Helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy of the pelvic lymph nodes with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate--first results of the PLATIN 1 trial

Pelvic Irradiation for Node-Positive Prostate Cancer After Prostatectomy: Long-Term Results of the Prospective PLATIN-4 and PLATIN-5 Trials

PURPOSE

After radical prostatectomy (RP), adjuvant or salvage radiation treatment in node-positive prostate cancer is offered to prevent systemic disease. Prospective long-term survival and toxicity data on patients with radiation for nodal disease are still scarce. This study evaluates safety and feasibility of salvage radiation therapy to the pelvic lymph nodes in node-positive prostate cancer after RP.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2009 and 2018, 78 patients with lymph node recurrence after RP (PLATIN-4 trial) or after RP and prostate bed radiation therapy (PLATIN-5 trial) were treated with salvage pelvic lymph node radiation therapy with boost to the involved nodes as field abutment (PLATIN-5) and boost to the prostate bed (PLATIN-4). Androgen deprivation therapy was started 2 months before radiation and recommended for 24 months. The primary endpoint was safety and feasibility of the intensity modulated radiation therapy-image guided radiation therapy technique based on the rate of treatment discontinuations and incidence of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3+ toxicity. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

No treatment discontinuations were reported in either trial. Median overall survival was not reached in PLATIN-4 and was 117 months in PLATIN-5. Median progression-free survival was 66 months in PLATIN-4 and 39 months in PLATIN-5. Late grade 3+ genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were observed in 4% of patients at 24 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage radiation therapy to the prostate bed and pelvic lymphatic drainage combined with long-term androgen deprivation therapy is a curative treatment option for patients with node-positive prostate cancer after RP, with excellent in-field disease control. Pelvic lymph node radiation therapy as field abutment after prostate bed radiation therapy is feasible with long-term survival and no high-grade toxicity.

Whole-pelvic irradiation with boost to involved nodes and prostate in node-positive prostate cancer-long-term data from the prospective PLATIN-2 trial

PURPOSE

Node-positive prostate cancer is a potentially curable disease. Definitive radiotherapy to the prostate and lymphatic drainage is an effective treatment option but prospective long-term outcome data are scarce. Thus, the current study aimed to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of definitive radiation therapy for men with prostate cancer and nodal metastases using modern irradiation techniques.

METHODS

A total of 40 treatment-naïve men with node-positive prostate cancer were allocated to the trial. All patients received definitive radiation therapy at two German university hospitals between 2009 and 2018. Radiation was delivered as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with 51 Gy to the lymphatic drainage with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) up to 61.2 Gy to involved nodes and 76.5 Gy to the prostate in 34 fractions. Feasibility and safety, overall and progression-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life measurements were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 79 months, median overall survival was 107 months and progression-free survival was 78 months. Based on imaging follow-up, no infield relapse was reported during the first 24 months of follow-up. There were 3 (8%) potentially treatment-related grade 3 toxicities. Common iliac node involvement was associated with a higher risk of progression (HR 15.8; 95% CI 2.1-119.8; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Definitive radiation to the lymphatic drainage with SIB to the involved nodes and prostate is a safe and effective treatment approach for patients with treatment-naïve, node-positive prostate cancer with excellent infield tumor control rates and tolerable toxicity. Location rather than number of involved nodes is a major risk factor for progression.

Beyond the heart in hypofractionated radiotherapy and in the transition from 3D to IMRT/VMAT

Background

The knowledge of the risks induced by radiation with hypofractionation regimens has only recently been estimated together with its implementation as a management standard. However, the dose to other risk organs with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is not clear, that is why this is only a reference study of radiation doses to organs at risk in hypofractionation in our center.

Materials and methods

We completed a retrospective and observational analysis of 1398 patients treated with adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy from 2015 to 2018, using the clinical records and dose-volume histogram of patients treated with moderate hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy. To analyze the institutional experience on the dosimetry of the esophagus and liver as risk organs in the use of moderate adjuvant hypofractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer.

Results

The dosimetry of the esophagus was 3271 cGy DMax, 177 cGy DMed, 68 cGy D50%, 500 cGy DcMAX with 3D RT and 4124 cGy DMax, 1242 cGy DMed, 934.50 cGy D50%, 3213 cGy DcMAX with IMRT/VMAT and the dosimetry for the liver was for right breast cancer 466 cGy DMed, 102 cGy D50% and 8% V20, for left breast cancer 22 cGy DMed, 6.10 cGy D50% and 0.3% V20.

Conclusion

The statistically significant differences in irradiation show the lack of consensus on the optimal restrictions in hypofractionation regimens to reduce clinical sequela; consequently, the variability in the specification of each radiation oncologist is observed; standardization in our center can lead to improvement in the quality of treatments.

Association between pelvic nodal radiotherapy and patient-reported functional outcomes through 5 years among men undergoing external-beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: An assessment of the comparative effectiveness analysis of surgery and radiation (CEASAR) cohort

BACKGROUND

The role of pelvic irradiation in men receiving external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer is unclear, in part due to a lack of data on patient-reported outcomes. We sought to compare functional outcomes for men receiving prostate and pelvic versus prostate-only radiotherapy, longitudinally over 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a population-based, prospective cohort study of men with clinically-localized prostate cancer undergoing EBRT. We examined the effect of prostate and pelvic (n = 102) versus prostate-only (n = 485) radiotherapy on patient-reported disease-specific (using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite[EPIC]-26) and general health-related (using the SF-36) function, over 5 years. Regression models were adjusted for outcome-specific baseline function, clinicopathologic characteristics, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

RESULTS

587 men (median [quartiles] age 69 [64-73] years) met inclusion criteria and completed ≥1 post-treatment survey. More men treated with prostate and pelvic radiotherapy had high-risk disease (58% vs. 18%, P < 0.01) and received ADT (75% vs. 41%, P < 0.01). These men reported worse sexual (6 months-5 years), hormonal (at 6 months), and physical (6 months-5 years) function. Accounting for baseline function, patient and tumor characteristics, and use of ADT, pelvic irradiation was not associated with statistically or clinically significant differences in bowel function, urinary incontinence, irritative voiding symptoms or sexual function through 5-years (all P > 0.05). Marginally clinically important differences were noted in hormonal function at 3-years (adjusted mean difference 4.7, 95% confidence interval [1.2-8.3]; minimally clinically important difference (MCID) 4 to 6) and 5-years (4.2, [0.4-8.0]) following treatment. After adjustment, there was a transient statistically significant, but not clinically important, difference in emotional well-being at 6 months (3.0, [0.19-5.8]; MCID 6) that resolved by 1 year and no differences in physical functioning or energy and fatigue.

CONCLUSION

This prospective, population-based cohort study of men with localized prostate cancer treated with EBRT, showed no clinically important differences in disease-specific or general health-related quality of life with the addition of pelvic irradiation to prostate radiotherapy, supporting the use of pelvic radiotherapy when it may be of clinical benefit, such as men with increased risk of nodal involvement.

Postoperative radiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in early breast cancer: A randomized clinical trial of KROG 15-03

PURPOSE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for early breast cancer compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in a prospective and randomized trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From March 2015 to February 2018, 693 patients with pT1-2N0M0 early breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery were enrolled and randomly assigned into IMRT and 3D-CRT. The primary endpoint was 3-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS). The secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival, overall survival, acute toxicity, target coverage index, irradiation dose to organs at risk, and fatigue inventory. The radiation dose for the 3D-CRT arm was 59.4 Gy in 33 fractions for 6.5 weeks. It was 57.4 Gy in 28 fractions with simultaneous integrated boost for 5.5 weeks for the IMRT arm.

RESULTS

Of 693 patients, 349 and 344 patients received 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. There was no significant difference in LRRFS between the two arms. Conformity index of planning target volume was significantly superior in the IMRT arm than the 3D-CRT arm (p < 0.001). The mean lung dose and V₅-V₅₀ for the ipsilateral lung were significantly lower in the IMRT arm than the 3D-CRT arm (all p < 0.05). The incidence of grade 2 or higher dermatitis was significantly lower in the IMRT arm (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Compared to 3D-CRT, IMRT showed similar results in locoregional tumor control but superior results in planning target volume coverage. When IMRT is used in breast cancer, the irradiation dose to an ipsilateral lung and skin toxicity can be reduced.

Elective Node Irradiation With Integrated Boost to the Prostate Using Helical IMRT-Clinical Outcome of the Prospective PLATIN-1 Trial

Introduction: This prospective, non-randomized phase II trial aimed to investigate the role of additional irradiation of the pelvic nodes for patients with prostate cancer and a high risk for nodal metastases using helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy with daily image guidance (IMRT/IGRT). Methods and materials: Between 2009 and 2012, 40 men with treatment-naïve prostate cancer and a risk of lymph node involvement of more than 20% were enrolled in the PLATIN-1 trial. All patients received definitive, helical IMRT of the pelvic nodes (total dose of 51.0 Gy) with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the prostate (total dose of 76.5 Gy) in 34 fractions. Antihormonal therapy (AHT) was administered for a minimum of 2 months before radiotherapy continuing for at least 24 months. Results: After a median follow-up of 71 months (range: 5-95 months), pelvic irradiation was associated with a 5-year overall survival (OS) and biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) of 94.3% and 83.6%, respectively. For our cohort, no grade 4 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity was observed. Quality of life (QoL) assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was comparable to EORTC reference values without significant changes. Conclusion: The current trial demonstrates that elective IMRT/IGRT of the pelvic nodes with SIB to the prostate for patients with a high-risk of lymphatic spread is safe and shows an excellent clinical outcome without compromising the quality of life. The PLATIN-1 trial delivers eminent baseline data for future studies using modern irradiation techniques.

Treatment-Related Toxicity Using Prostate-Only Versus Prostate and Pelvic Lymph Node Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy: A National Population-Based Study

PURPOSE

There is a debate about the effectiveness and toxicity of pelvic lymph node (PLN) irradiation for the treatment of men with high-risk prostate cancer. This study compared the toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to the prostate and the pelvic lymph nodes (PPLN-IMRT) with prostate-only IMRT (PO-IMRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer treated with IMRT in the English National Health Service between 2010 and 2013 were identified by using data from the Cancer Registry, the National Radiotherapy Dataset, and Hospital Episode Statistics, an administrative database of all hospital admissions. Follow-up was available up to December 31, 2015. Validated indicators were used to identify patients with severe toxicity according to the presence of both a procedure code and diagnostic code in patient Hospital Episode Statistics records. A competing risks regression analysis, with adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics, estimated subdistribution hazard ratios (sHRs) by comparing GI and genitourinary (GU) complications for PPLN-IMRT versus PO-IMRT.

RESULTS

Three-year cumulative incidence in the PPLN-IMRT (n = 780) and PO-IMRT (n = 3,065) groups was 14% for both groups for GI toxicity, and 9% and 8% for GU toxicity, respectively. Patients receiving PPLN-IMRT and PO-IMRT had similar levels of severe GI (adjusted sHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.24; P = .97) and GU (adjusted sHR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.46; P = .50) toxicity rates.

CONCLUSION

Including PLNs in radiation fields for high-risk or locally advanced prostate cancer is not associated with increased GI or GU toxicity at 3 years. Additional follow-up is required to answer questions about its impact on late GU toxicity. Results from ongoing trials will provide insight into the anticancer effectiveness of PLN irradiation.

68 Ga-PSMA-PET for radiation treatment planning in prostate cancer recurrences after surgery: Individualized medicine or new standard in salvage treatment

BACKGROUND

⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET imaging is a novel promising diagnostic tool to locate early biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy (RP) in prostate cancer (PC) patients. Exact knowledge of the relapse location may result in changes of the therapy concept aside from changes to the TNM stage. To gain data for this approach, we evaluated PC patients receiving ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET imaging before salvage radiotherapy (RT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In this study, 100 patients with biochemical failure after RP± prior RT who underwent ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA PET/CT or PET/MRI were evaluated undergoing salvage RT in our department. We analyzed TNM staging changes due to ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET imaging and its influence on RT planning and treatment.

RESULTS

Uptake indicative for tumor recurrence in ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET was found in 76% of the patients with biochemical recurrent PC. Median PSA level was 1.0 ng/mL (range 0.12-14.7 ng/mL). Of these, 80% showed no morphological correlate in the corresponding CT or MRI. A 43% of all patients experienced a change in TNM stage due to ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET imaging. Patients had changes from Tx to rcT+ (28%), 12% from pN0 to rcN1, 1% from pN0/cM0 to rcM1a, and 8% from cM0 to rcM1b. Due to the additional knowledge of ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET imaging, initial planned RT planning was adapted in 59% of all cases. An additional simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the prostate bed or lymph nodes was given to 32% and 63%, respectively. Ten patients received stereotactic body RT (SBRT) to single bone metastases.

CONCLUSION

⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET imaging showed a high clinical impact on staging and RT management in patients with biochemically recurrent PC, even at low serum PSA levels. With 43% changes in staging and 59% in radiotherapy planning ⁶⁸ Ga-PSMA-PET could lead to an indispensable tool in guiding radiation treatment in recurrent PC.