Oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer: radiotherapy quality assurance of the randomized PEACE V-STORM phase II trial

PEACE V-Salvage Treatment of OligoRecurrent nodal prostate cancer Metastases (STORM): Acute Toxicity of a Randomized Phase 2 Trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment recommendations for patients with limited nodal recurrences are lacking, and different locoregional treatment approaches are currently being used.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this trial is to compare metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) with or without elective nodal pelvic radiotherapy (ENRT).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

PEACE V-Salvage Treatment of OligoRecurrent nodal prostate cancer Metastases (STORM) is an international, phase 2, open-label, randomized, superiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03569241). Patients diagnosed with positron emission tomography-detected pelvic nodal oligorecurrence (five or fewer nodes) following radical local treatment for prostate cancer were randomized in a 1:1 ratio between arm A (MDT and 6 mo of androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) and arm B (ENRT [25 × 1.8 Gy] with MDT and 6 mo of ADT).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We report the secondary endpoint acute toxicity, defined as worst grade ≥2 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity within 3 mo of treatment. The chi-square test was used to compare toxicity between treatment arms. We also compare the quality of life (QoL) using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ C30 and PR25 questionnaires.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Between June 2018 and April 2021, 196 patients were assigned randomly to MDT or ENRT. Ninety-seven of 99 patients allocated to MDT and 93 of 97 allocated to ENRT received per-protocol treatment. Worst acute GI toxicity proportions were as follows: grade ≥2 events in three (3%) in the MDT group versus four (4%) in the ENRT group (p = 0.11). Worst acute GU toxicity proportions were as follows: grade ≥2 events in eight (8%) in the MDT group versus 12 (13%) in the ENRT group (p = 0.95). We observed no significant difference between the study groups in the proportion of patients with a clinically significant QoL reduction from baseline for any subdomain score area.

CONCLUSIONS

No clinically meaningful differences were observed in worst grade ≥2 acute GI or GU toxicity or in QoL subdomains between MDT and ENRT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We found no evidence of differential acute bowel or urinary side effects using metastasis-directed therapy and elective nodal radiotherapy for the treatment of patients with a pelvic lymph node recurrence.

Radiotherapy trial quality assurance processes: a systematic review

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.

Elective Nodal Irradiation for Oligorecurrent Nodal Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Variability in the PEACE V-STORM Randomized Phase 2 Trial

Purpose

Consistency in delineation of pelvic lymph node regions for prostate cancer elective nodal radiation therapy is still challenging despite current guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the interobserver variability in elective lymph node delineation in the PEACE V - STORM randomized phase 2 trial for oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer.

Methods and Materials

Twenty-three centers were asked to delineate the elective pelvic nodal clinical target volume (CTV) of a postoperative oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer benchmark case using a modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 2009 template (upper limit at the L4/L5 interspace). Overall, intersection and overflow volumes, Dice coefficient, Hausdorff distance, and count maps merged with computed tomography images were analyzed.

Results

The mean volume including the 23 nodal CTVs was 430.4 ± 64.1 cm3, larger than the modified RTOG 2009 CTV reference volume (386.1 cm3). The intersection common volume between the modified reference RTOG 2009 and the 23 nodal CTVs was estimated at 83.9%, whereas the overflow volume was 23.4%, mainly located at the level of the presacral and the upper limit of the L4/L5 interspace. The mean Dice coefficient was 0.79 ± 0.02, whereas the mean Hausdorff distance was 27 ± 4.4 mm.

Conclusions

In salvage radiation therapy treatment of oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer, variations in elective lymph node volume delineation were mainly observed in the presacral and common iliac areas. Routine implementation and diffusion of available contouring guidelines together with a constant evaluation and evidence-based updating are expected to further decrease the existing variability in pelvic node contouring.