern of LR detected on PSMA PET/CT. The PERYTON-CTV is highly reproducible across the participating centers and ensures coverage of 96% LRs while reducing the GFRU-CTV by 25%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Floor H E Staal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Jorinde Janssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Daniela E Oprea-Lager
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Evert J van Limbergen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MAASTRO Clinic, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Robert Jan Smeenk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Tom C G Budiharto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Jacobs
- Zuidwest Radiotherapeutisch Instituut, Vlissingen/Roosendaal, The Netherlands
| | | | - Charlotte L Brouwer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Kelvin Ng Wei Siang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J Fred Verzijlbergen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Ingle Jan de Jong
- Department of Urology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Walter Noordzij
- Department of Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Medicine, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Shafak Aluwini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Brooks C, Miles E, Hoskin PJ. Radiotherapy trial quality assurance processes: a systematic review. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:e104-e113. [PMID: 38423056 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00625-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Revised: 10/05/2023] [Accepted: 11/28/2023] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
Quality assurance remains a neglected component of many trials, particularly for technical interventions, such as surgery and radiotherapy, for which quality of treatment is an important component in defining outcomes. We aimed to evaluate evidence for the processes used in radiotherapy quality assurance of clinical trials. A systematic review was undertaken focusing on use of a pre-trial outlining benchmark case and subsequent on-trial individual case reviews of outlining for recruited patients. These pre-trial and on-trial checks are used to ensure consistency and standardisation of treatment for each patient recruited to the trial by confirming protocol compliance. Non-adherence to the trial protocol has been shown to have a negative effect on trial outcomes. 29 studies published between January, 2000, and December, 2022, were identified that reported on either outlining benchmark case results or outlining individual case review results, or both. The trials identified varied in their use of radiotherapy quality assurance practices and reporting of outcomes was inconsistent. Deviations from trial protocols were frequent, particularly regarding outlining. Studies correlating benchmark case results with on-trial individual case reviews provided mixed results, meaning firm conclusions could not be drawn regarding the influence of the pre-trial benchmark case on subsequent on-trial performance. The optimal radiotherapy quality assurance processes were unclear, and there was little evidence available. Improved reporting of outcomes from radiotherapy quality assurance programmes is needed to develop an evidence base for the optimal approach to radiotherapy quality assurance in trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chloe Brooks
- National Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance Group (RTTQA), National Institute for Health and Care Research, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.
| | - Elizabeth Miles
- National Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance Group (RTTQA), National Institute for Health and Care Research, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - Peter J Hoskin
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre and Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Staal FH, Siang KNW, Brouwer CL, Janssen J, Budiharto TC, Haverkort DM, Hollmann B, Jacobs I, De Jong MA, van de Sande MA, Vanneste BG, De Jong IJ, Verzijlbergen JF, Langendijk JA, Smeenk RJ, Aluwini S. Pretrial Quality Assurance for Hypofractionated Salvage Radiation Therapy After Prostatectomy in the Multi-Institutional PERYTON-trial. Adv Radiat Oncol 2024; 9:101379. [PMID: 38405312 PMCID: PMC10885595 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2023.101379] [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: 04/19/2023] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 02/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose The PERYTON trial is a multicenter randomized controlled trial that will investigate whether the treatment outcome of salvage external beam radiation therapy (sEBRT) will be improved with hypofractionated radiation therapy. A pretrial quality assurance (QA) program was undertaken to ensure protocol compliance within the PERYTON trial and to assess variation in sEBRT treatment protocols between the participating centers. Methods and Materials Completion of the QA program was mandatory for each participating center (N = 8) to start patient inclusion. The pretrial QA program included (1) a questionnaire on the center-specific sEBRT protocol, (2) a delineation exercise of the clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk, and (3) a treatment planning exercise. All contours were analyzed using the pairwise dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the 50th and 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD50 and HD95, respectively). The submitted treatment plans were reviewed for protocol compliance. Results The results of the questionnaire showed that high-quality, state-of-the-art radiation therapy techniques were used in the participating centers and identified variations of the sEBRT protocols used concerning the position verification and preparation techniques. The submitted CTVs showed significant variation, with a range in volume of 29 cm3 to 167 cm3, a mean pairwise DSC of 0.52, and a mean HD50 and HD95 of 2.3 mm and 24.4 mm, respectively. Only in 1 center the treatment plan required adaptation before meeting all constraints of the PERYTON protocol. Conclusions The pretrial QA of the PERYTON trial demonstrated that high-quality, but variable, radiation techniques were used in the 8 participating centers. The treatment planning exercise confirmed that the dose constraints of the PERYTON protocol were feasible for all participating centers. The observed variation in CTV delineation led to agreement on a new (image-based) delineation guideline to be used by all participating centers within the PERYTON trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Floor H.E. Staal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Kelvin Ng Wei Siang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Charlotte L. Brouwer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Jorinde Janssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Tom C.G. Budiharto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | - Birgit Hollmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HAGA Ziekenhuis, Den Haag, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Jacobs
- Zuidwest Radiotherapy Institute Vlissingen/Roosendaal, Vlissingen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Ben G.L. Vanneste
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MAASTRO Clinic, GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Igle Jan De Jong
- Department of Urology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J. Fred Verzijlbergen
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes A. Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Robert Jan Smeenk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Shafak Aluwini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Morgan HE, Wang K, Yan Y, Desai N, Hannan R, Chambers E, Cai B, Lin MH, Sher DJ, Wang J, Wang AZ, Jiang S, Timmerman R, Park CJ, Garant A. Preliminary Evaluation of PTV Margins for Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy of the Prostatic Fossa. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022:S1879-8500(22)00366-6. [PMID: 36509197 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2022] [Revised: 11/07/2022] [Accepted: 11/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In modern trials, traditional planning target volume (PTV) margins for postoperative prostate radiation therapy have been large (7-10 mm) to account for both daily changes in patient positioning and target deformation. With daily adaptive radiation therapy, these interfractional changes could be minimized, potentially reducing the margins required for treatment and improving adjacent normal-tissue dosimetry. METHODS AND MATERIALS A single-center retrospective study was conducted from March 2021 to November 2021. Patients receiving conventionally fractionated postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) for prostate cancer with pretreatment and posttreatment cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging (pre-CBCT and post-CBCT, respectively) were included (248 paired images). Pretreatment and posttreatment clinical target volumes (pre-CTVs and post-CTVs) were contoured by a single observer on all CBCTs and verified by a second observer. Motion was calculated from pre-CTV to that of the post-CTV, and predicted margins were calculated with van Herk's formula. Adequate coverage of the proposed planning target volume (PTV) margin expansions (pre-PTV) were verified by determining overlap with post-CTV. In a smaller cohort (25 paired images), dosimetric changes with the proposed online adaptive margins were compared with conventional plans in the Ethos emulator environment. RESULTS The estimated margins predicted to achieve ≥95% CTV coverage for 90% of the population were 1.6 mm, 2.0 mm, and 2.2 mm (x-, y-, and z -xes, respectively), with 95% of the absolute region of interest displacement being within 1.9 mm, 2.8 mm, and 2.1 mm. After symmetrically expanding all pre-CTVs by 3 mm, the percentage of paired images achieving ≥95% CTV coverage was 97.1%. When comparing adaptive plans (3-mm margins) with scheduled plans (7-mm margins), rectum dosimetry significantly improved, with an average relative reduction in V40Gy[cc] of 59.2% and V65Gy[cc] of 79.5% (where V40Gy and V65Gy are defined as the volumes receiving 40 Gy and 65 Gy or higher dose, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Online daily adaptive radiation therapy could significantly decrease PTV margins for prostatic PORT and improve rectal dosimetry, with a symmetrical expansion of 3 mm achieving excellent coverage in this cohort. These results need to be validated in a larger prospective cohort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard E Morgan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Radiation Oncology, CARTI Cancer Center, Little Rock, Arkansas
| | - Kai Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Yulong Yan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Neil Desai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Raquibul Hannan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Eric Chambers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Bin Cai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Mu-Han Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - David J Sher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Jing Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Andrew Z Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Steve Jiang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Medical Artificial Intelligence and Automation (MAIA) Laboratory, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Robert Timmerman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Chunjoo Justin Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida.
| | - Aurelie Garant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Achard V, Jaccard M, Vanhoutte F, Siva S, Heikkilä R, Dirix P, Liefhooghe N, Otte FX, Gomez-Iturriaga A, Berghen C, Shelan M, Conde-Moreno A, López Campos F, Papachristofilou A, Guckenberger M, Meersschout S, Putora PM, Zwahlen D, Couñago F, Scorsetti M, Eito C, Barrado M, Zapatero A, Muto P, Van De Voorde L, Lamanna G, Koutsouvelis N, Dipasquale G, Ost P, Zilli T. Oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer: Radiotherapy quality assurance of the randomized PEACE V-STORM phase II trial. Radiother Oncol 2022; 172:1-9. [PMID: 35476942 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.04.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2022] [Revised: 03/29/2022] [Accepted: 04/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Aim of this study is to report the results of the radiotherapy quality assurance program of the PEACE V-STORM randomized phase II trial for pelvic nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIAL AND METHODS A benchmark case (BC) consisting of a postoperative case with 2 nodal recurrences was used for both stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT, 30 Gy/3 fx) and whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT, 45 Gy/25 fx + SIB boost to 65 Gy). RESULTS BC of 24 centers were analyzed. The overall grading for delineation variation of the 1st BC was rated as 'UV' (Unacceptable Variation) or 'AV' (Acceptable Variation) for 1 and 7 centers for SBRT (33%), and 3 and 8 centers for WPRT (46%), respectively. An inadequate upper limit of the WPRT CTV (n = 2), a missing delineation of the prostate bed (n = 1), and a missing nodal target volume (n = 1 for SBRT and WPRT) constituted the observed 'UV'. With the 2nd BC (n = 11), the overall delineation review showed 2 and 8 'AV' for SBRT and WPRT, respectively, with no 'UV'. For the plan review of the 2nd BC, all treatment plans were per protocol for WPRT. SBRT plans showed variability in dose normalization (Median D90% = 30.1 Gy, range 22.9-33.2 Gy and 30.6 Gy, range 26.8-34.2 Gy for nodes 1 and 2 respectively). CONCLUSIONS Up to 46% of protocol deviations were observed in delineation of WPRT for nodal oligorecurrent PCa, while dosimetric results of SBRT showed the greatest disparities between centers. Repeated BC resulted in an improved adherence to the protocol, translating in an overall acceptable contouring and planning compliance rate among participating centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vérane Achard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland
| | - Maud Jaccard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland
| | | | - Shankar Siva
- EJ Whitten Foundation Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Epworth Healthcare and Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Australia
| | - Reino Heikkilä
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Norway
| | - Piet Dirix
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Kankernetwerk, Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Belgium
| | - Nick Liefhooghe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - François-Xavier Otte
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jules Bordet Institute and Hôpital Erasme, University Clinics of Brussels, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium
| | - Alfonso Gomez-Iturriaga
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cruces University Hospital (Biocruces Health Research Institute), Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Charlien Berghen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - Antonio Conde-Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic la Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Fernando López Campos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Daniel Zwahlen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonspital Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Felipe Couñago
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Quironsalud, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Spain
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, IRCSS, Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Clara Eito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Instituto Oncólogico Clinica Universitaria IMQ, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Marta Barrado
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Spain
| | - Almudena Zapatero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital La Princesa, Madrid, Spain
| | - Paolo Muto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Napoli Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale, Italy
| | | | - Giorgio Lamanna
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Piet Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Adherence to contouring and treatment planning requirements within a multicentric trial -results of the quality assurance of the SAKK 09/10 trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:80-91. [PMID: 34990777 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.12.174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2021] [Revised: 12/23/2021] [Accepted: 12/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the results of the radiation therapy (RT) quality assurance (QA) program of the phase III randomized "XXXX-Anonymized for Review" trial in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (PC) patients after prostatectomy. METHODS AND MATERIALS Within the "XXXX-Anonymized for Review" trial testing 64Gy versus 70Gy salvage RT, a central collection of treatment plans were performed, which were thoroughly reviewed by a dedicated medical physicist and radiation oncologist. Adherence to the treatment protocol and specifically to the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) guidelines for target volume definition (classified as deviation observed yes vs. no) and its potential correlation with acute and late toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0) and freedom from biochemical progression (FFBP) were investigated. RESULTS The treatment plans of 344 patients treated between February 2011 and April 2014 depicted important deviations to the EORTC guidelines and to the recommendations per trial protocol. For example, in up to half of the cases, the delineated structures deviated from the protocol (e.g., prostate bed (PB) in 48.8%, rectal wall (RW) in 41%). In addition, variations in clinical (CTV) - and planning target volume (PTV) occurred frequently (e.g., CTV and PTV deviations in up to 42.4% and 25.9%, respectively). The detected deviations showed a significant association with a lower risk of grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal (GI) acute toxicity when CTV not overlapped RW vs. CTV overlapping RW, (OR 0.43; CI [0.22, 0.85]; p= 0.014), and a higher rate of grade ≥ 2 late genitourinary (GU) toxicity in case of the CTV overlapped with RW, (OR 2.58; CI [1.17, 5.72]; p= 0.019). A marginally significant lower risk of grade ≥ 2 late GU toxicity in patients when PB not overlapping RW versus overlapping RW was observed (OR 0.51; CI [0.25, 1.03]; p= 0.06). In addition, a marginally significant decrease of FFBP in patients with PTV not including surgical clips as potential markers of the limits of the prostate bed, (HR 1.44; CI [0.96, 2.17]; p= 0.07) was observed. CONCLUSIONS Despite a thorough QA program, the central review of a phase-III trial showed limited adherence to treatment protocol recommendations which was associated with a higher risk of toxicity by means of acute or late GI or GU toxicity and showed a trend towards worse FFBP. Data from this QA review may help refine future QA programs and prostate bed delineation guidelines.
Collapse
|
8
|
Ghadjar P, Hayoz S, Bernhard J, Zwahlen DR, Hölscher T, Gut P, Polat B, Hildebrandt G, Müller AC, Plasswilm L, Papachristofilou A, Schär C, Sumila M, Zaugg K, Guckenberger M, Ost P, Reuter C, Bosetti DG, Khanfir K, Gomez S, Wust P, Thalmann GN, Aebersold DM. Dose-intensified Versus Conventional-dose Salvage Radiotherapy for Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Prostatectomy: The SAKK 09/10 Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Eur Urol 2021; 80:306-315. [PMID: 34140144 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2020] [Accepted: 05/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is utilized for biochemical progression of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE To report the outcomes of the SAKK 09/10 trial comparing conventional and dose-intensified SRT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS SAKK 09/10 was a randomized, multicenter, phase 3 trial that recruited men with biochemical progression after RP. INTERVENTION Patients were randomly assigned to conventional-dose (64 Gy) or dose-intensified SRT (70 Gy) to the prostate bed without hormonal therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical progression (FFBP). Secondary endpoints included clinical progression-free survival (PFS), time to hormonal treatment, overall survival (OS), acute and late toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0), and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Between February 2011 and April 2014, 350 patients were randomly assigned to 64 Gy (n = 175) or 70 Gy (n = 175). Median prostate-specific antigen at randomization was 0.3 ng/ml. After median follow-up of 6.2 yr, the median FFBP was 8.2 yr in the 64 Gy arm and 7.6 in the 70 Gy arm (log-rank p = 0.4), with a hazard ratio of 1.14 (95% confidence interval 0.82-1.60). The 6-year FFBP rates were 62% and 61%, respectively. No significant differences in clinical PFS, time to hormonal treatment, or OS were observed. Late grade 2 and 3 genitourinary toxicity was observed in 35 (21%) and 13 (7.9%) patients in the 64 Gy arm, and 46 (26%) and seven (4%) in the 70 Gy arm, respectively (p = 0.8). Late grade 2 and 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in 12 (7.3%) and seven patients (4.2%) in the 64 Gy arm, and 35 (20%) and four (2.3%) in the 70 Gy arm, respectively (p = 0.009). There were no significant differences in QoL. CONCLUSIONS Conventional-dose SRT to the prostate bed is sufficient in patients with early biochemical progression of prostate cancer after RP. PATIENT SUMMARY The optimal radiation therapy dose for patients who have increased tumor markers after surgery for prostate cancer is unclear. We found that administering a higher dose only increased the gastrointestinal side effects without providing any benefits to the patient. This clinical trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01272050.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pirus Ghadjar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Switzerland.
| | | | - Jürg Bernhard
- IBCSG Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Department of Medical Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Daniel R Zwahlen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - Tobias Hölscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Philipp Gut
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - Bülent Polat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Guido Hildebrandt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | | | - Ludwig Plasswilm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Marcin Sumila
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hirslanden Hospital Group, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Kathrin Zaugg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Stadtspital Triemli, Zürich, Switzerland
| | | | - Piet Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Christiane Reuter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Münsterlingen, Switzerland
| | - Davide G Bosetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Istituto Oncologico della Svizzera Italiana, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Kaouthar Khanfir
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hôpital Valais, Sion, Switzerland
| | - Silvia Gomez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Peter Wust
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - George N Thalmann
- Department of Urology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
González-San Segundo C, Gómez-Iturriaga A, Couñago F. Are all prostate cancer patients "fit" for salvage radiotherapy? World J Clin Oncol 2020; 11:1-10. [PMID: 31976305 PMCID: PMC6935690 DOI: 10.5306/wjco.v11.i1.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2019] [Revised: 11/13/2019] [Accepted: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The indication for salvage radiotherapy (RT) (SRT) in patients with biochemically-recurrent prostate cancer after surgery is based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at the time of biochemical recurrence. Although there are clear criteria (pT3-pT4 disease and/or positive margins) for the use of adjuvant radiotherapy, no specific clinical or tumour-related criteria have yet been defined for SRT. In retrospective series, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival (PFS) ranges from 35%-85%, depending on the PSA level at the start of RT. Two phase 3 trials have compared SRT with and without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), finding that combined treatment (SRT+ADT) improves both PFS and overall survival. Similar to adjuvant RT, the indication for ADT is based on tumour-related factors such as PSA levels, tumour stage, and surgical margins. The number of patients referred to radiation oncology departments for SRT continues to rise. In the present article, we define the clinical, therapeutic, and tumour-related factors that we believe should be evaluated before prescribing SRT. In addition, we propose a decision algorithm to determine whether the patient is fit for SRT. This algorithm will help to identify patients in whom radiotherapy is likely to improve survival without significantly worsening quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Felipe Couñago
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Quirónsalud Madrid, Madrid 28003, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Cloak K, Jameson MG, Paneghel A, Wiltshire K, Kneebone A, Pearse M, Sidhom M, Tang C, Fraser‐Browne C, Holloway LC, Haworth A. Contour variation is a primary source of error when delivering post prostatectomy radiotherapy: Results of the Trans‐Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 08.03 Radiotherapy Adjuvant Versus Early Salvage (RAVES) benchmarking exercise. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2019; 63:390-398. [DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.12884] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2018] [Accepted: 03/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kirrily Cloak
- South Western Sydney Clinical School University of NSW Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Cancer Therapy Centre Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Michael G Jameson
- South Western Sydney Clinical School University of NSW Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Cancer Therapy Centre Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | | | | | - Andrew Kneebone
- University of Sydney Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Royal North Shore Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | | | - Mark Sidhom
- South Western Sydney Clinical School University of NSW Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Cancer Therapy Centre Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Colin Tang
- Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital Perth Western Australia Australia
| | | | - Lois C Holloway
- South Western Sydney Clinical School University of NSW Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Cancer Therapy Centre Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
- Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research Liverpool Hospital Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ghadjar P, Hayoz S, Bernhard J, Zwahlen DR, Stein J, Hölscher T, Gut P, Polat B, Hildebrandt G, Müller AC, Putora PM, Papachristofilou A, Schär C, Dal Pra A, Biaggi Rudolf C, Wust P, Aebersold DM, Thalmann GN. Impact of dose intensified salvage radiation therapy on urinary continence recovery after radical prostatectomy: Results of the randomized trial SAKK 09/10. Radiother Oncol 2017; 126:257-262. [PMID: 29103826 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.10.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2017] [Revised: 10/15/2017] [Accepted: 10/15/2017] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Adjuvant radiation therapy (aRT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is associated with impaired urinary continence recovery as compared to surveillance. Less is known regarding the effect of salvage radiation therapy (sRT) dose intensification on continence outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Urinary continence recovery was investigated within a multicentre randomized trial in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer patients who received either 64 Gy (32 fractions) or 70 Gy (35 fractions) sRT. Incontinence was assessed using Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 at baseline, at the end of sRT and 3 months afterward. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed with the EORTC QoL questionnaires C30 and PR25 at baseline and 3 months after completion of sRT. A total of 344 patients were evaluable. RESULTS At baseline 233 (68%) of patients were fully continent and 14% in both arms became incontinent three months after treatment. Of the remaining 111 (32%) patients being incontinent at baseline, continence recovery was achieved 3 months after sRT by 44% vs. 41% with 64 vs. 70 Gy, respectively (p = 0.8). This analysis is limited by its short follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Dose intensification of sRT had no impact on early urinary continence recovery or prevalence of de novo incontinence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pirus Ghadjar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern, Switzerland, now at Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany; Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.
| | | | - Jürg Bernhard
- IBCSG Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | - Daniel R Zwahlen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - Jürgen Stein
- Department of Urology, Bundeswehrkrankenhaus Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Tobias Hölscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Dresden, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Alan Dal Pra
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | | | - Peter Wust
- Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
| | | | - George N Thalmann
- Department of Urology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Latorzeff I, Sargos P, Loos G, Supiot S, Guerif S, Carrie C. Delineation of the Prostate Bed: The "Invisible Target" Is Still an Issue? Front Oncol 2017; 7:108. [PMID: 28620579 PMCID: PMC5449739 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2017.00108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2017] [Accepted: 05/10/2017] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
For pathological high-risk prostate cancer, adjuvant irradiation has shown a survival benefit. Phase III studies have highlighted that half men would face biochemical relapse and would be candidate for radiotherapy at adjuvant or salvage times. Despite at least four published international contouring guidelines from different collaborative groups, discrepancies remain for volumes, delineation, and margins to be considered in order to optimize radiotherapy planning. This article from “Groupe d’Etude des Tumeurs UroGénitales (GETUG)” members will focus on controversies to help clinicians to create best volume delineation for adjuvant or salvage post prostatectomy radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Igor Latorzeff
- Department of Oncology Radiotherapy, Bât Atrium, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France
| | - Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France
| | - Geneviève Loos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Centre Jean-Perrin, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut de Cancérologie de L'Ouest René Gauducheau, Nantes, France
| | - Stéphane Guerif
- Department of Radiotherapy, CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ghadjar P, Hayoz S, Zwahlen DR, Thalmann GN, Aebersold DM. Is Dose-Intensified Salvage Radiation Therapy After Prostatectomy Beneficial? J Clin Oncol 2017; 35:1490-1491. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2016.70.7265] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Pirus Ghadjar
- Pirus Ghadjar, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Stefanie Hayoz, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer (SAKK) Research Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland; and George N. Thalmann and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | - Stefanie Hayoz
- Pirus Ghadjar, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Stefanie Hayoz, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer (SAKK) Research Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland; and George N. Thalmann and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | - Daniel R. Zwahlen
- Pirus Ghadjar, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Stefanie Hayoz, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer (SAKK) Research Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland; and George N. Thalmann and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | - George N. Thalmann
- Pirus Ghadjar, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Stefanie Hayoz, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer (SAKK) Research Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland; and George N. Thalmann and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | - Daniel M. Aebersold
- Pirus Ghadjar, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Stefanie Hayoz, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer (SAKK) Research Coordinating Center, Bern, Switzerland; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland; and George N. Thalmann and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Ghadjar P, Hayoz S, Zwahlen DR, Thalmann GN, Aebersold DM. In Regard to Pisansky et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 97:438-439. [PMID: 28068252 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.10.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2016] [Accepted: 10/14/2016] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Pirus Ghadjar
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Target volume definition for post prostatectomy radiotherapy: Do the consensus guidelines correctly define the inferior border of the CTV? Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2016; 21:525-31. [PMID: 27656107 DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2016.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2015] [Revised: 04/01/2016] [Accepted: 07/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
AIM We compare urethrogram delineation of the caudal aspect of the anastomosis to the recommended guidelines of post prostatectomy radiotherapy. BACKGROUND Level one evidence has established the indications for, and importance of, adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Several guidelines have recently addressed delineation of the prostate bed target volume including identification of the vesico-urethral anastomosis, taken as the first CT slice caudal to visible urine in the bladder neck. The inferior border of clinical target volume is then variably defined 5-12 mm below this anastomosis or 15 mm cranial to the penile bulb. METHODS AND MATERIALS Thirty-three patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy were reviewed. All underwent planning CT with urethrogram. The authors (MM, JC) independently identified the CT slice caudal to the last slice showing urine in the bladder neck (called the CT Reference Slice), and measured the distance between this and the tip of the urethrogram cone. Five patients also had a diagnostic MRI at the time of CT planning to better visualize the anatomy. RESULTS Sixty-six readings were obtained. The mean distance between the Bladder CT Reference Slice and the most cranial urethrogram contrast slice was 16.1 mm (MM 16.4 mm, JC 15.8 mm), range: 6.8-34.2 mm. The mean distance between the urethrogram tip and the ischial tuberosities was 19.9 mm (range 12.5-29.8 mm). The mean distance between the CT Reference Slice and the ischial tuberosities was 36.9 mm (range 28.3-52.4 mm). CONCLUSIONS Guidelines for prostate bed radiation post prostatectomy have been developed after publication of the trials proving benefit of such treatment, and are thus untested. The anastomosis is a frequent site of local relapse but is variably defined by the existing guidelines, none of which take into account anatomic patient variation and all of which are at variance with urethrogram data. We recommend the use of planning urethrogram to better delineate the vesico-urethral junction and minimize the potential for geographic misses.
Collapse
|
16
|
Salvage radiotherapy for patients with rising PSA. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17:e314-e315. [PMID: 27511150 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30276-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2016] [Revised: 06/20/2016] [Accepted: 06/22/2016] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
17
|
Beck M, Barelkowski T, Kaul D, Wecker S, Thieme AH, Zwahlen DR, Wust P, Aebersold DM, Budach V, Ghadjar P. Role of Dose Intensification for Salvage Radiation Therapy after Radical Prostatectomy. Front Oncol 2016; 6:48. [PMID: 26973815 PMCID: PMC4771737 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2016.00048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2016] [Accepted: 02/17/2016] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
For primary radiation therapy (RT) of prostate cancer, dose intensification is established as standard of care. Less is known on the role of dose intensification in the postprostatectomy setting for salvage RT. Thus, we aimed to identify and summarize the existing literature. In retrospective analyses, dose-intensified salvage RT showed a superior biochemical control compared to standard dose salvage radiation with favorable acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity rates, especially when modern radiation techniques such as intensity modulated RT were applied. We identified one randomized phase III trial addressing the potential benefits of dose-intensified salvage RT (SAKK 09/10). Recently, acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities and early quality of life data of this trial were reported, and no significant difference in acute toxicities between both treatment arms were found; however, a significant worsening of genitourinary quality of life was noted in the dose-intensified treatment arm. Whereas dose-intensified salvage RT appears to be feasible and well tolerated, the improved biochemical control rates using dose intensified RT as suggested by retrospective analyses have yet to be validated by prospective trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcus Beck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | - Tomasz Barelkowski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | - David Kaul
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | - Sascha Wecker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | - Alexander H Thieme
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | | | - Peter Wust
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | | | - Volker Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| | - Pirus Ghadjar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin , Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ghadjar P, Hayoz S, Bernhard J, Zwahlen DR, Hölscher T, Gut P, Guckenberger M, Hildebrandt G, Müller AC, Plasswilm L, Papachristofilou A, Stalder L, Biaggi-Rudolf C, Sumila M, Kranzbühler H, Najafi Y, Ost P, Azinwi NC, Reuter C, Bodis S, Kaouthar K, Wust P, Thalmann GN, Aebersold DM. Acute Toxicity and Quality of Life After Dose-Intensified Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Prostatectomy: First Results of the Randomized Trial SAKK 09/10. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33:4158-66. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2015.63.3529] [Citation(s) in RCA: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Patients with biochemical failure (BF) after radical prostatectomy may benefit from dose-intensified salvage radiation therapy (SRT) of the prostate bed. We performed a randomized phase III trial assessing dose intensification. Patients and Methods Patients with BF but without evidence of macroscopic disease were randomly assigned to either 64 or 70 Gy. Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or intensity-modulated radiation therapy/rotational techniques were used. The primary end point was freedom from BF. Secondary end points were acute toxicity according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0) and quality of life (QoL) according to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires C30 and PR25. Results Three hundred fifty patients were enrolled between February 2011 and April 2014. Three patients withdrew informed consent, and three patients were not eligible, resulting in 344 patients age 48 to 75 years in the safety population. Thirty patients (8.7%) had grade 2 and two patients (0.6%) had grade 3 genitourinary (GU) baseline symptoms. Acute grade 2 and 3 GU toxicity was observed in 22 patients (13.0%) and one patient (0.6%), respectively, with 64 Gy and in 29 patients (16.6%) and three patients (1.7%), respectively, with 70 Gy (P = .2). Baseline grade 2 GI toxicity was observed in one patient (0.6%). Acute grade 2 and 3 GI toxicity was observed in 27 patients (16.0%) and one patient (0.6%), respectively, with 64 Gy, and in 27 patients (15.4%) and four patients (2.3%), respectively, with 70 Gy (P = .8). Changes in early QoL were minor. Patients receiving 70 Gy reported a more pronounced and clinically relevant worsening in urinary symptoms (mean difference in change score between arms, 3.6; P = .02). Conclusion Dose-intensified SRT was associated with low rates of acute grade 2 and 3 GU and GI toxicity. The impact of dose-intensified SRT on QoL was minor, except for a significantly greater worsening in urinary symptoms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pirus Ghadjar
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Stefanie Hayoz
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Jürg Bernhard
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Daniel R. Zwahlen
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Tobias Hölscher
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Philipp Gut
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Guido Hildebrandt
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Arndt-Christian Müller
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Ludwig Plasswilm
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Alexandros Papachristofilou
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Lukas Stalder
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Christine Biaggi-Rudolf
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Marcin Sumila
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Helmut Kranzbühler
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Yousef Najafi
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Piet Ost
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Ngwa C. Azinwi
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Christiane Reuter
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Stephan Bodis
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Khanfir Kaouthar
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Peter Wust
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - George N. Thalmann
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| | - Daniel M. Aebersold
- Pirus Ghadjar, Jürg Bernhard, George N. Thalmann, and Daniel M. Aebersold, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern; Stefanie Hayoz, Lukas Stalder, and Christine Biaggi-Rudolf, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Coordinating Center; Jürg Bernhard, International Breast Cancer Study Group Coordinating Center, Bern; Daniel R. Zwahlen, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur; Philipp Gut, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern; Ludwig Plasswilm, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; Alexandros
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Murray JR, McNair HA, Dearnaley DP. Rationale and development of image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy post-prostatectomy: the present standard of care? Cancer Manag Res 2015; 7:331-44. [PMID: 26635484 PMCID: PMC4646477 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s51955] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
The indications for post-prostatectomy radiotherapy have evolved over the last decade, although the optimal timing, dose, and target volume remain to be well defined. The target volume is susceptible to anatomical variations with its borders interfacing with the rectum and bladder. Image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy has become the gold standard for radical prostate radiotherapy. Here we review the current evidence for image-guided techniques with intensity-modulated radiotherapy to the prostate bed and describe current strategies to reduce or account for interfraction and intrafraction motion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia R Murray
- Academic Urology Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, London
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Helen A McNair
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - David P Dearnaley
- Academic Urology Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, London
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Müller AC, Zips D, Heinrich V, Lamprecht U, Voigt O, Burock S, Budach V, Wust P, Ghadjar P. Regional hyperthermia and moderately dose-escalated salvage radiotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer. Protocol of a phase II trial. Radiat Oncol 2015; 10:138. [PMID: 26152590 PMCID: PMC4493985 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-015-0442-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2015] [Accepted: 06/20/2015] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Current studies on salvage radiotherapy (sRT) investigate timing, dose-escalation and anti-hormonal treatment (ADT) for recurrent prostate cancer. These approaches could either be limited by radiation-related susceptibility of the anastomosis or by suspected side-effects of long-term ADT. A phase II protocol was developed to investigate the benefit and tolerability of regional hyperthermia with moderately dose-escalated radiotherapy. METHODS The study hypothesis is that radio-thermotherapy is a safe and feasible salvage treatment modality. The primary endpoint is safety measured by frequency of grade 3+ genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AE) according to Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) version 4. Feasibility is defined by number of hyperthermia treatments (n ≥ 7) and feasibility of radiotherapy according to protocol. Target volume delineation is performed according to the EORTC guidelines. Radiation treatment is administered with single doses of 2 Gy 5×/week to a total dose of 70 Gy. Regional hyperthermia is given 2×/week to a total of 10 treatments. RESULTS European centres participate in the phase II trial using intensity modulated RT (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc technique (VMAT). The initiating centres were participants of the SAKK 09/10 study, where the same patient criteria and target volume definition (mandatory successful performed dummy run) were applied insuring a high standardisation of the study procedures. CONCLUSIONS The introduced phase II study implements highly precise image-guided radiotherapy and regional hyperthermia. If the phase II study is found to be safe and feasible, a multicenter phase III study is planned to test whether the addition of regional hyperthermia to dose-intensified sRT improves biochemical control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arndt-Christian Müller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
| | - Daniel Zips
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
| | - Vanessa Heinrich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
| | - Ulf Lamprecht
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
| | - Otilia Voigt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
| | - Susen Burock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Volker Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Peter Wust
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Pirus Ghadjar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
The natural course of pT2 prostate cancer with positive surgical margin: predicting biochemical recurrence. World J Urol 2015; 33:973-9. [PMID: 25682109 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1510-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2015] [Accepted: 02/06/2015] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To predict biochemical recurrence respecting the natural course of pT2 prostate cancer with positive surgical margin (R1) and no adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS A multicenter data analysis of 956 patients with pT2R1N0/Nx tumors was performed. Patients underwent radical prostatectomy between 1994 and 2009. No patients received neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. All prostate specimens were re-evaluated according to a well-defined protocol. The association of pathological and clinical features, in regard to BCR, was calculated using various statistical tests. RESULTS With a mean follow-up of 48 months, BCR was found in 25.4 %. In univariate analysis, multiple parameters such as tumor volume, PSA, Gleason at positive margin were significantly associated with BCR. However, in multivariate analysis, Gleason score (GS) of the prostatectomy specimen was the only significant parameter for BCR. Median time to recurrence for GS ≤ 6 was not reached; 5-year BCR-free survival was 82 %; and they were 127 months and 72 % for GS 3+4, 56 months and 54 % for GS 4 + 3, and 27 months and 32 % for GS 8-10. The retrospective approach is a limitation of our study. CONCLUSIONS Our study provides data on the BCR in pT2R1-PCa without adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy and thus a rationale for an individual's risk stratification. The data support patients and physicians in estimating the individual risk and timing of BCR and thus serve to personalize the management in pT2R1-PCa.
Collapse
|
22
|
[Postoperative radiotherapy of prostate cancer]. Cancer Radiother 2014; 18:517-23. [PMID: 25195116 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2014.07.149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2014] [Revised: 07/11/2014] [Accepted: 07/17/2014] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
Between 10 and 40% of patients who have undergone a radical prostatectomy may have a biologic recurrence. Local or distant failure represents the possible patterns of relapse. Patients at high-risk for local relapse have extraprostatic disease, positive surgical margins or seminal vesicles infiltration or high Gleason score at pathology. Three phase-III randomized clinical trials have shown that, for these patients, adjuvant irradiation reduces the risk of tumoral progression without higher toxicity. Salvage radiotherapy for late relapse allows a disease control in 60-70% of the cases. Several research in order to improve the therapeutic ratio of the radiotherapy after prostatectomy are evaluate in the French Groupe d'Étude des Tumeurs Urogénitales (Gétug) and of the French association of urology (Afu). The Gétug-Afu 17 trial will provide answers to the question of the optimal moment for postoperative radiotherapy for pT3-4 R1 pN0 Nx patients, with the objective of comparing an immediate treatment to a differed early treatment initiated at biological recurrence. The Gétug-Afu 22 questions the place of a short hormonetherapy combined with image-guided, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in adjuvant situation for a detectable prostate specific antigen (PSA). The implementation of a multicenter quality control within the Gétug-Afu in order to harmonize a modern postoperative radiotherapy will allow the development of a dose escalation IMRT after surgery.
Collapse
|