Tolerance doses for late adverse events after hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer on trial NRG Oncology/RTOG 0415

An exposure-safety analysis to support the dosage of the novel AKT inhibitor capivasertib

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate capivasertib exposure-response relationships for clinical safety events to support dosage selection.

METHODS

Data from 277 patients with solid tumors participating in three phase 1 studies were analyzed. Capivasertib 80-800 mg was administered as monotherapy orally twice daily (BID) on continuous or intermittent (4 days on, 3 days off [4/3] or 2 days on, 5 days off [2/5]) schedules. Relationships between exposure related metrics (dose, weekly dose, AUC, AUCPWD, Cmax, and Cmin) and probability of safety endpoints (adverse event [AE] leading to dose discontinuation, AE leading to dose modification, serious AE [SAE], AE grade ≥ 3, AE grade ≥ 1, diarrhea AE grade ≥ 2, rash AE grade ≥ 2, hyperglycemia AE grade ≥ 3 and increased blood glucose > 13.9 mmol/L) were evaluated by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Significant exposure-response relationships were identified for all safety endpoints evaluated, except for AE grade ≥ 1. The analysis suggested that most of the safety endpoints are driven by the total weekly exposure, whereas glucose elevations are driven by the exposure achieved within a dosing interval. The probability of experiencing an AE leading to dose discontinuation, AE leading to dose modification, SAE, AE grade ≥ 3, diarrhea or rash were lower with the 480 mg BID [4/3] schedule than with the 320 mg BID continuous schedule.

CONCLUSION

Significant exposure-response relationships were identified for safety endpoints when capivasertib was administered to patients with solid tumors suggesting that the intermittent [4/3] schedule is better tolerated than the continuous schedule due to lower total weekly exposure.

Radiation technique and outcomes following moderately hypofractionated treatment of low risk prostate cancer: a secondary analysis of RTOG 0415

BACKGROUND

While moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) for prostate cancer (PC) is commonly delivered by intensity modulated radiation therapy, IMRT has not been prospectively compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in this context. We conducted a secondary analysis of the phase III RTOG 0415 trial comparing survival and toxicity outcomes for low-risk PC following MHRT with IMRT versus 3D-CRT.

METHODS

RTOG 0415 was a phase III, non-inferiority trial randomizing low-risk PC patients to either MHRT or conventionally fractionated radiation with stratification by RT technique. A secondary analysis for differences in overall survival (OS), biochemical recurrence free survival (BRFS), or toxicity by EPIC scores and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) was performed.

RESULTS

1079 patients received the allocated intervention with a median follow up of 5.8 years. 79.1% of patients were treated with IMRT and radiation technique was balanced between arms. Across all patients, RT technique was not associated with significant differences in BRFS, OS, or rates of acute and late toxicities. For patients completing MHRT, there was a difference in the late GU toxicity distribution between 3D-CRT and IMRT but no difference in late grade 2 or greater GU or GI toxicity. Stratifying patients by RT technique and fractionation, no significant differences were observed in the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in EPIC urinary and bowel scores following RT.

CONCLUSIONS

RT technique did not impact clinical outcomes following MHRT for low-risk PC. Despite different late GU toxicity distributions in patients treated with MHRT by IMRT or 3D-CRT, there was no difference in late Grade 2 or greater GU or GI toxicity or patient reported toxicity. Increases in late GU and GI toxicity following MHRT compared to CFRT, as demonstrated in the initial publication of RTOG 0415, do not appear related to a 3D-CRT treatment technique.

Acute and long-term toxicity in primary hypofractionated external photon radiation therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Compelling evidence exists for the iso-effectiveness and safety of moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy (Hypo-RT) schedules [1, 2]. However, international guidelines are not congruent regarding recommendation of ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy (UHF-RT) to all risk groups.

METHODS

The current review gives an overview of clinically relevant toxicity extracted from major randomized controlled trials (RCT) trials comparing conventional to hypofractionated regimes in the primary setting of external photon radiation. Functional impairments are reported by using physician-rated and patient-reported scores using validated questionnaires.

RESULTS

The uncertain radiobiology of the urethra/bladder when applying extreme hypofractionation may have contributed to worse acute urinary toxicity score in the Scandinavian UHF-RT and worse subacute toxicity in PACE-B. The observed trend of increased acute GI toxicity in several moderate Hypo-RT trials and one UHF-RT trial, the Scandinavian Hypo-RT PC trial, could be associated to the different planning margins and radiation dose schedules.

CONCLUSION

Nevertheless, Hypo-RT has gained ground for patients with localized PCa and further improvements may be achieved by inclusion of genetically assessed radiation sensitivity. Several RCTs in Hypo-RT have shown non-inferior outcome and well-tolerated treatment toxicity by physician-rated scores. In the future, we suggest that toxicity should be measured by patient-reported outcome (PRO) using comparable questionnaires.

Gastrointestinal Toxicity Prediction Not Influenced by Rectal Contour or Dose-Volume Histogram Definition

PURPOSE

Rectal dose delivered during prostate radiation therapy is associated with gastrointestinal toxicity. Treatment plans are commonly optimized using rectal dose-volume constraints, often whole-rectum relative-volumes (%). We investigated whether improved rectal contouring, use of absolute-volumes (cc), or rectal truncation might improve toxicity prediction.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients from the CHHiP trial (receiving 74 Gy/37 fractions [Fr] vs 60 Gy/20 Fr vs 57 Gy/19 Fr) were included if radiation therapy plans were available (2350/3216 patients), plus toxicity data for relevant analyses (2170/3216 patients). Whole solid rectum relative-volumes (%) dose-volume-histogram (DVH), as submitted by treating center (original contour), was assumed standard-of-care. Three investigational rectal DVHs were generated: (1) reviewed contour per CHHiP protocol; (2) original contour absolute volumes (cc); and (3) truncated original contour (2 versions; ±0 and ±2 cm from planning target volume [PTV]). Dose levels of interest (V30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 74 Gy) in 74 Gy arm were converted by equivalent-dose-in-2 Gy-Fr (EQD2α/β= 3 Gy) for 60 Gy/57 Gy arms. Bootstrapped logistic models predicting late toxicities (frequency G1+/G2+, bleeding G1+/G2+, proctitis G1+/G2+, sphincter control G1+, stricture/ulcer G1+) were compared by area-undercurve (AUC) between standard of care and the 3 investigational rectal definitions.

RESULTS

The alternative dose/volume parameters were compared with the original relative-volume (%) DVH of the whole rectal contour, itself fitted as a weak predictor of toxicity (AUC range, 0.57-0.65 across the 8 toxicity measures). There were no significant differences in toxicity prediction for: (1) original versus reviewed rectal contours (AUCs, 0.57-0.66; P = .21-.98); (2) relative- versus absolute-volumes (AUCs, 0.56-0.63; P = .07-.91); and (3) whole-rectum versus truncation at PTV ± 2 cm (AUCs, 0.57-0.65; P = .05-.99) or PTV ± 0 cm (AUCs, 0.57-0.66; P = .27-.98).

CONCLUSIONS

We used whole-rectum relative-volume DVH, submitted by the treating center, as the standard-of-care dosimetric predictor for rectal toxicity. There were no statistically significant differences in prediction performance when using central rectal contour review, with the use of absolute-volume dosimetry, or with rectal truncation relative to PTV. Whole-rectum relative-volumes were not improved upon for toxicity prediction and should remain standard-of-care.

Dose-Volume Histogram Parameters and Quality of Life in Patients with Prostate Cancer Treated with Surgery and High-Dose Volumetric-Intensity-Modulated Arc Therapy to the Prostate Bed

INTRODUCTION

Prostate bed radiotherapy (RT) is a major affecter of patients' long-term quality of life (QoL). To ensure the best possible outcome of these patients, dose constraints are key for optimal RT planning and delivery. However, establishing refined dose constraints requires access to patient-level data. Therefore, we aimed to provide such data on the relationship between OAR and gastrointestinal (GI) as well as genitourinary (GU) QoL outcomes of a homogenous patient cohort who received dose-intensified post-operative RT to the prostate bed. Furthermore, we aimed to conduct an exploratory analysis of the resulting data.

METHODS

Patients who were treated with prostate bed RT between 2010 and 2020 were inquired about their QoL based on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC). Those (n = 99) who received volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) of at least 70 Gy to the prostate bed were included. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters were gathered and correlated with the EPIC scores.

RESULTS

The median age at the time of prostate bed RT was 68.9 years, and patients were inquired about their QoL in the median 2.3 years after RT. The median pre-RT prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum level was 0.35 ng/mL. The median duration between surgery and RT was 1.5 years. The median prescribed dose to the prostate bed was 72 Gy. A total of 61.6% received prostate bed RT only. For the bladder, the highest level of statistical correlation (p < 0.01) was seen for V10-20Gy, Dmean and Dmedian with urinary QoL. For bladder wall, the highest level of statistically significant correlation (p < 0.01) was seen for V5-25Gy, Dmean and Dmedian with urinary QoL. Penile bulb V70Gy was statistically significantly correlated with sexual QoL (p < 0.05). A larger rectal volume was significantly correlated with improved bowel QoL (p < 0.05). Sigmoid and urethral DVH parameters as well as the surgical approach were not statistically significantly correlated with QoL.

CONCLUSION

Specific dose constraints for bladder volumes receiving low doses seem desirable for the further optimization of prostate bed RT. This may be particularly relevant in the context of the aspiration of establishing focal RT of prostate cancer and its local recurrences. Our comprehensive dataset may aid future researchers in achieving these goals.

Comparative efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for patients with borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

The optimal dose and treatment modality of neoadjuvant radiotherapy applied for treating borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have been debated topics in oncology. The objective of the present network meta-analysis (NMA) is to study and compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant radiotherapy comprehensively using different doses in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Four electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library and Web of science, will be searched thoroughly to identify relevant studies published from 2006 to October 2020. Electronic searching by titles using neoadjuvant treatments for PDAC will be performed in the annual meetings of European Society of Medical Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology (2018-2020).

CLINICALTRIALS

gov will also be searched for grey literature. Two reviewers will perform search strategies and extract data independently. R0 resection rate and local control rate are defined as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, disease-free survival and acute and late grade 3 and grade 4 toxicities. For randomised control trials, the risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, while the risk of bias for non-randomised, observational studies will be evaluated using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions. The quality of evidence will be evaluated using the version of Cochrane tool and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be conducted in the present NMA.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will synthesise the evidence regarding dose schedule of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in patients with BRPC and LAPC. We hope the findings from this NMA will help clinicians and patients select the optimal modality and dose schedule of neoadjuvant radiotherapy with respect to patient-reported outcomes. As no primary data collection will be undertaken, no ethics approval is required. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020222408.

Role of CDK4/6 inhibitors in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal receptor-2 negative (HER-2) metastatic breast cancer study protocol for a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

INTRODUCTION

It is currently unclear which cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, combined with endocrine therapy, is the preferred treatment approach in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal receptor-2 (HER2) negative metastatic breast cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the existing evidence for the comparative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of different CDK4/6 inhibitors for metastatic breast cancer in first-line and second-line settings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will systematically conduct a literature search in Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library and additional searches by handsearching citations of previous systematic reviews. We will also screen major conference proceedings (American Society of Clinical Oncology, European Society of Medical Oncology and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium). Preliminary scoping searches were conducted in July 2021, but the search will be updated when new trials are available. The primary outcome was progression-free survival. The secondary outcomes were overall survival, objective response rates, grade 3-4 haematological and non-haematological toxicities, quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The risk of bias will be assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tools, and the quality of evidence will be assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be performed to further confirm our findings. In addition, one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analyses will be conducted to determine uncertainty.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study does not require ethics approval as only secondary data will be collected. The results of our study will provide an overview of the current level of CDK4/6 inhibitors for patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer, and undertake subgroup analyses to explore variables that might affect these effects. The results of this study will be presented at an international clinical conference and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021266597.

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

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

Efficacy and Prognostic Factors of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Combined with Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Objective

To analyze the efficacy of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with radiation therapy (also known as radiotherapy) for prostate cancer.

Methods

The clinical data of 94 prostate cancer patients treated in the Oncology Department of Xiangzhou People's Hospital from January 2017 to January 2018 were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients were divided into the combined group and the reference group according to their admission order, with 47 cases each. The patients in the reference group only received the radiotherapy, and on this basis, those in the combined group accepted ADT, so as to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment methods by comparing the patients' serum total prostate-specific antigen (T-PSA), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and other indicators and analyze the relevant factors affecting patients' prognosis by Cox single-factor and multi-factor regression models.

Results

Compared with the reference group after treatment, the patients in the combined group obtained significantly lower T-PSA and VEGF levels (P < 0.001), significantly higher objective remission rate and disease control rate (P < 0.05), and remarkably longer modified progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (OS) (P < 0.001), and after the multi-factor research, it was found that the Gleason score of 8–10, positive lymphatic metastasis, and single radiotherapy were the factors affecting the clinical prognosis of prostate cancer.

Conclusion

Combining ADT with radiotherapy ensures a better survival benefit for prostate cancer patients and has a fairly well efficacy. Further study will be conducive to establishing a better solution for such patients.

Reducing systematic errors due to deformation of organs at risk in radiotherapy

PURPOSE

In radiotherapy (RT), the planning CT (pCT) is commonly used to plan the full RT-course. Due to organ deformation and motion, the organ shapes seen at the pCT will not be identical to their shapes during RT. Any difference between the pCT organ shape and the organ's mean shape during RT will cause systematic errors. We propose to use statistical shrinkage estimation to reduce this error using only the pCT and the population mean shape computed from training data.

METHODS

The method was evaluated for the rectum in a cohort of 37 prostate cancer patients that had a pCT and 7-10 treatment CTs with rectum delineations. Deformable registration was performed both within-patient and between patients, resulting in point-to-point correspondence between all rectum shapes, which enabled us to compute a population mean rectum. Shrinkage estimates were found by combining the pCTs linearly with the population mean. The method was trained and evaluated using leave-one-out cross validation. The shrinkage estimates and the patient mean shapes were compared geometrically using the Dice similarity index (DSI), Hausdorff distance (HD), and bidirectional local distance. Clinical dose/volume histograms, equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and minimum dose to the hottest 5% volume (D5%) were compared for the shrinkage estimate and the pCT.

RESULTS

The method resulted in moderate but statistically significant increase in similarity to the patient mean shape over the pCT. On average, the HD was reduced from 15.6 to 13.4 mm, while the DSI was increased from 0.74 to 0.78. Significant reduction in the bias of volume estimates was found in the DVH-range of 52.5-65 Gy, where the bias was reduced from -1.3 to -0.2 percentage points, but no significant improvement was found in EUD or D5%, CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that shrinkage estimation can reduce systematic errors due to organ deformations in RT. The method has potential to increase the accuracy in RT of deformable organs and can improve motion modeling.

Anorectal dose-effect relations for late gastrointestinal toxicity following external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the FLAME trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The phase III FLAME trial (NCT01168479) showed an increase in five-year biochemical disease-free survival, with no significant increase in toxicity when adding a focal boost to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localized prostate cancer [Kerkmeijer et al. JCO 2021]. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between delivered radiation dose to the anorectum and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (grade ≥2).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients in the FLAME trial were analyzed, irrespective of treatment arm. The dose-effect relation of the anorectal dose parameters (D2cm³ and D50%) and GI toxicity grade ≥2 in four years of follow-up was assessed using a mixed model analysis for repeated measurements, adjusted for age, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, T-stage, baseline toxicity grade ≥1, hormonal therapy and institute.

RESULTS

A dose-effect relation for D2cm³ and D50% was observed with adjusted odds ratios of 1.17 (95% CI 1.13-1.21, p < 0.0001) and 1.20 (95% CI 1.14-1.25, p < 0.0001) for GI toxicity, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although there was no difference in toxicity between study arms, a higher radiation dose to the anorectum was associated with a statistically significant increase in GI toxicity following EBRT for prostate cancer. This dose-effect relation was present for both large and small anorectal volumes. Therefore, further increase in dose to the anorectum should be weighed against the benefit of focal dose escalation for prostate cancer.

Estimates of Alpha/Beta (α/β) Ratios for Individual Late Rectal Toxicity Endpoints: An Analysis of the CHHiP Trial

PURPOSE

Changes in fraction size of external beam radiation therapy exert nonlinear effects on subsequent toxicity. Commonly described by the linear-quadratic model, fraction size sensitivity of normal tissues is expressed by the α/β ratio. We sought to study individual α/β ratios for different late rectal effects after prostate external beam radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The CHHiP trial (ISRCTN97182923) randomized men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer 1:1:1 to 74 Gy/37 fractions (Fr), 60 Gy/20 Fr, or 57 Gy/19 Fr. Patients in the study had full dosimetric data and zero baseline toxicity. Toxicity scales were amalgamated to 6 bowel endpoints: bleeding, diarrhea, pain, proctitis, sphincter control, and stricture. Lyman-Kutcher-Burman models with or without equivalent dose in 2 Gy/Fr correction were log-likelihood fitted by endpoint, estimating α/β ratios. The α/β ratio estimate sensitivity was assessed using sequential inclusion of dose modifying factors (DMFs): age, diabetes, hypertension, inflammatory bowel or diverticular disease (IBD/diverticular), and hemorrhoids. 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were bootstrapped. Likelihood ratio testing of 632 estimator log-likelihoods compared the models.

RESULTS

Late rectal α/β ratio estimates (without DMF) ranged from bleeding (G1 + α/β = 1.6 Gy; 95% CI, 0.9-2.5 Gy) to sphincter control (G1 + α/β = 3.1 Gy; 95% CI, 1.4-9.1 Gy). Bowel pain modelled poorly (α/β, 3.6 Gy; 95% CI, 0.0-840 Gy). Inclusion of IBD/diverticular disease as a DMF significantly improved fits for stool frequency G2+ (P = .00041) and proctitis G1+ (P = .00046). However, the α/β ratios were similar in these no-DMF versus DMF models for both stool frequency G2+ (α/β 2.7 Gy vs 2.5 Gy) and proctitis G1+ (α/β 2.7 Gy vs 2.6 Gy). Frequency-weighted averaging of endpoint α/β ratios produced: G1 + α/β ratio = 2.4 Gy; G2 + α/β ratio = 2.3 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

We estimated α/β ratios for several common late adverse effects of rectal radiation therapy. When comparing dose-fractionation schedules, we suggest using late a rectal α/β ratio ≤ 3 Gy.

A Ten-year-long Update on Radiation Proctitis Among Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Curative External Beam Radiotherapy

This comprehensive synopsis summarizes the most relevant information obtained from a systematic analysis of studies of the last decade on radiation proctitis, one of the most feared radioinduced side effects among prostate cancer patients treated with curative external beam radiotherapy. The present review provides a useful support to radiation oncologists for limiting the onset or improving the treatment of radiation proctitis. This work shows that the past decade was a harbinger of significant new evidence in technological advances and technical tricks to avoid radiation proctitis, in addition to dosimetric perspectives and goals, understanding of pathogenesis, diagnostic work-up and treatment. We believe that a well-rounded knowledge of such an issue is fundamental for its appropriate management.

Dosimetric impact of rectum and bladder anatomy and intrafractional prostate motion on hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric impact on hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy of two geometric uncertainty sources: rectum and bladder filling and intrafractional prostate motion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 544 images (375 pre-treatment cone-beam CT [CBCT] and 169 post-treatment CBCT) from 15 prostate adenocarcinoma patients. We recalculated the dose on each pre-treatment CBCT once the positioning errors were corrected. We also recalculated two dose distributions on each post-treatment CBCT, either using or not intrafractional motion correction. A correlation analysis was performed between CBCT-based dose and rectum and bladder filling as well as intrafraction prostate displacements.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between administered and planned rectal doses. However, we observed an increase in bladder dose due to a lower bladder filling in 66% of treatment fractions. These differences were reduced at the end of the fraction since the lower bladder volume was compensated by the filling during the treatment session. A statistically significant reduction in target volume coverage was observed in 27% of treatment sessions and was correlated with intrafractional prostate motion in sagittal plane > 4 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

A better control of bladder filling is recommended to minimize the number of fractions in which the bladder volume is lower than planned. Fiducial mark tracking with a displacement threshold of 5 mm in any direction is recommended to ensure that the prescribed dose criteria are met.

Clinical Outcomes of the CHIRP Trial: A Phase II Prospective Randomized Trial of Conventionally Fractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Prostate and Pelvic Nodal Radiation Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) may offer treatment advantages for patients with prostate cancer. However, HFRT may also increase the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity compared with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT). Several large trials have found that HFRT is well tolerated in mixed risk population studies. Here, we report on a phase II, randomized controlled study conducted to evaluate these endpoints in exclusively high-risk patients with prostate cancer treated with prostate and pelvic nodal radiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

After giving informed consent, patients with high-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to prostate plus pelvic nodal radiation therapy with either HFRT (68 Gy in 25 fractions) or CFRT (78 Gy in 39 fractions) and 18 months of androgen suppression therapy. Toxicity was scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Biochemical failure was determined by the Phoenix definition. Patients were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 111 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled and 109 patients were treated. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or higher acute GI toxicity was not significantly different between the arms (HFRT 18.9% vs CFRT 21.8%; P = .812). Similarly, acute GU (HFRT 30.2% vs CFRT 30.9%; P = 1.00), late GI (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 10.0%; P = .554), and late GU (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 6.0%; P = .200) were not significantly different between the arms. Median follow-up was 38.0 months (4.8-77.8 months). The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was not significantly different between the 2 arms (97.3% for HFRT vs 91.0% for CFRT; P = .606). The 3-year overall survival was 94.8% in the HFRT arm and 100.0% in the CFRT arm (P = .116).

CONCLUSIONS

HFRT and CFRT using intensity modulated radiation therapy were both well tolerated for patients with high-risk prostate cancer and resulted in similar 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and overall survival.

Distribution analysis of hydrogel spacer and evaluation of rectal dose reduction in Japanese prostate cancer patients undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

To report on our primary experience with the placement of a hydrogel spacer following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients and assess its impact on dosimetry as well as acute toxicity.

METHODS

A total of 70 patients treated with SBRT (total dose of 36.25 Gy) in 5 fractions were included. Hydrogel spacers were inserted in 53 patients along with gold fiducial markers. For dosimetry, we trisected the rectum on the sagittal image of magnetic resonance imaging and defined it as the upper rectum (UR), middle rectum (MR), and lower rectum (LR). We compared the dose to each part of the rectum with and without hydrogel spacer using dose volume histograms. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity assessments were conducted until 6 months of follow-up visits.

RESULTS

The median volume of the hydrogel spacer was 12.3 mL. Overall, the hydrogel spacer could significantly reduce the rectal dose in the middle-to-high-dose region (V20-V35). The rectum doses at the UR and MR were significantly lower in the spacer group in the middle to high dose region (V20-V35); the dose at the LR was significantly lower in the spacer group in the high-dose region (V30-V35). There was no grade ≥ 3 toxicity observed, but grade 2 toxicity of GU and GI occurred in 17.1% and 1.4% of the patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Hydrogel spacers could contribute to rectal dose reduction, especially in high dose regions, by creating a prostate-rectum distance.

COVID-19: hypofractionation in the Radiation Oncology Department during the 'state of alarm': first 100 patients in a private hospital in Spain

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Spain declared a ‘state of alarm’ on 14 March 2020. In our Radiation Oncology Department, experienced in administering hypofractionated treatments (partial irradiation in breast cancer, moderate hypofractionation in localized prostate cancer, etc), we have increased the hypofractionated treatment indications. We are only deferring the start of non-urgent treatments such as prostate tumours under androgen deprivation or benign brain tumours which are candidates for radiosurgery such as meningiomas or acoustic neuroma.

In this hypofractionation era we find that we have decreased the number of sessions per patient and that we can evaluate the last years with the fractionation index (FI) (calculated by dividing the total number of fractions administered in the department by the total number of patients treated). We have gone from 14.4 in 2018 to 13.78 in 2019, excluding brachytherapy.

We report the results of the first 100 patients who have experienced radiotherapy treatment since the state of alarm (66 women and 34 men). In these patients, the FI is 12.12—lower than previous years.

Seven or less Fractions is Not the Standard of Care for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

Evidence is accumulating for seven and less fractions in localised prostate cancer, including one large randomised trial. However, there is much more evidence yet to come and changing practice in advance of this may be premature. We review the reasons to persist with moderate hypofractionation for prostate cancer radiotherapy, until the results of further phase III studies are known.

Refinement & validation of rectal wall dose volume objectives for prostate hypofractionation in 20 fractions

•

LRB was correlated to irradiation technique and several % rectal wall cut points.

•

The predictive role of dosimetric variables relates to the irradiation technique.

•

Dose volume objectives for patients treated with IMRT/VMAT are reported.

Background and purpose

Dose-volume objectives for the rectum have been proposed to limit long term toxicity after moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) for localized prostate cancer. The purpose of the present study is to validate and possibly refine dose volume objective for the rectal wall after 20-fraction MHRT.

Materials and methods

All patients treated by 20-fraction MHRT at a single Institution were identified and relative rectal wall (%RW) DVH retrieved. The endpoint of the study is the development of grade 2+ late rectal bleeding (LRB) according to a modified RTOG scale. Clinical and dosimetric predictors of LRB were investigated at both uni- and multi-variable analysis.

Results

293 patients were identified and analyzed. Of them, 35 (12%) developed the endpoint. At univariable analysis, antithrombotic drug usage (yes vs no), technique (3DCRT vs IMRT/VMAT) and several %RW DVH cut-points were significantly correlated with LRB. However, within patients treated by 3DCRT (N = 106), a bi-variable model including anti-thrombotic drug usage and selected %RW dose/volume metrics failed to identify independent dosimetric predictors of LRB. Conversely, within patients treated with intensity modulation (N = 187), the same model showed a progressively higher impact of the percent of RW receiving doses above 40 Gy. Based on this model, we were able to confirm (V32), refine (V60) and identify a novel (V50) cut-point for the %RW.

Conclusion

We recommend the following dose volume objectives for the %RW in order to minimize the risk of LRB after 20-fraction MHRT: V32 ≤ 50%; V50 ≤ 25.8% and V60 ≤ 10%.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: When and for Whom?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize recent evidence concerning the use of moderately hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy, defined as 2.4-3.4 Gy per fraction, and ultrahypofractionated external beam radiotherapy (also known as stereotactic body radiotherapy [SBRT]), defined as at least 5 Gy per fraction, in men with localized prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Taken together, a number of recently completed randomized trials show that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy confers similar biochemical control compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy without increasing late toxicity. These effects appear to extend across all baseline clinical risk groups. Several single-arm phase II studies, as well as a recently published large-scale randomized trial comparing SBRT with conventional fractionation, show very promising biochemical control and favorable acute and late treatment-related morbidity with the use of SBRT in predominantly low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. As it is associated with similar prostate cancer control and toxicity while improving patient convenience and reducing cost, moderate hypofractionation is a preferred alternative to conventional fractionation in a majority of men with localized prostate cancer choosing radiotherapy as their primary treatment modality. To date, studies conducted largely in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer report encouraging oncologic outcomes and acceptable toxicity with SBRT. Mature results of phase III trials evaluating five-fraction SBRT regimens are eagerly awaited.