The early result of whole pelvic radiotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy boost for high-risk localized prostate cancer

High-risk prostate cancer treated with a stereotactic body radiation therapy boost following pelvic nodal irradiation

Purpose

Modern literature has demonstrated improvements in long-term biochemical outcomes with the use of prophylactic pelvic nodal irradiation followed by a brachytherapy boost in the management of high-risk prostate cancer. However, this comes at the cost of increased treatment-related toxicity. In this study, we explore the outcomes of the largest cohort to date, which uses a stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) boost following pelvic nodal radiation for exclusively high-risk prostate cancer.

Methods and materials

A large institutional database was interrogated to identify all patients with high-risk clinical node-negative prostate cancer treated with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy to the pelvis followed by a robotic SBRT boost to the prostate and seminal vesicles. The boost was uniformly delivered over three fractions. Toxicity was measured using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0. Oncologic outcomes were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were created to evaluate associations between pretreatment characteristics and clinical outcomes.

Results

A total of 440 patients with a median age of 71 years were treated, the majority of whom were diagnosed with a grade group 4 or 5 disease. Pelvic nodal irradiation was delivered at a total dose of 4,500 cGy in 25 fractions, followed by a three-fraction SBRT boost. With an early median follow-up of 2.5 years, the crude incidence of grade 2+ genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 13% and 11%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed grade 2+ GU toxicity was associated with older age and a higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage. Multivariate analysis revealed overall survival was associated with patient age and posttreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir.

Conclusion

Utilization of an SBRT boost following pelvic nodal irradiation in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer is oncologically effective with early follow-up and yields minimal high-grade toxicity. We demonstrate a 5-year freedom from biochemical recurrence (FFBCR) of over 83% with correspondingly limited grade 3+ GU and GI toxicity measured at 3.6% and 1.6%, respectively. Long-term follow-up is required to evaluate oncologic outcomes and late toxicity.

Virtual HDR Boost for Prostate Cancer: Rebooting a Classic Treatment Using Modern Tech

Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common malignancy in men. Internal radiotherapy (brachytherapy) has been used to treat PC successfully for over a century. In particular, there is level-one evidence of the benefits of using brachytherapy to escalate the dose of radiotherapy compared with standard external beam radiotherapy approaches. However, the use of PC brachytherapy is declining, despite strong evidence for its improved cancer outcomes. A method using external beam radiotherapy known as virtual high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (vHDRB) aims to noninvasively mimic a brachytherapy boost radiation dose plan. In this review, we consider the evidence supporting brachytherapy boosts for PC and the continuing evolution of vHDRB approaches, culminating in the current generation of clinical trials, which will help define the role of this emerging modality.

A comparison between high dose rate brachytherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy boost after elective pelvic irradiation for high and very high-risk prostate cancer

Purpose: To compare biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and toxicity outcomes of high dose rate brachytherapy (HDRB) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) boost after elective nodal irradiation for high/very high-risk prostate cancer.Materials and Methods: a retrospective analysis was performed in 149 male. In 98 patients, the boost to the prostate was delivered by HDRB as 2 fractions of 10 Gy (EQD2 for α/β = 1.5; 66 Gy) or 1 fraction of 15 Gy (EQD2 for α/β = 1.5; 71 Gy). In 51 male, SBRT was used for the boost delivery (3 fractions of 7 Gy; EQD2Gy for α/β = 1.5; 51 Gy) because brachytherapy equipment was out of order.Results: In 98 patients that received HDRB boost, 3- and 5-year BRFS were 74.6% and 66.8%. Late grade-II genitourinary toxicity was detected in 27, grade-III in 1 case. Grade-II (maximum) rectal toxicity was diagnosed in nine patients. For 51 male patients that received SBRT boost, 3- and 5-year BRFS was 76.5% and 67.7%. Late grade-II (maximum) genitourinary toxicity was detected in five cases, late grade-II rectal toxicity in four cases. Other three patients developed late grade-III–IV rectal toxicity that required diverting colostomy. SBRT boost was associated with higher maximum dose to 2 cm3 of anterior rectal wall (D2cm³rectum) compared to HDRB: 92% versus 55% of dose to prostate. Severe rectal toxicity was negligible at EQD2 D2cm³rectum <85 Gy and EQD2 D5cm³ rectum <75 Gy.Conclusion: Our results indicate similar 3- and 5-year BRFS in patients with high/very high-risk prostate cancer who received HDRB or SBRT boost, but SBRT boost is associated with higher rate of severe late rectal toxicity.

The Journey of Radiotherapy Dose Escalation in High Risk Prostate Cancer; Conventional Dose Escalation to Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) Boost Treatments

High risk prostate cancer (HR-PrCa) is a subset of localized PrCa with significant potential for morbidity and mortality associated with disease recurrence and metastasis. Radiotherapy combined with Androgen Deprivation Therapy has been the standard of care for many years in HR-PrCa. In recent years, dose escalation, hypo-fractionation and high precision delivery with immobilization and image-guidance have substantially changed the face of modern PrCa radiotherapy, improving treatment convenience and outcomes. Ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy delivered with high precision in the form of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) combines delivery of high biologically equivalent dose radiotherapy with the convenience of a shorter treatment schedule, as well as the promise of similar efficacy and reduced toxicity compared to conventional radiotherapy. However, rigorous investigation of SBRT in HR-PrCa remains limited. Here, we review the changes in HR-PrCa radiotherapy through dose escalation, hypo- and ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy boost treatments, and the radiobiological basis of these treatments. We focus on completed and on-going trials in this disease utilizing SBRT as a sole radiation modality or as boost therapy following pelvic radiation.

Effective Organs-at-Risk Dose Sparing in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Using a Half-Beam Technique in Whole Pelvic Irradiation

Background

Although there are some controversies regarding whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) due to its gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities, it is considered for patients with gynecological, rectal, and prostate cancer. To effectively spare organs-at-risk (OAR) doses using multi-leaf collimator (MLC)’s optimal segments, potential dosimetric benefits in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using a half-beam technique (HF) were investigated for WPRT.

Methods

While the size of a fully opened field (FF) was decided to entirely include a planning target volume in all beam’s eye view across arc angles, the HF was designed to use half the FF from the isocenter for dose optimization. The left or the right half of the FF was alternatively opened in VMAT-HF using a pair of arcs rotating clockwise and counterclockwise. Dosimetric benefits of VMAT-HF, presented with dose conformity, homogeneity, and dose–volume parameters in terms of modulation complex score, were compared to VMAT optimized using the FF (VMAT-FF). Consequent normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) by reducing the irradiated volumes was evaluated as well as dose–volume parameters with statistical analysis for OAR. Moreover, beam-on time and MLC position precision were analyzed with log files to assess plan deliverability and clinical applicability of VMAT-HF as compared to VMAT-FF.

Results

While VMAT-HF used 60%–70% less intensity modulation complexity than VMAT-FF, it showed superior dose conformity. The small intestine and colon in VMAT-HF showed a noticeable reduction in the irradiated volumes of up to 35% and 15%, respectively, at an intermediate dose of 20–45 Gy. The small intestine showed statistically significant dose sparing at the volumes that received a dose from 15 to 45 Gy. Such a dose reduction for the small intestine and colon in VMAT-HF presented a significant NTCP reduction from that in VMAT-FF. Without sacrificing the beam delivery efficiency, VMAT-HF achieved effective OAR dose reduction in dose–volume histograms.

Conclusions

VMAT-HF led to deliver conformal doses with effective gastrointestinal-OAR dose sparing despite using less modulation complexity. The dose of VMAT-HF was delivered with the same beam-on time with VMAT-FF but precise MLC leaf motions. The VMAT-HF potentially can play a valuable role in reducing OAR toxicities associated with WPRT.

Deriving optimal planning organ at risk volume margins in prostate external beam radiotherapy

Planning organ-at-risk volume (PRV) margins can be applied to the bladder and rectum in prostate external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), in order to incorporate the uncertainties resulting from their inter-fraction motion. For each of a total of 16 patients, the bladder and rectum were delineated on CBCT images for five treatment fractions in addition to the planning CT image set. The bladder and rectum boundary displacements across the images were measured and the frequency and size of organ boundary displacements were evaluated. Subsequently, PRV margins were created to cover a specific percentage of organ boundary motion for a specified percentage of the population. In this investigation, two bladder PRV margins were generated to deal with two bladder conditions of low and high-volume variation among fractions. A combined PRV margin was also generated for the rectum by separating the rectum into three parts and deriving independent PRV margins for each segment. Outward coverage and effectiveness metrics allowed evaluation of the margins.

Extreme Hypofractionation with SBRT in Localized Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men around the world. Radiotherapy is a standard of care treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer. Over the years, radiation delivery modalities have contributed to increased precision of treatment, employing radiobiological insights to shorten the overall treatment time, improving the control of the disease without increasing toxicities. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) represents an extreme form of hypofractionated radiotherapy in which treatment is usually delivered in 1–5 fractions. This review assesses the main efficacy and toxicity data of SBRT in non-metastatic prostate cancer and discusses the potential to implement this scheme in routine clinical practice.

Brachytherapy boost (BT-boost) or stereotactic body radiation therapy boost (SBRT-boost) for high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa)

Systematic review for the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa, D'Amico classification risk system) with external body radiation therapy (EBRT)+brachytherapy-boost (BT-boost) or with EBRT+stereotactic body RT-boost (SBRT-boost). In March 2020, 391 English citations on PubMed matched with search terms "high risk prostate cancer boost". Respectively 9 and 48 prospective and retrospective studies were on BT-boost and 7 retrospective studies were on SBRT-boost. Two SBRT-boost trials were prospective. Only one study (ASCENDE-RT) directly compared the gold standard treatment [dose-escalation (DE)-EBRT+androgen deprivation treatment (ADT)] versus EBRT+ADT+BT-boost. Biochemical control rates at 9 years were 83% in the experimental arm versus 63% in the standard arm. Cumulative incidence of late grade 3 urinary toxicity in the experimental arm and in the standard arm was respectively 18% and 5%. Two recent studies with HR-PCa (National Cancer Database) demonstrated better overall survival with BT-boost (low dose rate LDR or high dose rate HDR) compared with DE-EBRT. These recent findings demonstrate the superiority of EBRT+BT-boost+ADT versus DE-EBRT+ADT for HR-PCa. It seems that EBRT+BT-boost+ADT could now be considered as a gold standard treatment for HR-PCa. HDR or LDR are options. SBRT-boost represents an attractive alternative, but the absence of randomised trials does not allow us to conclude for HR-PCa. Prospective randomised international phase III trials or meta-analyses could improve the level of evidence of SBRT-boost for HR-PCa.

Phase I/II Study of Extreme Hypofractionated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost to Prostate for Locally Advanced, Node-Positive and Oligometastatic Cancer

Introduction: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly being utilized to deliver escalated radiation doses for improving outcomes in various malignancies. We analyzed our cohort of locally advanced, node-positive, and bone oligometastatic prostate cancer patients, that were treated with a combination of pelvic RT using conventional fractionation (CF) and SBRT boost to prostate using extreme hypofractionation (EH), along with hormone therapy (HT).

Materials and Methods: Outcomes of 44 prospectively treated patients were analyzed. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) was utilized to deliver a dose of 45 Gy to pelvic nodal region, 50 Gy to prostate, and 54-56 Gy to gross nodes in 25 fractions. EH boost 18 Gy in three fractions was delivered to the prostate using CyberKnife (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) SBRT. Bone oligometastasis, if any, were treated to a dose of 16 Gy in two fractions, delivered on weekends. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of pelvis, and prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) were used for response assessment during follow-up. HT was given as per standard guidelines.

Results: There were 33 (75%) locally advanced, nine (20.5%) node-positive, and two (4.5%) oligometastatic cases. At a median follow-up of 63.5 months, the five-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 88.2%, biochemical PFS (bPFS) was 91.4% and overall survival (OS) was 96.9%. Grade III or greater acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity was 2.3% each, and late toxicity was 4.5% and 0%, respectively.

Conclusion: Excellent five-year outcomes can be attained even for locally advanced, node-positive and bone oligometastatic prostate cancer, by means of dose-escalation using EH-SBRT boost to the prostate.

Phase I/IIa trial of androgen deprivation therapy, external beam radiotherapy, and stereotactic body radiotherapy boost for high-risk prostate cancer (ADEBAR)

Background

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) boost in high-risk prostate cancer patients.

Methods

This prospective phase I/IIa study was conducted between 2016 and 2017. Following WPRT of 44 Gy in 20 fractions, patients were randomized to two boost doses, 18 Gy and 21 Gy, in 3 fractions using the Cyberknife system. Primary endpoints were incidences of acute toxicities and short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS). Secondary endpoints included late toxicities and short-term clinical progression-free survival (CPFS).

Results

A total of 26 patients were enrolled. Twelve patients received a boost dose of 18 Gy, and the rest received 21 Gy. The Median follow-up duration was 35 months. There were no grade ≥ 3 genitourinary (GU) or gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities. Sixty-one and 4% of patients experienced grade 1–2 acute GU and GI toxicities, respectively. There were 12% late grade 1–2 GU toxicities and 8% late grade 1–2 GI toxicities. Patient-reported outcomes of urinary symptoms were aggravated after WPRT and SBRT boost. However, they resolved at 1 month and returned to the baseline level at 4 months. Three-year BCRFS was 88.1%, and CPFS was 92.3%.

Conclusions

The present study protocol demonstrated that the combination of ADT, WPRT, and SBRT boosts for high-risk prostate cancer is safe and feasible, and may reduce total treatment time to 5 weeks. Boost dose of 21 Gy in 3 fractions seems appropriate.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID; NCT03322020 - Retrospectively registered on 26 October 2017.

Whole Pelvic Radiotherapy With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Boost vs. Conventionally Fractionated Radiotherapy for Patients With High or Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Background: Whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) boost has been shown to be effective in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PC). However, no study has directly compared the efficacy of WPRT with SBRT boost with that of conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT). We compared the clinical outcomes between CFRT and WPRT with SBRT boost in patients with high or very high-risk PC (National Comprehensive Cancer Network definition).

Methods: In total, 132 patients treated with CFRT and 121 patients treated with WPRT followed by SBRT boost were retrospectively analyzed. For the CFRT group, the prescribed dose range was 74–79.2 Gray (Gy) administered at 1.8–2 Gy per fraction. For WPRT with SBRT boost, the prescribed doses were 45 Gy administered in 25 fractions to the whole pelvis followed by 21 Gy boost (3 fractions of 7 Gy each) to prostate and seminal vesicles. The overall survival (OS) and biochemical failure (Phoenix definition) free survival (bFFS) were assessed by using the Kaplan–Meier method or the Cox proportional hazards regression model. The gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) tract toxicity were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v3.0.

Results: The estimated 4-years overall survival in the CFRT and WPRT with SBRT boost groups was 91.6 and 97.7%, respectively (P = 0.18). The estimated 4-years biochemical failure-free survival in the CFRT and WPRT with SBRT boost groups was 89.1 and 93.9%, respectively (P = 0.41). No acute grade 3 or higher GI and GU toxicity was observed in both groups. Late grade 3 GI and GU toxicity occurred in 2.3 and 2.3% in the CFRT group, and in 1.7 and 0.8% in the WPRT with SBRT boost group, respectively. There was no significant between-group difference with respect to acute or late toxicity.

Conclusions: In patients with high or very high-risk localized PC, compared with CFRT, WPRT with SBRT boost resulted in similar biochemical-free and overall survival rate with minimal toxicity. WPRT with SBRT boost is a feasible option for patients with high or very high-risk PC.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Study

PURPOSE

High-dose-rate brachytherapy boost plus external beam radiation therapy is an established option for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) boost can potentially mimic high-dose-rate boost and could be a viable alternative. Here we report the long-term outcomes of a phase 1 dose-escalation trial of single-fraction SBRT boost.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients had intermediate-risk PCa and were accrued to 3 different SBRT single-fraction dose-level cohorts (10 Gy, 12.5 Gy, and 15 Gy). All received supplemental radiation therapy afterwards (37.5 Gy in 15 fractions). Three gold fiducials were implanted for image guidance. Patients were simulated and treated with a foley catheter and intrarectal balloon. A T2 magnetic resonance imaging scan was used for contouring, and a cine magnetic resonance imaging scan was used to calculate patient-specific internal target volume margins. Toxicity and quality-of-life data were collected using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite.

RESULTS

30 patients were accrued, 10 in each cohort. Median follow-up was 72 months. 60% had unfavorable intermediate-risk PCa. Two patients in the 15 Gy cohort developed late grade ≥3 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity, with 1 patient suffering from a grade-4 rectal fistula after a rectal ulcer was biopsied repeatedly. Two patients had biochemical failure. Median PSA nadir was 0.4 ng/mL with 10 Gy, 0.09 ng/mL with 12.5 Gy and 0.07 ng/mL with 15 Gy. Median PSA at 4 years as well as proportion achieving a nadir <0.2 ng/mL improved significantly with higher doses. There was no significant change in quality of life from baseline in any of the domains, and the minimal clinically important change was not statistically different between the 3 cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Other than a grade 4 toxicity, which may in part be due to repeated biopsies of a rectal ulcer, single-fraction SBRT boost was feasible and well tolerated. Larger studies are warranted to better document the outcomes of such an approach.

A Phase I/II Trial of Fairly Brief Androgen Suppression and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer (FASTR-2): Preliminary Results and Toxicity Analysis

Purpose

FASTR was designed to provide a compact treatment course for high-risk prostate cancer patients but was discontinued because of excess toxicity. We present the results of FASTR-2, which used a lower dose to the prostate (35 Gy vs 40 Gy), smaller posterior PTV margin (4 mm vs 5 mm) and omitted nodal radiation to lower the volumes of rectum receiving high and intermediate doses compared with FASTR. Gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities at baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year and biochemical control rates are presented.

Methods and Materials

Eligibility included high-risk prostate cancer (cT3/4, prostate-specific antigen >20 or Gleason Score ≥8), age ≥70 or refused standard treatment, and no evidence of metastatic disease. Patients received 18 months of androgen deprivation therapy starting 2 months before radiation. Clinical target volume was defined as prostate plus proximal 1-cm seminal vesicles. PTV was a nonuniform expansion around clinical target volume (4 mm posteriorly, 5 mm in all other directions). Volumetric arc therapy was used for treatment delivery (35 Gy delivered in 5 weekly fractions of 7 Gy each), and cone beam computed tomography with soft tissue matching (no fiducial placement) was used for daily image guidance. Toxicity was assessed at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year according to Common Toxicity Criteria.

Results

In the study, 30 patients were enrolled in FASTR-2 between 2015 and 2017. Two patients were withdrawn owing to ineligibility after enrollment. One patient (3.7%) reported grade 2 GI toxicity at 6 weeks. There was no reported grade ≥2 GI toxicity at 6 months or 1 year. There were no reported episodes of rectal bleeding. Four patients (14.8%), 5 patients (17.9%), and 5 patients (21.7%) reported grade 2 GU toxicity at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year, respectively. There were no reported cases of grade ≥3 GU toxicity. The most common toxicities were nocturia and urinary frequency or urgency.

Conclusions

FASTR-2 was more tolerable than FASTR, with no grade ≥3 toxicities reported, in keeping with expectations based on our previous FASTR analysis. Long-term follow-up is necessary to ensure disease control and toxicity outcomes are comparable to conventional high-risk treatment paradigms.

Phase 2 Multicenter Study of Gantry-Based Stereotactic Radiotherapy Boost for Intermediate and High Risk Prostate Cancer (PROMETHEUS)

Objectives: To report feasibility, early toxicity, and PSA kinetics following gantry-based, stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) boost within a prospective, phase 2, multicenter study (PROMETHEUS: ACTRN12615000223538).

Methods: Patients were treated with gantry-based SBRT, 19–20 Gy in two fractions delivered 1 week apart, followed by conventionally fractionated IMRT (46 Gy in 23 fractions). The study mandated MRI fusion for RT planning, rectal displacement, and intrafraction image guidance. Toxicity was prospectively graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v4).

Results: Between March 2014 and July 2018, 135 patients (76% intermediate, 24% high-risk) with a median age of 70 years (range 53–81) were treated across five centers. Short course (≤6 months) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was used in 36% and long course in 18%. Rectal displacement method was SpaceOAR in 59% and Rectafix in 41%. Forty-two and ninety-three patients were treated at the 19 Gy and 20 Gy dose levels, respectively. Median follow-up was 24 months. Acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) and urinary toxicity occurred in 4.4 and 26.6% with no acute grade 3 toxicity. At 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months post-treatment the prevalence of late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity was 1.6, 3.7, 2.2, 0, and 0%, respectively, and the prevalence of late grade ≥2 urinary toxicity was 0.8, 11, 12, 7.1, and 6.3%, respectively. Three patients experienced grade 3 late toxicity at 12 to 18 months which subsequently resolved to grade 2 or less. For patients not receiving ADT the median PSA value pre-treatment was 7.6 ug/L (1.1–20) and at 12, 24, and 36 months post-treatment was 0.86, 0.36, and 0.20 ug/L.

Conclusions: Delivery of a gantry-based SBRT boost is feasible in a multicenter setting, is well-tolerated with low rates of early toxicity and is associated with promising PSA responses. A second transient peak in urinary toxicity was observed at 18 months which subsequently resolved. Follow-up is ongoing to document late toxicity, long-term patient reported outcomes, and tumor control with this approach.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy, Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy, and Brachytherapy Boost Modalities in Invasive Cervical Cancer: A Study of the National Cancer Data Base

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Our objective was to determine whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and brachytherapy boost techniques have comparable overall survival in treating cervical cancer when adjusted for known prognostic factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to study women with invasive cervical cancer who were treated with radiation between 2004 and 2013. A logistic regression model was built to identify factors associated with the receipt of SBRT and IMRT. Outcomes were compared using Kaplan-Meier and propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of all 15,905 patients, 14,394 (90.5%) received brachytherapy, 42 (0.8%) received SBRT, and 1468 (9.2%) received IMRT. After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) for patients who received SBRT boost versus brachytherapy boost (hazard ratio = 1.477, 95% confidence interval = 0.746-2.926, P = 0.263) but a significant OS detriment in patients who received IMRT boost versus brachytherapy boost (hazard ratio = 1.455, 95% confidence interval = 1.300-1.628, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a propensity-matched analysis, those who received SBRT boost had equal OS when compared with brachytherapy, but those who received IMRT boost had worse OS when compared with brachytherapy.

Phase 1-2 Study of Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy Including Regional Lymph Node Irradiation in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer (SATURN): Early Toxicity and Quality of Life

PURPOSE

Five-fraction stereotactic ablative radiation therapy appears to be gaining popularity in treatment of prostate cancer, but it has not been extensively tested in the context of pelvic radiation. The objective of this prospective prostate and pelvic SABR study is to report the acute toxicity, late toxicity, and quality of life (QoL) after study completion.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A phase 1/2 study was conducted for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Radiation therapy was planned to deliver 25 Gy to pelvis and seminal vesicles (SV) and a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of up to 40 Gy to the prostate in 5 fractions, weekly, over 29 days. Androgen deprivation therapy was used for 12 to 18 months. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 was used to assess worst acute and late toxicities. QoL data was captured using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite questionnaire (EPIC).

RESULTS

Thirty patients completed the planned treatment with a median follow-up of 25.7 months (range, 18.5-30.7 months). The following "worst" acute and late toxicities were observed: grade 2 genitourinary toxicity, 46.7% and 52%, respectively; grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity, 3.3% and 32%, respectively. No grade 3 or higher toxicities were noted. Mean (95% confidence interval) EPIC urinary QoL scores were 86.6 (81.9-91.3), 87.1 (81.4-92.6), and 87.9 (80.1-95.7) at baseline, 3 months and 24 months; bowel scores were 94.1 (91.3-97.0), 93.2 (89.1-97.2), and 92.4 (87.7- 97.1), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This gantry-based novel fractionation schedule incorporating pelvic radiation for high-risk prostate cancer in combination with androgen deprivation therapy is feasible and well tolerated.

Predictive Factors of Late-onset Rectal Mucosal Changes After Radiotherapy of Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

The Vienna Rectoscopy Score (VRS; from 0, absence of rectal mucosal changes, to 5) assessed 1 year after radiotherapy is a surrogate end-point of late rectal toxicity. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between treatment-related factors and 1-year VRS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Patients with prostate adenocarcinoma treated with definitive or postoperative radiotherapy (RT) underwent endoscopy 1 year after RT. Relationships between VRS of 2 or more and treatment parameters were investigated by univariate and multivariate logistic analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-five patients (mean age=69 years; range=43-81 years) were considered eligible for the study. At univariate analysis, patients treated with hypofractionation plus radiosurgery boost (p<0.001) and an equivalent dose in 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) (α/β=3) ≥75 Gy (p<0.001) was associated with a significantly higher incidence of VRS ≥2 after 1 year of follow-up. At multivariate analysis, radiosurgery boost was an independent risk factor for developing rectal mucosal lesions (VRS ≥2), yielding an odds ratio (OR) of 4.14 (95% confidence interval (CI)=1.2-13.8), while pelvic surgery was inversely associated with VRS ≥2 (OR=0.39; 95% CI=0.17-0.94).

CONCLUSION

Hypofractionation followed by radiosurgery boost significantly increased the risk of developing late-onset rectal mucosal changes. Therefore, special care and preventative treatment strategies are needed when using radiosurgery boost after hypofractionated RT.

Stereotactic body-radiotherapy boost dose of 18 Gy vs 21 Gy in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy and whole-pelvic radiotherapy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer: a study protocol for a randomized controlled, pilot trial

Background

Combination therapy using external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with a brachytherapy boost has demonstrated superior biochemical control than dose-escalated EBRT alone. Whereas brachytherapy is disadvantageous because it is an invasive procedure, stereotactic body-radiotherapy (SBRT) using CyberKnife could emulate the dose distribution of brachytherapy and is a non-invasive and safe modality to control intra-fractional movement. We therefore adopted SBRT using CyberKnife as a boost therapy after whole-pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT).

Methods/design

In this prospective, randomized, single-center, pilot study for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer without nodal or distant metastasis, after androgen-deprivation therapy and WPRT, patients will be randomized to one of two SBRT boost regimens, i.e., 18 or 21 Gy administered in three fractions every other day.

Discussion

The aim of this trial is to evaluate acute toxicities using both physician- and patient-reported outcomes and short-term biochemical control with SBRT boost following WPRT. Additionally, chronic toxicities and long-term biochemical control will be evaluated as secondary endpoints in this trial. Based on the generated results, we will plan the full-scale phase II study for selecting the SBRT boost dose.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID; NCT03322020. Retrospectively registered on 26 October 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2574-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In silico assessment of the dosimetric quality of a novel, automated radiation treatment planning strategy for linac-based radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases and a comparison with robotic methods

Background

To appraise the dosimetric features and the quality of the treatment plan for radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases optimized with a novel automated engine and to compare with plans optimized for robotic-based delivery.

Methods

A set of 15 patients with multiple brain metastases was selected for this in silico study. The technique under investigation is the recently introduced HyperArc. For all patients, three treatment plans were computed and compared: i: a HyperArc; ii: a standard VMAT; iii) a CyberKnife. Dosimetric features were computed for the clinical target volumes as well as for the healthy brain tissue and the organs at risk.

Results

The data showed that the best dose homogeneity was achieved with the VMAT technique. HyperArc allowed to minimize the volume of brain receiving 4Gy (as well as for the mean dose and the volume receiving 12Gy, although not statistically significant). The smallest dose on 1 cm³ volume for all organs at risk is for CK techniques, and the biggest for VMAT (p < 0.05). The Radiation Planning Index coefficient indicates that, there are no significant differences among the techniques investigated, suggesting an equivalence among these.

Conclusion

At treatment planning level, the study demonstrates that the use of HyperArc technique can significantly improve the sparing of the healthy brain while maintaining a full coverage of the target volumes.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Primary Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous cancer in males. There are a number of options for patients with localized early stage disease, including active surveillance for low-risk disease, surgery, brachytherapy, and external beam radiotherapy. Increasingly, external beam radiotherapy, in the form of dose-escalated and moderately hypofractionated regimens, is being utilized in prostate cancer, with randomized evidence to support their use. Stereotactic body radiotherapy, which is a form of extreme hypofractionation, delivered with high precision and conformality typically over 1 to 5 fractions, offers a more contemporary approach with several advantages including being non-invasive, cost-effective, convenient for patients, and potentially improving patient access. In fact, one study has estimated that if half of the patients currently eligible for conventional fractionated radiotherapy in the United States were treated instead with stereotactic body radiotherapy, this would result in a total cost savings of US$250 million per year. There is also a strong radiobiological rationale to support its use, with prostate cancer believed to have a low α/β ratio and therefore being preferentially sensitive to larger fraction sizes. To date, there are no published randomized trials reporting on the comparative efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy compared to alternative treatment modalities, although multiple randomized trials are currently accruing. Yet, early results from the randomized phase III study of HYPOfractionated RadioTherapy of intermediate risk localized Prostate Cancer (HYPO-RT-PC) trial, as well as multiple single-arm phase I/II trials, indicate low rates of late adverse effects with this approach. In patients with low- to intermediate-risk disease, excellent biochemical relapse-free survival outcomes have been reported, albeit with relatively short median follow-up times. These promising early results, coupled with the enormous potential cost savings and implications for resource availability, suggest that stereotactic body radiotherapy will take center stage in the treatment of prostate cancer in the years to come.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: A Report on 3-Year Toxicity

Background

Recent data suggest that intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plus brachytherapy boost for unfavorable prostate cancer provides improved biochemical relapse-free survival over IMRT alone. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may be a less invasive alternative to brachytherapy boost. Here, we report the 3-year gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities of IMRT plus SBRT boost.

Materials and methods

Between March 2008 and September 2012, patients with prostate cancer were treated with robotic SBRT (19.5 Gy in three fractions) followed by fiducial-guided IMRT (45–50.4 Gy) on an institutional protocol. Toxicity was prospectively graded using the common terminology criteria for adverse events version 4.0 (CTCAEv.4) at the start of and at 1- to 6-month intervals after therapy. Rectal telangiectasias were graded using the Vienna Rectoscopy Score (VRS).

Results

At a median follow-up of 4.2 years (2.4–7.5), 108 patients (4 low-, 45 intermediate-, and 59 high-risk) with a median age of 74 years (55–92) were treated with SBRT plus IMRT, with 8% on anticoagulation and an additional 48% on antiplatelet therapy at the start of therapy. The cumulative incidence of late ≥grade 2 GI toxicity was 12%. Of these, 7% were due to late rectal bleeding, with six patients requiring up to two coagulation procedures. One patient with rectal telangiectasias was treated with hyperbaric oxygen (grade 3 toxicity). No rectal fistulas or stenoses were observed. Ten patients had multiple non-confluent telangiectasias (VRS grade 2), and three patients had multiple confluent telangiectasias (VRS grade 3). The cumulative incidence of late grade 3 GU toxicity was 6%. Most late toxicities were due to hematuria requiring bladder fulguration. There were no late ≥grade 4 GU toxicities.

Conclusion

Rates of clinically significant GI and GU toxicities are modest following IMRT plus SBRT boost. Future studies should compare cancer control, quality of life, and toxicity with other treatment modalities for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: The Georgetown University Experience

Purpose/objective(s)

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to brachytherapy to deliver highly conformal, dose-­escalated radiation therapy (RT) to the prostate. SBRT alone may not adequately cover the tumor extensions outside the prostate commonly seen in unfavorable prostate cancer. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with high dose rate brachytherapy boost is a proven effective therapy for unfavorable prostate cancer. This study reports on early prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer-specific quality of life (QOL) outcomes in a cohort of unfavorable patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and SBRT boost.

Materials/methods

Prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT (19.5 Gy in three fractions) followed by fiducial-guided IMRT (45–50.4 Gy) from March 2008 to September 2012 were included in this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Biochemical failure was assessed using the Phoenix definition. Patients completed the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC)-26 at baseline, 1 month after the completion of RT, every 3 months for the first year, then every 6 months for a minimum of 2 years.

Results

One hundred eight patients (4 low-, 45 intermediate-, and 59 high-risk) with median age of 74 years completed treatment, with median follow-up of 4.4 years. Sixty-four percent of the patients received androgen deprivation therapy prior to the initiation of RT. The 3-year actuarial biochemical control rates were 100 and 89.8% for intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively. At the initiation of RT, 9 and 5% of men felt their urinary and bowel function was a moderate to big problem, respectively. Mean EPIC urinary and bowel function and bother scores exhibited transient declines, with subsequent return to near baseline. At 2 years posttreatment, 13.7 and 5% of men felt their urinary and bowel function was a moderate to big problem, respectively.

Conclusion

At 3-year follow-up, biochemical control was favorable. Acute urinary and bowel symptoms were comparable to conventionally fractionated IMRT and brachytherapy. Patients recovered to near their baseline urinary and bowel function by 2 years posttreatment. A combination of IMRT with SBRT boost is well tolerated with minimal impact on prostate cancer-specific QOL.

Prostate-specific antigen kinetics following hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy boost as post-external beam radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has emerged as an effective treatment for localized prostate cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics between conventionally fractionated external beam radiotherapy (CF-EBRT) and SBRT boost after whole pelvis EBRT (WP-EBRT) in localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

A total of 77 patients with localized prostate cancer [T-stage, T1-T3; Gleason score (GS) 5-9; PSA < 20 ng/mL] were enrolled. A total of 35 patients were treated with SBRT boost (21 Gy in 3 fractions) after WP-EBRT and 42 patients were treated with CF-EBRT (45 Gy WP-EBRT and boost of 25.2-30.6 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions). PSA nadir and rate of change in PSA (slope) were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 52.4 months (range, 14-74 months), the median PSA nadir and slope for SBRT boost were 0.29 ng/mL and -0.506, -0.235, -0.129, and -0.092 ng/mL/mo, respectively, for durations of 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years postradiotherapy. Similarly, for CF-EBRT, the median PSA nadir and slopes were 0.39 ng/mL and -0.720 ng/mL/mo, -0.204 ng/mL/mo, -0.121 ng/mL/mo, and -0.067 ng/mL/mo, respectively. The slope of CF-EBRT was significantly different with a greater median rate of change for 1 year postradiotherapy than that of SBRT boost (P = 0.018). Contrastively, the slopes of SBRT boost for durations of 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years tended to be continuously greater than that of CF-EBRT. The significantly lower PSA nadir was observed in SBRT boost (median nadir 0.29 ng/mL) compared with CF-EBRT (median nadir 0.35 ng/mL, P = 0.025). Five-year biochemical failure (BCF) free survival was 94.3% for SBRT boost and 78.6% for CF-EBRT (P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with SBRT boost after WP-EBRT experienced a lower PSA nadir and there tended to be a continuously greater rate of decline of PSA for durations of 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years than with CF-EBRT. The improved PSA kinetics of SBRT boost over CF-EBRT led to favorable BCF free survival.