1
|
Foerster R, Zwahlen DR, Buchali A, Tang H, Schroeder C, Windisch P, Vu E, Akbaba S, Bostel T, Sprave T, Zamboglou C, Zilli T, Stelmes JJ, Telkhade T, Murthy V. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13040759. [PMID: 33673077 PMCID: PMC7918664 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040759] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2020] [Revised: 02/04/2021] [Accepted: 02/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiotherapy (RT) is an established, potentially curative treatment option for all risk constellations of localized prostate cancer (PCA). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and dose-escalated RT can further improve outcome in high-risk (HR) PCA. In recent years, shorter RT schedules based on hypofractionated RT have shown equal outcome. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly conformal RT technique enabling ultra-hypofractionation which has been shown to be safe and efficient in patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCA. There is a paucity of data on the role of SBRT in HR PCA. In particular, the need for pelvic elective nodal irradiation (ENI) needs to be addressed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to analyze the available data on observed toxicities, ADT prescription practice, and oncological outcome to shed more light on the value of SBRT in HR PCA. METHODS We searched the PubMed and Embase electronic databases for the terms "prostate cancer" AND "stereotactic" AND "radiotherapy" in June 2020. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. RESULTS After a rigorous selection process, we identified 18 individual studies meeting all selection criteria for further analyses. Five additional studies were included because their content was judged as relevant. Three trials have reported on prostate SBRT including pelvic nodes; 2 with ENI and 1 with positive pelvic nodes only. The remaining studies investigated SBRT of the prostate only. Grade 2+ acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity was between 12% and 46.7% in the studies investigating pelvic nodes irradiation and ranged from 0% to 89% in the prostate only studies. Grade 2+ chronic GU toxicity was between 7% and 60% vs. 2% and 56.7%. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) grade 2+ toxicity was between 0% to 4% and 0% to 18% for studies with and without pelvic nodes irradiation, respectively. Chronic GI grade 2+ toxicity rates were between 4% and 50.1% vs. 0% and 40%. SBRT of prostate and positive pelvic nodes only showed similar toxicity rates as SBRT for the prostate only. Among the trials that reported on ADT use, the majority of HR PCA patients underwent ADT for at least 2 months; mostly neoadjuvant and concurrent. Biochemical control rates ranged from 82% to 100% after 2 years and 56% to 100% after 3 years. Only a few studies reported longer follow-up data. CONCLUSION At this point, SBRT with or without pelvic ENI cannot be considered the standard of care in HR PCA, due to missing level 1 evidence. Treatment may be offered to selected patients at specialized centers with access to high-precision RT. While concomitant ADT is the current standard of care, the necessary duration of ADT in combination with SBRT remains unclear. Ideally, all eligible patients should be enrolled in clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert Foerster
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
- Medical Faculty, University of Zurich (UZH), 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +41-52-266-31-40
| | - Daniel Rudolf Zwahlen
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
- Medical Faculty, University of Zurich (UZH), 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Andre Buchali
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruppiner Kliniken GmbH, Brandenburg Medical School (MHB), 16816 Neuruppin, Germany;
| | - Hongjian Tang
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
| | - Christina Schroeder
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruppiner Kliniken GmbH, Brandenburg Medical School (MHB), 16816 Neuruppin, Germany;
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), ETH Domain, 5232 Villingen, Switzerland
| | - Paul Windisch
- Institute for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland; (D.R.Z.); (H.T.); (C.S.); (P.W.)
| | - Erwin Vu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen (KSSG), 9007 St. Gallen, Switzerland;
| | - Sati Akbaba
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (S.A.); (T.B.)
| | - Tilman Bostel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (S.A.); (T.B.)
| | - Tanja Sprave
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany; (T.S.); (C.Z.)
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany; (T.S.); (C.Z.)
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Geneva (HUG), 1205 Geneva, Switzerland;
| | - Jean-Jacques Stelmes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncological Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), Cantonal Hospitals (EOC), 6500 Bellinzona, Switzerland;
| | - Tejshri Telkhade
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, India; (T.T.); (V.M.)
| | - Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai 400012, India; (T.T.); (V.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Murthy V, Mallick I, Gavarraju A, Sinha S, Krishnatry R, Telkhade T, Moses A, Kannan S, Prakash G, Pal M, Menon S, Popat P, Rangarajan V, Agarwal A, Kulkarni S, Bakshi G. Study protocol of a randomised controlled trial of prostate radiotherapy in high-risk and node-positive disease comparing moderate and extreme hypofractionation (PRIME TRIAL). BMJ Open 2020; 10:e034623. [PMID: 32114475 PMCID: PMC7050316 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034623] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There has been an interest in studying the efficacy of extreme hypofractionation in low and intermediate risk prostate cancer utilising the low alpha/beta ratio of prostate. Its role in high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer, however, is unknown. We hypothesise that a five-fraction schedule of extreme hypofractionation will be non-inferior to a moderately hypofractionated regimen over 5 weeks in efficacy and will have acceptable toxicity and quality of life while reducing the cost implications during treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This is an ongoing, non-inferiority, multicentre, randomised trial (NCT03561961) of two schedules for National Cancer Control Network high-risk and/or node-positive non-metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. The standard arm will be a schedule of 68 Gy/25# over 5 weeks while the test arm will be extremely hypofractionated radiotherapy with stereotactic body radiation therapy to 36.25 Gy/5# (7 to 10 days). The block randomisation will be stratified by nodal status (N0/N+), hormonal therapy (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone therapy/orchiectomy) and centre. All patients will receive daily image-guided radiotherapy.The primary end point is 4-year biochemical failure free survival (BFFS). The power calculations assume 4-year BFFS of 80% in the moderate hypofractionation arm. With a 5% one-sided significance and 80% power, a total of 434 patients will be randomised to both arms equally (217 in each arm). The secondary end points include overall survival, prostate cancer specific survival, acute and late toxicities, quality of life and out-of-pocket expenditure. DISCUSSION The trial aims to establish a therapeutically efficacious and cost-efficient modality for high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer with an acceptable toxicity profile. Presently, this is the only trial evaluating and answering such a question in this cohort. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The trial has been approved by IEC-III of Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Registered with CTRI/2018/05/014054 (http://ctri.nic.in) on 24 May 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Indranil Mallick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Centre, Kolkata, India
| | | | - Shwetabh Sinha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Rahul Krishnatry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Tejshri Telkhade
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Arunsingh Moses
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Centre, Kolkata, India
| | - Sadhna Kannan
- Clinical Research Secretariat, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Gagan Prakash
- Division of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Mahendra Pal
- Division of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Santosh Menon
- Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Palak Popat
- Department of Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Venkatesh Rangarajan
- Department of Nuclear Imaging and Bio imaging, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Archi Agarwal
- Department of Nuclear Imaging and Bio imaging, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Sheetal Kulkarni
- Clinical Research Secretariat, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Ganesh Bakshi
- Division of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Murthy V, Sinha S, Kannan S, Datta D, Das R, Bakshi G, Prakash G, Krishnatry R. Safety of Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy after Transurethral Resection of Prostate (TURP): A Propensity Score Matched Pair Analysis. Pract Radiat Oncol 2019; 9:347-353. [PMID: 30978467 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2019.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2019] [Revised: 04/01/2019] [Accepted: 04/02/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine the genitourinary (GU) toxicity outcomes in prostate cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) who have undergone a prior transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and compare it to a similar non-TURP cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS Fifty prostate cancer patients who had undergone a single TURP, had a good baseline urinary function, and had been subsequently treated with SBRT were chosen from a prospectively maintained database. These were propensity score matched to a similar non-TURP cohort treated during the same period. Matching was done for diabetes mellitus and volume of radiation therapy. Acute GU and late GU toxicity were scored using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. Stricture and incontinence were scored using Common Terminology for Common Adverse Events version 4.0. RESULTS Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 26 months (non-TURP vs TURP, 30 months vs 22 months, P = .34). The median duration between TURP and start of SBRT was 10 months. There was no significant difference between non-TURP versus TURP cohort in terms of RTOG acute GU toxicities grade ≥2 (8% vs 6%, P = .45), RTOG late GU toxicities grade ≥2 (8% vs 12%, P = .10), stricture rates (4% vs 6%, P = .64), and incontinence rates (0% vs 4%, P = .15). The median duration of time to late toxicity was 16 months vs 10 months (P = .12) in non-TURP and TURP cohort, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Although modestly increased as compared with non-TURP patients, GU toxicities remains low with SBRT in post-TURP patients. SBRT can be safely performed in carefully selected post-TURP prostate cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India.
| | - Shwetabh Sinha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| | - Sadhana Kannan
- Department of Biostatistics, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, India
| | - Debanjali Datta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| | - Rabi Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| | - Ganesh Bakshi
- Division of Urology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| | - Gagan Prakash
- Division of Urology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| | - Rahul Krishnatry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| |
Collapse
|