Contralateral Nodal Relapse in Well-lateralised Oral Cavity Cancers Treated Uniformly with Ipsilateral Surgery and Adjuvant Radiotherapy With or Without Concurrent Chemotherapy: a Retrospective Study

AIMS

To evaluate the incidence and pattern of contralateral nodal relapse (CLNR), contralateral nodal relapse-free survival (CLNRFS) and risk factors predicting CLNR in well-lateralised oral cavity cancers (OCC) treated with unilateral surgery and adjuvant ipsilateral radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients of well-lateralised OCC treated between 2012 and 2017 were included. The primary endpoint was incidence of CLNR and CLNRFS. Univariable and multivariable analyses were carried out to identify potential factors predicting CLNR.

RESULTS

Of the 208 eligible patients, 21 (10%) developed isolated CLNR at a median follow-up of 45 months. The incidence of CLNR was 21.3% in node-positive patients. CLNR was most common at level IB (61.9%) followed by level II. The 5-year CLNRFS and overall survival were 82.5% and 57.7%, respectively. Any positive ipsilateral lymph node (P = 0.001), two or more positive lymph nodes (P < 0.001), involvement of ipsilateral level IB (P = 0.002) or level II lymph node (P < 0.001), presence of extranodal extension (P < 0.001), lymphatic invasion (P = 0.015) and perineural invasion (P = 0.021) were significant factors for CLNR on univariable analysis. The presence of two or more positive lymph nodes (P < 0.001) was an independent prognostic factor for CLNR on multivariable analysis. CLNR increased significantly with each increasing lymph node number beyond two compared with node-negative patients.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of isolated CLNR is low in well-lateralised OCC. Patients with two or more positive lymph nodes have a higher risk of CLNR and may be considered for elective treatment of contralateral neck.

Prostatectomy in oligometastatic prostate cancer: a call for high-quality evidence

The systematic review by Saouli et al. investigates the role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in managing oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPCa) [1]. They analyzed the existing literature to assess the oncological and functional outcomes of RP for these patients. RP is feasible and has an acceptable risk of complications. However, the lack of consensus on the definitions of omPCa and the low-quality evidence of the available comparative and retrospective studies, RP in omPCa should not be recommended outside of clinical trials.

Access and barriers to genomic classifiers for breast cancer and prostate cancer in India

The incidence of cancer in general, including breast and prostate cancer specifically, is increasing in India. Breast and prostate cancers have genomic classifiers developed to guide therapy decisions. However, these genomic classifiers are often inaccessible in India due to high cost. These classifiers may also be less suitable to the Indian population, as data primarily from patients in wealthy Western countries were used in developing these genomic classifiers. In addition to the limitations in using these existing genomic classifiers, developing and validating new genomic classifiers for breast and prostate cancer in India is challenging due to the heterogeneity in the Indian population. However, there are steps that can be taken to address the various barriers that currently exist for accurate, accessible genomic classifiers for cancer in India.

Prognostic Significance of Lymph Node Density in Pathological Node Positive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder -Upfront Surgery and Post Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Cohorts

AIM

To validate the role of lymph node density as a prognostic marker in patients undergoing primary surgery and postneoadjuvant therapy in pathological node-positive urothelial bladder carcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 503 patients who underwent radical cystectomy from 2006 to 2019 for muscle-invasive urothelial bladder carcinoma, of which 152 patients with pathological node-positive disease were analyzed. Demographic details, pathological findings, treatment details, disease-free, and overall survival were documented. X tile program analysis was used to divide patients with positive lymph nodes into 3 groups: LD1: <= 7, LD2 :>7 to <15, LD3: >15, and the optimal cut-off value obtained was 15%. To evaluate the impact of lymph node ratio, patients with positive lymph nodes into 3 categories for each cut-off point estimation method, the application generates the histogram, Kaplan-Meier plot and calculates hazard ratio, confidence intervals and P-values. Univariate and multivariate cox regression analysis was done with a P-value of <.05, considered significant.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-two patients (30.2%) had pathological nodal metastasis, with 87 of them having perinodal extension. Ninety-six underwent primary surgery, and 56 were postneoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 55.42 months. 68 of the 152 node-positive patients died of the disease. Median number of lymph nodes removed was 17.11. Lymph node density divided into tertiles were LD1 <7%, LD2 7-<15%, LD3 >15% showed 5-year RFS 40.5%,29.3%, 22.6% and 5 year OS was 55.5%, 42.4%,32.1% respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that age less than 55 years ,higher tumor stage, lymphovascular invasion, and higher lymph node ratio were significant in univariate and multivariate analysis. The lymph node density cut-off value of 15% was substantial among node-positive patients (P = .027), and subgroup analysis in upfront surgery with the adjuvant treatment group and postneoadjuvant chemotherapy group was also significant (P =.021).

CONCLUSION

Pathological higher T stage, Age <55 years, Lymphovascular invasion, adjuvant chemotherapy , adjuvant radiation treatment and lymph node density had prognostic significance in both cohorts of patients who underwent upfront surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Lymph node density cut-off value of <15% was prognostically significant.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Alone Versus Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy and Brachytherapy for Early-Stage Oropharyngeal Cancers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) alone versus IMRT + brachytherapy (BT) in patients with T1-T2N0M0 oropharyngeal squamous cell cancers (OPSCC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This open-label randomized controlled trial was conducted at Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. Patients with stage I and II OPSCC were considered for IMRT to a dose of 50 Gy/25 fractions/5 weeks in phase I followed by randomization (1:1) to further treatment with IMRT (20 Gy/10 fractions/2 weeks) or BT (192Ir high dose rate, 21 Gy/7 fractions/2 fractions per day). The primary endpoint of the trial was the reduction in xerostomia at 6 months evaluated using 99mTc salivary scintigraphy. Severe salivary toxicity (xerostomia) was defined as posttreatment salivary excretion fraction ratio <45%. Secondary endpoints were local control, disease-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Between November 2010 and February 2020, 90 patients were randomized to IMRT (n = 46) alone or IMRT + BT (n = 44). Eleven patients (8 residual/recurrent disease, 2 lost to follow-up, 1 second primary) in the IMRT arm and 9 patients (8 residual/recurrence, 1 lost to follow-up) in the BT arm were not evaluable at 6 months for the primary endpoint. At 6 months, xerostomia rates using salivary scintigraphy were 14% (5/35: 95% CI, 5%-30%) in the BT arm while it was seen in 44% (14/32: 95% CI, 26%-62%) in the IMRT arm (P = .008). Physician-rated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade ≥2 xerostomia at any time point was observed in 30% of patients (9/30) in the IMRT arm and 6.7% (2/30) in the BT arm (P = .02). At a median follow-up of 42.5 months, the 3-year local control in the IMRT arm was 56.4% (95% CI, 43%-73%) while it was 66.2% (95% CI, 53%-82%) in the BT arm (P = .24).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of BT to IMRT for T1-T2N0M0 OPSCC results in a significant reduction in xerostomia. This strongly supports the addition of BT to IMRT in suitable cases.

Reducing Salivary Toxicity with Adaptive Radiotherapy (ReSTART): A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Conventional IMRT to Adaptive IMRT in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas

BACKGROUND

The utility of Adaptive Radiotherapy (ART) in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC) remains to be ascertained. While multiple retrospective and single-arm prospective studies have demonstrated its efficacy in decreasing parotid doses and reducing xerostomia, adequate randomized evidence is lacking.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

ReSTART (Reducing Salivary Toxicity with Adaptive Radiotherapy) is an ongoing phase III randomized trial of patients with previously untreated, locally advanced HNSCC of the oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the standard Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) arm {Planning Target Volume (PTV) margin 5 mm} vs. Adaptive Radiotherapy arm (standard IMRT with a PTV margin 3 mm, two planned adaptive planning at 10th and 20th fractions). The stratification factors include the primary site and nodal stage. The RT dose prescribed is 66Gy in 30 fractions for high-risk PTV and 54Gy in 30 fractions for low-risk PTV over six weeks, along with concurrent chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is to compare salivary toxicity between arms using salivary scintigraphy 12 months' post-radiation. To detect a 25% improvement in the primary endpoint at 12 months in the ART arm with a two-sided 5% alpha value and a power of 80% (and 10% attrition ratio), a sample size of 130 patients is required (65 patients in each arm). The secondary endpoints include acute and late toxicities, locoregional control, disease-free survival, overall survival, quality of life, and xerostomia scores between the two arms.

DISCUSSION

The ReSTART trial aims to answer an important question in Radiation Therapy for HNSCC, particularly in a resource-limited setting. The uniqueness of this trial, compared to other ongoing randomized trials, includes the PTV margins and the xerostomia assessment by scintigraphy at 12 months as the primary endpoint.

Safety of Ultrahypofractionated Pelvic Nodal Irradiation in the Definitive Management of Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the evidence for ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation in patients with prostate cancer, with a focus on reported acute and late toxicities.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A comprehensive search was conducted in 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception until March 23, 2023. Eligible publications included patients with intermediate- and high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer who underwent elective or therapeutic ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation. Primary outcomes included the presence of grade ≥2 rates of acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scales. Quality assessment was performed using National Institutes of Health tools for noncontrolled beforeand after (single arm) clinical trials, as well as single-arm observational studies. Because all outcomes were categorical variables, proportion was calculated to estimate the effect size and compare the outcomes after the intervention.

RESULTS

We identified 16 publications that reported the use of ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy to treat the pelvis in prostate cancer. Seven publications met our criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, including 417 patients. The median total dose to the pelvic lymph nodes was 25 Gy (range, 25-28.5 Gy), with a median of 5 fractions. The prostate received a median dose of 40 Gy (range, 35-47.5 Gy). All studies used androgen deprivation therapy for a median duration of 18 months. The median follow-up period was 3 years (range, 0.5-5.6 years). The rates of acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were 8% (95% CI, 1%-15%) and 29% (95% CI, 18%-41%), respectively. For late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity, the rates were 13% (95% CI, 5%-21%) and 29% (95% CI, 17%-42%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation appears to be a safe approach in terms of acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer after surgical treatment of prostatic obstruction: Impact on urinary morbidity and mitigation strategies

In the past decade, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a valid treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer. Despite the promising results of ultra-hypofractionation in terms of tolerance and disease control, the toxicity profile of SBRT for prostate cancer patients with a history of surgical treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia is still underreported. Here we present an overview of the available data on urinary morbidity for prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT after prior surgical treatments for benign prostate hyperplasia. Technical improvements useful to minimize toxicity and possible treatments for radiation-induced urethritis are discussed.

Clinical Profile and Outcomes of Carcinoma Penis Patients Receiving Systemic Therapy at an Indian tertiary care Center: A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Penile cancer is a rare malignancy with scant data on the impact of systemic therapy on outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of patients with a histological diagnosis of carcinoma penis treated with systemic therapy at the Tata Memorial Centre (Mumbai, India) between August 2010 and February 2018. Primary objective was overall survival (OS); secondary objectives included assessment of clinical characteristics, treatment approaches, and toxicity profiles.

RESULTS

We included 91 patients with penile carcinoma who received systemic therapy at our center. Intent of therapy was curative in 71 patients (78%), and palliative in 20 (22%). Median age was 57 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50-65.5) for curatively treated patients and 58.5 years (IQR, 44-65.2) for those with advanced disease. Common presenting symptoms were lumps (70%), and pain (57%). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with paclitaxel + platinum was administered to 19 patients (20.9%), of which 7 (37%) attained complete or partial response. Six patients (31.5%) underwent R0 surgery post-NACT. All 71 patients underwent primary surgery; 47 (66.2%) undergoing partial penectomy. Of the 20 patients treated with palliative first-line chemotherapy, 4(20%) attained a partial response. Median OS of patients treated in curative and palliative settings was 33.8 months (95% CI, 17.2-not recorded) and 11.4 months (95% CI, 9.53-23.3), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with penile cancer treated with systemic therapy have poor outcomes. Little over a third of the patients respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those with advanced disease have poor survival despite systemic therapy, emphasizing the need for early detection and optimum management of primary and nodal disease.

Volumetric and geometric changes in the parotid glands and target volume during image-guided radiotherapy for locally advanced oropharyngeal cancers

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the volumetric and geometric changes in the parotid glands and target volume during image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for locally advanced oropharyngeal cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients receiving radiotherapy using IGRT at a dose of 70 Gy/35 fractions/7 weeks for locally advanced oropharyngeal cancers were accrued. Radiotherapy planning computed tomography (CT) scans were performed at pre-radiotherapy (RT), 20, 40, and 60 Gy for each patient. Volume changes in target and parotids along with shifts of parotids were assessed with respect to pre-RT scan after co-registration. In study scans, GTVp and GTVn were recontoured as per particular CT. CTV and PTV were copied from planning CT to study CT. CTV was edited from anatomical barriers, and PTV was edited only from the skin in the study CT. The parotids were recontoured on each study scan. The center of mass (COM) of C2 vertebral body was considered as the reference to evaluate its shifts.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant percentage regression of ipsilateral and contralateral parotid mean volumes at the rate of 0.85%/0.207 cc and 0.98%/0.26 cc per day, respectively. We observed the mean medial shift of center of mass of ipsilateral parotid of 2.23 mm (p = 0.011) and contralateral parotid of 2.67 mm (p = 0.069) at the end of 60 Gy. GTVp (mean) reduced from 41.87 cc at 0 Gy to 31.13 cc (25.65%) at 60 Gy (p = 0.003), while GTVn (mean) reduced from 19.98 cc at 0 Gy to 10.79 cc (45.99%) at 60 Gy (p = 0.003). There was a statistically significant reduction in CTV and PTV volumes at 60 Gy.

CONCLUSION

Statistically significant volumetric and geometric changes occurred during intensity-modulated radiation (IMRT), which were most prominent after 40 Gy and were maximum at 60 Gy. There was a medial shift of parotid glands toward the high-dose region. This study can be useful to devise an adaptive radiotherapy strategy.

Evaluation of post-chemotherapy residual seminomatous masses by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT using tumor-to-liver ratio - conundrum or solution?

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET/CT in the detection of viable disease in post-chemotherapy seminomatous residual masses using visual interpretation, SUVmax, and T/L ratio.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study assessing the post-chemotherapy seminomatous residual masses of size >3 cm. The PET/CT scan findings were interpreted visually for presence of residual disease which were validated from histopathology reports or imaging follow-up for a maximum of 3 years. SUVmax and T/L ratios were also determined for all the residual lesions. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value NPV were calculated and compared for all three parameters along with ROC analysis to obtain an optimal cutoff value for SUVmax and T/L ratio, respectively.

RESULTS

Sample size was 49. Out of these 49 patients, 8 had validation of PET results with histopathology. Rest was validated with imaging follow-up. FDG-PET was positive in 30 patients and negative in 19 patients by visual interpretation. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV by this method were 100%, 62.5%, 73%, and 100%, respectively. The SUVmax and T/L ratios were also calculated for these lesions. The cutoff for these two variables was 4.56 and 1.21, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV at these cutoffs were 76%, 87.5%, 86%, 77.7%, and 92%, 87.5%, 88%, 91%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

FDG-PET has a favorable diagnostic value in predicting viable disease in post-chemotherapy seminomatous residual masses and using T/L ratio cutoff of 1.21 will increase the specificity of the test.

Use of focal radiotherapy boost for prostate cancer: radiation oncologists' perspectives and perceived barriers to implementation

BACKGROUND

In a recent phase III randomized control trial, delivering a focal radiotherapy (RT) boost to tumors visible on MRI was shown to improve disease-free survival and regional/distant metastasis-free survival for patients with prostate cancer-without increasing toxicity. The aim of this study was to assess how widely this technique is being applied in current practice, as well as physicians' perceived barriers toward its implementation.

METHODS

We invited radiation oncologists to complete an online questionnaire assessing their use of intraprostatic focal boost in December 2022 and February 2023. To include perspectives from a broad range of practice settings, the invitation was distributed to radiation oncologists worldwide via email list, group text platform, and social media.

RESULTS

263 radiation oncologist participants responded. The highest-represented countries were the United States (42%), Mexico (13%), and the United Kingdom (8%). The majority of participants worked at an academic medical center (52%) and considered their practice to be at least partially genitourinary (GU)-subspecialized (74%). Overall, 43% of participants reported routinely using intraprostatic focal boost. Complete GU-subspecialists were more likely to implement focal boost, with 61% reporting routine use. In both high-income and low-to-middle-income countries, less than half of participants routinely use focal boost. The most cited barriers were concerns about registration accuracy between MRI and CT (37%), concerns about risk of additional toxicity (35%), and challenges to accessing high-quality MRI (29%).

CONCLUSIONS

Two years following publication of a randomized trial of patient benefit without increased toxicity, almost half of the radiation oncologists surveyed are now routinely offering focal RT boost. Further adoption of this technique might be aided by increased access to high-quality MRI, better registration algorithms of MRI to CT simulation images, physician education on benefit-to-harm ratio, and training on contouring prostate lesions on MRI.

Use of Focal Radiotherapy Boost for Prostate Cancer and Perceived Barriers toward its Implementation: A Survey

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

In a recent phase III randomized control trial (FLAME), delivering a focal radiotherapy (RT) boost to tumors visible on MRI was shown to improve outcomes for prostate cancer patients without increasing toxicity. The aim of this study was to assess how widely this technique is being applied in current practices worldwide as well as physicians' perceived barriers toward its implementation.

MATERIALS/METHODS

An online survey assessing the use of intraprostatic focal boost was conducted in December 2022 and February 2023. The survey link was distributed to radiation oncologists worldwide via email list, group text platform, and social media. Survey questions included how many prostate cancer cases participants treat in a typical month; how often they use focal boost, if at all; the degree to which their practice is genitourinary (GU)-subspecialized; main barriers to implementing focal boost more often in their practice; and demographic information. Subgroup analyses were also conducted for participants from high-income or low-to-middle-income countries, as defined by the World Bank.

RESULTS

The survey initially collected 205 responses from various countries over a two-week period in December 2022. The survey was then reopened for one week in February 2023 to allow for more participation, leading to a total of 263 responses. The highest-represented countries were the United States (42%), Mexico (13%), and the United Kingdom (8%). The majority of respondents worked at an academic medical center (52%) and considered their practice to be at least partially GU-subspecialized (74%). 57% of participants overall reported not routinely using intraprostatic focal boost. Even among complete subspecialists, a substantial proportion (39%) do not routinely use focal boost. Less than half of participants in both high-income and low-to-middle-income countries were shown to routinely use focal boost. Perceived barriers to implementation are shown in Table 1.

CONCLUSION

Despite the promising level 1 results of the FLAME trial, many radiation oncologists worldwide are not routinely offering focal RT boost. Adoption of this technique might be accelerated by increased access to high-quality MRI, better registration algorithms of MRI to CT simulation images, physician education on benefit-to-harm ratio, automated planning algorithms, and physician training on contouring prostate lesions on MRI.

Late Urinary Toxicity and QoL with Curative Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Dose-Effect Relations in the POP-RT Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) showed better biochemical failure-free survival and metastasis-free survival than prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in the phase III randomized POP-RT trial for high and very high-risk prostate cancer, albeit with higher RTOG grade 2 late urinary toxicity. We report updated long term, symptom-wise comparison and dose-effect relations from this trial.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Late urinary toxicity, and cumulative severity of each symptom over the follow-up period was graded using CTCAE v5.0. Grade 2+ toxicities were compared between the trial arms by chi square test. Bladder dosimetry in 5-Gy increments (V5, V10, V15...V65 Gy, V68 Gy) from the trial database of approved radiotherapy plans, was compared for each urinary symptom and overall late gr2+ toxicity by student t-test. Observed differences in dosimetric parameters were tested using multivariable logistic regression analysis, including age at diagnosis, known diabetes, tumor stage, trial arm, and prior transurethral resection of prostate (TURP). Urinary QOL scores were compared between arms using generalised linear mixed model.

RESULTS

Combined late symptom-wise toxicity and dose-volume data were available for analysis for 193/224 patients. At a median follow-up of 75 months, cumulative CTCAE gr2+ late urinary toxicity remained higher with WPRT than PORT, though not statistically significant (36.5% vs 26.8%, p = 0.15). Grade 3 toxicity was low and similar in both arms. Symptom-wise cumulative rates showed no significant difference between arms (Table 1). Dosimetric comparison showed significantly higher bladder V5-V15 in patients with gr2+ toxicity over those with

CONCLUSION

Compared to prostate-only radiotherapy, whole pelvic radiotherapy resulted similar Grade 3 urinary toxicity of about 5% with about 10% higher cumulative grade 2+ urinary toxicity over long term follow up. This difference was not reflected in patient-reported QOL. WPRT particularly increased urgency and hematuria. Larger bladder volume being irradiated with 5Gy to 15Gy dose range could contribute to increase in urinary symptoms.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

G Maheshwari Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
P Maitre Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
J Sarkar Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
V Raveendran Department of Medical Physics, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
R Phurailatpam Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
P Singh Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
V Murthy Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India

Collapse

Prospective Comparative Study of Quality of Life in Bladder Cancer Patients Undergoing Cystectomy or Bladder Preservation

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Health-related Quality of life (HRQOL) may be decisive when different treatments yield comparable survival outcomes. We compared QOL in patients undergoing radical cystectomy with ileal conduit (RCIC) or bladder preservation (BP) with (chemo)radiotherapy for bladder cancer.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients with histological diagnosis of bladder cancer, stage T1-T4, N0-N1, M0 with a minimum follow-up of 6 months from the last treatment intervention (RCIC or BP) and alive without disease at the time of QOL assessment were eligible for inclusion. After ethics committee approval, two HRQOL instruments were translated, validated and administered: Bladder cancer index (BCI) for bladder cancer-specific HRQOL, which includes 36 items under three domains - bladder, bowel and sexual function and the EORTC QLQ C30 which includes 30 items under three domains - functional, symptom and global health. The mean QOL scores across various domains and specific questions were compared between the two treatment groups using the independent t-test.

RESULTS

Of the 104 patients enrolled, 56 had RCIC, and 48 received BP, and included 95 (91.3%) males. The median time from treatment completion to QOL assessment was 22 months (IQR 10-56). The median age for the entire cohort was 62 years (IQR 55-68), 65.5 years (IQR 55-71) in BP and 59.5 years (IQR 55-66) in RCIC. Overall, mean BCI urinary scores and bowel scores were high in both groups, with no significant difference in function or bother subdomains between the two groups (Table 1). Overall, BCI sexual scores were low in both the groups but significantly better after BP (BPmean 56.9, RCICmean 41.5, p = 0.01). Mean scores for sexual function BPmean 38.4 and RCIC mean 25 p (0.07) and sexual bother BPmean 81 RCICmean 62 (p 0.02) subdomains. There was no significant difference in EORTC QOL outcomes in functional (BPmean 91.4, RCICmean 88.7 p 0.23), symptom (BPmean 89.8, RCICmean 89, p = 0.68) and global health scale (BPmean 76.8, RCICmean 78.5, p = 0.69) in both groups. On question-wise assessment, the ability to perform an exercise (BPmean 94.2, RCICmean 85, p = 0.06) and urinary leakage at night time (BPmean 91.7, RCICmean 77.6, p = 0.01) were better in the BP group, while scores for blood in the urine (BPmean 89.1, RCICmean 97, p = 0.05) were better in the RCIC group compared to BP.

CONCLUSION

Overall, QOL was good in both groups in the urinary and bowel domains while it was low in the sexual domain. However, bladder preservation performed significantly better in the sexual domain than RCIC.

Patterns of Utilization and Outcomes of Perioperative Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced-urothelial Bladder Cancer (LABC)-Real World Data From an Indian Tertiary Care Cancer Center

AIM

Optimal utilization of perioperative systemic therapy in locally advanced bladder cancer (LABC) holds the key in improving the survival outcomes. We aim to analyze the oncological outcomes of clinically locally advanced urothelial bladder cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant (NACT) or adjuvant chemotherapy or without any systemic therapy in the perioperative period of radical cystectomy.

METHODS & MATERIAL

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients with cancer of the urinary bladder diagnosed between 2012 and 2020. The demographic profile, and the treatment received, was recorded for all patients. Oncological outcomes of the patients based on these variables were analyzed.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty nine (229) locally advanced bladder cancer patients were included in the study. Eighty eight (38%) of them underwent upfront radical cystectomy and 141 (62%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). With a median follow-up of 27 months, the 2-year DFS in either of the groups was 65.4% and 67.1% respectively (P - 0.373). In the multivariate analysis, the pathological lymph nodal status and lymph vascular invasion (LVI) status influenced the DFS. The initial modality of management chosen did not affect the outcome. (HR - 0.688; 95% CI: 0.38-1.21). The commonest reason for not receiving NACT was Cisplatin ineligibility due to malignant obstructive uropathy and a subgroup analysis of this set of patients also did not show any significant difference in 2 year DFS compared to those who received NACT.

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of patients with LABC are unable to receive the recommended neoadjuvant chemotherapy and obstructive uropathy is the commonest reason for this in our centre. In our single centre series upfront radical cystectomy followed by adjuvant platinum based therapy had an outcome similar to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in LABC patients, in patients who were unable to receive the same due to various reasons.

Surgical templates for inguinal lymph node dissection in cN0 penile cancer: A comparative study

PURPOSE

Modified and superficial inguinal lymph node dissection (MILD and SILD) are the 2 widely used templates for surgical staging of clinically node negative (cN0) penile cancer (PeCa); however, no previous reports have compared their outcomes. We compared these 2 surgical templates for oncological outcomes and complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of cN0 PeCa patients who underwent MILD/SILD at our cancer care center from January 2013 to December 2019. Patients who developed a penile recurrence during follow up were excluded from analysis of oncological outcomes. The 2 groups (MILD and SILD) were compared for baseline clinico-pathological characteristics. The primary outcome was the groin recurrence free survival (gRFS). Secondary outcomes included the false negative rate (FNR) and disease free survival (DFS) for both templates and also the post-operative wound related complication.

RESULTS

Of the 146 patients with intermediate and high risk N0 PeCa, 74 (50.7%) and 72 (49.3%) underwent MILD and SILD respectively. The 2 groups were comparable with regards to the distribution of T stage, tumor grade and the proportion of intermediate and high-risk patients. At a median follow up of 34 months (47 for SILD and 23 for MILD), a total of 5 groin recurrences were encountered; all of them occurred in the MILD group. The gRFS and DFS for the MILD group was 93.2% and 91.8% respectively; while that for the SILD group was 100% and 94.4% respectively. Too few events had occurred to determine any statistically significant difference. The FNR for MILD and SILD was 26.3% and 0% respectively. The overall complication rate was significantly higher in the SILD group (46% vs 20.3%, p=0.001), especially for Clavien Dindo 3A complications.

CONCLUSION

MILD can fail to pick up micro-metastatic disease in a small proportion of cN0 PeCa patients, while SILD provides better oncological clearance with no groin recurrences. This oncological superiority comes at the cost of a higher incidence of wound-related complications.

Study Protocol of the Bladder Adjuvant RadioTherapy (BART) Trial: A Randomised Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Radiotherapy Following Cystectomy in Bladder Cancer

AIMS

To assess the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) following radical cystectomy (RC) and chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The BART (Bladder Adjuvant RadioTherapy) trial is an ongoing multicentric, randomised, phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation in patients with high-risk MIBC. The key eligibility criteria include ≥pT3, node-positive (pN+), positive margins and/or nodal yield <10, or, neoadjuvant chemotherapy for cT3/T4/N+ disease. In total, 153 patients will be accrued and randomised, in a 1:1 ratio, to either observation (standard arm) or adjuvant radiotherapy (test arm) following surgery and chemotherapy. Stratification parameters include nodal status (N+ versus N0) and chemotherapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy). For patients in the test arm, adjuvant radiotherapy to cystectomy bed and pelvic nodes is planned with intensity-modulated radiotherapy to a dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions using daily image guidance. All patients will follow-up with 3-monthly clinical review and urine cytology for 2 years and subsequently 6 monthly until 5 years, with contrast-enhanced computed tomography abdomen pelvis 6 monthly for 2 years and annually until 5 years. Physician-scored toxicity using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 and patient-reported quality of life using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Colorectal questionnaire is recorded pre-treatment and at follow-up.

ENDPOINTS AND STATISTICS

The primary endpoint is 2-year locoregional recurrence-free survival. The sample size calculation was based on the estimated improvement in 2-year locoregional recurrence-free survival from 70% in the standard arm to 85% in the test arm (hazard ratio 0.45) using 80% statistical power and a two-sided alpha error of 0.05. Secondary endpoints include disease-free survival, overall survival, acute and late toxicity, patterns of failure and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

The BART trial aims to evaluate whether contemporary radiotherapy after standard-of-care surgery and chemotherapy reduces pelvic recurrences safely and also potentially affects survival in high-risk MIBC.

Multi-Institutional Clinical Outcomes of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 Prostate Cancers Treated With Contemporary High-Dose Radiation and Long-Term Androgen Deprivation Therapy

AIMS

This multicentric retrospective study reports long-term clinical outcomes of non-metastatic grade group 5 prostate cancers treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) alone with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated across 19 institutions were studied. The key endpoints that were evaluated were 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), metastases-free survival (MFS), overall survival, together with EBRT-related acute and late toxicities. The impact of various prognostic factors on the studied endpoints was analysed using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Among the 462 patients, 88% (405) had Gleason 9 disease and 31% (142) had primary Gleason pattern 5. A prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan was used for staging in 33% (153), 80% (371) were staged as T3/T4 and 30% (142) with pelvic nodal disease. The median ADT duration was 24 months; 66% received hypofractionated EBRT and 71.4% (330) received pelvic nodal irradiation. With a median follow-up of 56 months, the 5-year bRFS, MFS and overall survival were 73.1%, 77.4% and 90.5%, respectively. Primary Gleason pattern 5 was associated with worse bRFS, MFS and overall survival with hazard ratios of 0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.73, P < 0.001), 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.96, P = 0.031) and 0.52 (95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.97, P = 0.040), respectively, whereas pelvic nodal disease was associated with worse bRFS (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.98, P = 0.039) and MFS (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.85, P = 0.006). The acute and late radiation-related toxicities were low overall and pelvic nodal irradiation was associated with higher toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Contemporary EBRT and long-term ADT led to excellent 5-year clinical outcomes and low rates of toxicity in this cohort of non-metastatic grade group 5 prostate cancers. Primary Gleason pattern 5 and pelvic node disease portends inferior clinical outcomes.

Use of focal radiotherapy boost for prostate cancer and perceived barriers toward its implementation: a survey

Background

In a recent phase III randomized control trial (FLAME), delivering a focal radiotherapy (RT) boost to tumors visible on MRI was shown to improve outcomes for prostate cancer patients without increasing toxicity. The aim of this study was to assess how widely this technique is being applied in current practice as well as physicians' perceived barriers toward its implementation.

Methods

An online survey assessing the use of intraprostatic focal boost was conducted in December 2022 and February 2023. The survey link was distributed to radiation oncologists worldwide via email list, group text platform, and social media.

Results

The survey initially collected 205 responses from various countries over a two-week period in December 2022. The survey was then reopened for one week in February 2023 to allow for more participation, leading to a total of 263 responses. The highest-represented countries were the United States (42%), Mexico (13%), and the United Kingdom (8%). The majority of participants worked at an academic medical center (52%) and considered their practice to be at least partially genitourinary (GU)-subspecialized (74%). 57% of participants reported not routinely using intraprostatic focal boost. Even among complete subspecialists, a substantial proportion (39%) do not routinely use focal boost. Less than half of participants in both high-income and low-to-middle-income countries were shown to routinely use focal boost. The most commonly cited barriers were concerns about registration accuracy between MRI and CT (37%), concerns about risk of additional toxicity (35%), and challenges to accessing high-quality MRI (29%).

Conclusion

Despite level 1 evidence from the FLAME trial, most radiation oncologists surveyed are not routinely offering focal RT boost. Adoption of this technique might be accelerated by increased access to high-quality MRI, better registration algorithms of MRI to CT simulation images, physician education on benefit-to-harm ratio, and training on contouring prostate lesions on MRI.

Utilising alternative cystoscopic schedules to minimise cost and patient burden after trimodality therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

To assess urinary symptoms and urine cytology as screening tools for cystoscopic detection of local recurrence after bladder-preserving trimodality treatment (TMT).

METHODS

Patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer receiving definitive TMT follow-up three monthly for 2 years, six monthly for the next 3 years and then yearly, with a clinical review, urine cytology and cystoscopy at each visit (triple assessment, TA). Grade 2+ cystitis/haematuria absent/present was scored 0/1, and urine cytology reported negative/suspicious or positive was scored 0/1, respectively. The performance of these two parameters for predicting local recurrence in cystoscopic biopsy was tested. Other hypothetical surveillance schedules included cystoscopy on alternate visits (COAV), or suspected recurrence (COSR), six-monthly COSR and six-monthly TA.

RESULTS

A total of 630 follow-up visits in 112 patients with 19 recurrences (7 muscle invasive, 12 non-muscle invasive) at a median follow-up of 19 months were analysed. The sensitivity and specificity of clinical symptoms were 47.4% and 92%, and for urine cytology 58% and 85%, respectively. The combination of clinical symptoms and cytology (COSR) was 95% sensitive and 78% specific for local recurrence but 100% sensitive for muscle-invasive recurrence. Both COAV and COSV schedules showed a high area under the curve (AUC) for detecting local recurrence (COAV = 0.84, COSR = 0.83), muscle-invasive recurrence (AUC = 0.848 each) and non-muscle-invasive recurrence (COAV = 0.82, COSR = 0.81); reducing the need for TAs by 64% and 67% respectively, and overall cost by 18% and 33%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Cystoscopy at suspected recurrence during follow-up is safe and the most cost-effective for detecting muscle-invasive local recurrences, while cystoscopy at alternate visits may be more optimal for detecting any local recurrence.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022

BACKGROUND

Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The experts voted on controversial questions where high-level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

TWITTER SUMMARY

Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer.

TAKE-HOME MESSAGE

At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer is summarised here.

Management of testicular tumours in patients with undescended testes – a challenging but rewarding task: experience from a tertiary care cancer centre in India

Objective

Primary objective: To study patients' clinical profile and outcomes with germ cell tumours developing in undescended testes.

Materials and methods

Case records of patients enlisted in the prospectively maintained 'testicular cancer database' at our tertiary cancer care hospital from 2014 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Any patient who presented with testicular germ cell tumour with a documented history/diagnosis of undescended testes, whether surgically corrected or not, was considered for this study. The patients were managed along the standard lines of treatment for testicular cancer. We evaluated clinical features, difficulties and delays in diagnosis and complexities in management. We evaluated event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) using the Kaplan-Meier Method.

Results

Fifty-four patients were identified from our database. The mean age was 32.4 years (median age 32, range: 15-56 years). Seventeen (31.4%) had developed cancer in orchidopexy testes, and 37 (68.6%) presented with testicular cancer in uncorrected cryptorchid testes. The median age at orchidopexy was 13.5 years (range: 2-32 years). The median time from symptom onset to diagnosis was 2 months (1-36 months). There was a delay in the initiation of treatment of more than 1 month in 13 patients, with the longest delay being 4 months. Two patients were initially misdiagnosed as gastrointestinal tumours. Thirty-two (59.25%) patients had seminoma, and 22 (40.7%) patients had non-seminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT). Nineteen patients had metastatic disease at presentation. Thirty (55.5%) patients underwent orchidectomy upfront while in 22 (40.7%) patients, orchidectomy was done after chemotherapy. The surgical approach included high inguinal orchidectomy, exploratory laparotomy or laparoscopic surgery per the clinical situation. Post-operative chemotherapy was offered as clinically indicated. At a median follow-up of 66 months (95% CI: 51-76), there were four relapses (all NSGCT) and one death. The 5-year EFS was 90.7% (95% CI: 82.9-98.7). The 5-year OS was 96.3% (95% CI: 91.2-100).

Conclusions

The tumours in undescended testes, particularly those without prior orchiopexy, often presented late and with bulky masses, requiring complex multidisciplinary management. Despite the complexity and challenges, our patient's OS and EFS matched that of patients with tumours in normally descended testes. Orchiopexy may help in earlier detection. In the first such series from India, we show that testicular tumours in the cryptorchid are also as curable as the germ cell tumours developing in the descended testis.A multidisciplinary disease management group with expertise in managing complex cases is crucial for a favourable outcome in these groups of patients. We also found that orchiopexy done even later in life confers an advantage in terms of early detection in a subsequently developing testicular tumour.

Prophylactic versus reactive feeding approach in patients undergoing adjuvant radiation therapy for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: A propensity score matched-pair analysis

BACKGROUND

To assess the efficacy of prophylactic versus reactive feeding strategy in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) patients receiving adjuvant radiation therapy (RT).

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of patients of OCSCC enrolled in a randomized trial comparing three adjuvant strategies. In this trial, till 2010, a prophylactic feeding approach was followed for all patients. Since January 2011, a reactive feeding approach was followed.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty-eight in each cohort (total n = 526) were eligible for analysis after propensity score matching. At 6 weeks post-RT completion, the median weight loss in the prophylactic versus reactive cohort was 5 versus 3 kg, p = 0.002. At all other time points until 1 year, the median weight loss was lesser in reactive than in the prophylactic cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

A reactive feeding tube approach should be preferred for OCSCC receiving adjuvant RT.

Oral cavity adjuvant therapy (OCAT) -a phase III, randomized controlled trial of surgery followed by conventional RT (5 fr/wk) versus concurrent CT-RT versus accelerated RT (6fr/wk) in locally advanced, resectable, squamous cell carcinoma of oral cavity

BACKGROUND

Limited data exists regarding the impact of intensification of adjuvant therapy in resected Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinomas (OCSCC) with adverse prognostic features on histopathology.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a three-arm phase III, randomised trial including patients with resected advanced OCSCC. Randomisation was done in a 1:1:1 ratio: Arm-A- standard adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) 60Gy/30 fractions over 6 weeks versus Arm-B-concurrent chemoradiation versus Arm-C-accelerated radiation therapy (6 d a week). The trial was powered to detect an absolute difference of 10% in 5-year Locoregional Control (LRC).

RESULTS

The trial was conducted between June 2005 and March 2013. Majority of the patients were males, had T3-T4 disease, had N2-N3 nodal status and had Extra-Capsular Extension (ECE) in nodes. The median follow-up was 95.9 months. There was no difference between the three arms (A versus B versus C) for 10-year locoregional control (LRC): 60.2% versus 61.4% versus 65.7%, p = 0.57; disease free survival (DFS): 37.4% versus 43.9% versus 39.6%, p = 0.40; or Overall Survival (OS): 39.7% versus 46.6% versus 40.4%, p = 0.40. There was no benefit of intensification with either modality in patients with any single adverse pathological factor. A benefit of intensification could be seen in patients with a combination of high-risk features: T3-T4 primary tumours with N2-N3 nodes along with ECE for DFS (Arm B versus Arm A HR) = 0.53, Arm C versus Arm A HR = 0.63) and OS (Arm B versus Arm A HR = 0.58, Arm C versus Arm A HR = 0.60).

CONCLUSIONS

All optimally resected OCSCC with adverse features did not benefit from intensification of adjuvant therapy. Only a cohort of patients with a combination of high-risk features are likely candidates for intensification.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00193843.

Updates in staging of penile cancer: the evolution, nuances, and issues

Staging based on the tumor (T), node (N), and metastasis (M) schema of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) is usually the most important prognostic factor for any tumor type. Although a rare tumor, in penile cancers, this staging has evolved rapidly in the last two editions of the AJCC Cancer Staging manuals. These changes and updates are largely based on the advancement in our knowledge of the complex anatomy of the penis, the role of histopathological variables in disease biology, and the results of multicentric studies comprising large data sets. In this review, we present the evolution of the AJCC staging model from its inception to the present day. The evidence and data that entailed these changes are also discussed. We highlight a few issues with the current staging model and also briefly discuss the future perspectives and the road map which, with the help of global efforts, can further refine the staging models.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

BACKGROUND

Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management.

OBJECTIVE

To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.

Function Preservation With Brachytherapy: Reviving the Art. Improving Quality of Life With Brachytherapy for Urological Malignancies

Brachytherapy for localised prostate, muscle-invasive bladder and penile cancer is well established, providing high tumour dose delivery and minimising normal tissue doses compared with external beam techniques. In prostate cancer, the main impact on quality of life relates to diminished sexual function and irritative or obstructive urinary symptoms, which are seen up to 15 years after treatment. Significant changes in bowel function are rare. Compared with radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy, irritative or obstructive urinary symptoms are more prominent, whereas incontinence is less than after radical prostatectomy and bowel changes are less than after external beam radiotherapy. For muscle-invasive bladder cancer, when compared with radical cystectomy, although no difference is seen for urinary symptoms or fatigue, role and social functioning scores are higher and there is better post-treatment sexual function in both men and women. Compared with surgical treatment for penile cancer, brachytherapy results in better erectile function scores than after glansectomy and partial penectomy and high quality of life scores, with good satisfaction ratings for cosmetic appearance.

Salivary IgA as a Surrogate Biomarker for Microbial Infections in Postoperative Patients Receiving Chemo-Radio-Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer

Objective Radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) are important treatment options in patients with head and neck cancers. A common complication of this is microbial colonization or infection of mucosal surfaces. These infections may commonly be due to bacteria or yeasts. Salivary proteins with their buffering activity and immunoglobulin, especially immunoglobulin A (IgA), protect oral tissue, mucosal surfaces, and teeth from various microorganisms. This study characterizes the common microorganisms encountered and evaluates the role of salivary IgA in predicting microbial infections in this group of patients with mucositis.

Methods A total of 150 adult head and neck cancer patients on CTRT were evaluated at baseline and at the end of 3 and 6 weeks, respectively. Oral swabs collected from buccal mucosa were processed in the microbiology laboratory for the presence of microorganisms. Saliva was processed for IgA level estimation on Siemens Dimension Automated biochemistry analyzer.

Results Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the most common organisms found in our patients, followed by Escherichia coli and group A beta-hemolytic Streptococci. A significant increase (p = 0.0203) in the incidence of bacterial infection was observed in post-CTRT patients (61%) compared to pre-CTRT patients (49.33%). There was significant increase in levels of salivary IgA (p = 0.003) in patients with bacterial and fungal infection (n = 135/267) when compared to those in samples showing no growth (n = 66/183).

Conclusion A significant increase in the incidence of bacterial infection in post-CTRT patients was observed in this study. This study also indicated that postoperative head and neck cancer patients with oral mucositis that developed an infection were associated with high salivary IgA levels, and it may serve as a surrogate biomarker of infection in these patients.

Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma - A clinicopathological case series of an aggressive variant of urothelial cancer

Background

Many new morphological variants of urothelial carcinoma of urinary bladder have been described in the literature, plasmacytoid/signet ring cell/diffuse variant being one of the rare amongst these. Till date, no case series has been reported from India, describing this variant.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological data of 14 patients diagnosed at our center with plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma.

Results

Seven cases (50%) were pure forms while the remaining 50% of cases had a concurrent conventional urothelial carcinoma component. Immunohistochemistry was performed to rule out other mimickers of this variant. Treatment-related data were available for seven patients, while follow-up was available for nine cases.

Conclusion

Overall, plasmacytoid variant of urothelial carcinoma is considered to be an aggressive tumor with poor prognosis.

Genomic Classifiers in Personalized Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy Approaches: A Systematic Review and Future Perspectives Based on International Consensus

Current risk-stratification systems for prostate cancer (PCa) do not sufficiently reflect the disease heterogeneity. Genomic classifiers (GC) enable improved risk stratification after surgery, but less data exist for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT) or RT in oligo-/metastatic disease stages. To guide future perspectives of GCs for RT, we conducted (1) a systematic review on the evidence of GCs for patients treated with RT and (2) a survey of experts using the Delphi method, addressing the role of GCs in personalized treatments to identify relevant fields of future clinical and translational research. We performed a systematic review and screened ongoing clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Based on these results, a multidisciplinary international team of experts received an adapted Delphi method survey. Thirty-one and 30 experts answered round 1 and round 2, respectively. Questions with ≥75% agreement were considered relevant and included in the qualitative synthesis. Evidence for GCs as predictive biomarkers is mainly available to the postoperative RT setting. Validation of GCs as prognostic markers in the definitive RT setting is emerging. Experts used GCs in patients with PCa with extensive metastases (30%), in postoperative settings (27%), and in newly diagnosed PCa (23%). Forty-seven percent of experts do not currently use GCs in clinical practice. Expert consensus demonstrates that GCs are promising tools to improve risk-stratification in primary and oligo-/metastatic patients in addition to existing classifications. Experts were convinced that GCs might guide treatment decisions in terms of RT-field definition and intensification/deintensification in various disease stages. This work confirms the value of GCs and the promising evidence of GC utility in the setting of RT. Additional studies of GCs as prognostic biomarkers are anticipated and form the basis for future studies addressing predictive capabilities of GCs to optimize RT and systemic therapy. The expert consensus points out future directions for GC research in the management of PCa.

Bone metastases in prostate cancer - Gallium-68-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen or Fluorine 18 sodium fluoride PET/computed tomography - the better tracer?

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to assess the roles of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and 18F-NaF PET/CT in evaluation of skeletal metastatic lesions in prostate cancer.

METHODS

Two hundred consecutive prostate cancer patients who had undergone 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and 18F-NaF PET/CT at baseline evaluation (n = 80) and following suspected recurrence or disease progression (restaging) (n = 120) were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

PSMA and NAF scans were positive for skeletal metastatic lesions in 67% (134 patients) and negative in 33% (66 patients). The scans were concordant in 80% (160 patients: 66 negative and 94 positive) and discordant in 20% (40 patients). Among 40 discordant results, 14 were baseline and 26 were restaging studies. PSMA detected more number of lesions in 11 (nine baseline and two restaging). These were true positive marrow or lytic metastatic lesions. NaF revealed more number of lesions in 29 (5 initial and 24 restaging). These were false positive on follow-up imaging. No statistical difference (P value = 0.7 by McNemar test) between the two scans for identifying absence or presence of at least one skeletal lesion was noted at baseline staging.

CONCLUSION

Though, both 18F-NaF and 68Ga-PSMA are excellent tracers for evaluation of skeletal metastases in prostate cancer, there is a distinct advantage of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT due to detection of additional skeletal lesions and absence of false positive lesions. In addition, absence of PSMA avidity in healed metastases in the restaging setting opens up new avenue for assessment of response of skeletal metastases.

Exploring Texture Analysis to Optimize Bladder Preservation in Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

PURPOSE

To explore if texture analysis of Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC) can aid in better patient selection for bladder preservation.

METHODS

Pretreatment noncontrast CT images of 41 patients of MIBC treated with bladder preservation were included. The visible tumor was contoured on all slices by a single observer. The primary endpoint was to identify texture parameters associated with disease recurrence posttreatment. The secondary endpoints included intra and interobserver variability, single and multislice analysis, and differentiating the texture features of normal bladder and tumor. For interobserver variability of bladder tumor texture features, 3 observers contoured the visible tumor on all slices independently. Observer 1 contoured again at an interval of 1 month for intraobserver variability.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 30 months with 12 patients having a recurrence. In the primary endpoint analysis, the mean of the pixels at Spatial Scaling Filter (SSF) 2 for the no recurrence group and recurrence group was 6.44 v 13.73 respectively (P = .031) and the same at SSF-3 was 11.95 and 22.32 respectively (P = .034). The texture features that could significantly differentiate tumor and normal bladder were mean, standard deviation and kurtosis of the pixels at SSF-2 and entropy and kurtosis of the pixels at SSF-3. Overall, there was an excellent intra and interobserver concordance in texture features. Only multislice analysis and not single-slice could differentiate recurrence and no recurrence posttreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Texture analysis can be explored as a modality for patient selection for bladder preservation along with the established clinical parameters to improve outcomes.

Optimizing Target Volume for Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Penile Cancer

PURPOSE

Recent studies have reported improved outcomes with adjuvant radiation therapy in penile cancer. However, the appropriate target volumes to be irradiated in this group of patients for optimal outcomes are still unclear. This study aims to report the patterns of failure and define target volumes to be irradiated in patients with pN3 penile cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with pT1-T4, pN3, cM0, and squamous cell carcinoma of the penis who received adjuvant radiation therapy (involved field or extended field), with or without concurrent chemotherapy were included in the study. Complete information on disease characteristics, radiation therapy target details, and patterns of failure were available for 75 patients. Disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and log-rank test was used to compare survival outcomes between the involved field and extended field radiation therapy groups. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model to analyze factors correlating with survival outcomes.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 39 months, 38.6% (29/75) of patients had relapsed either locally, regionally, or at distant sites. Of the 24 patients who received extended field radiation therapy (EFRT), only 1 (4%) patient experienced relapse. Twenty-eight (55%) patients experienced relapse after involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT), of which 28.5% were regional-only relapses and 64% relapses were associated with a regional component. The 2-year DFS and OS of the entire cohort were 62.2% and 70.8%, respectively. The 2-year DFS was 67.9% in patients who received IFRT and 94.1% in those who received EFRT (P = .002), and the 2-year OS was 62.4% with IFRT and 91.1% with EFRT (P = .014). Extended field radiation therapy was associated with an improved DFS (hazard ratio, 12.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-97.4; P = .02) and OS (hazard ratio, 4.6; 95% confidence interval, 1-21.5; P = .05) on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended field radiation therapy significantly improves clinical outcomes compared with involved-field radiation in patients with pN3 penile cancer.

Second malignancy probabilities in patients with prostate cancer treated with whole pelvis radiation therapy versus prostate only radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

Whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) may improve outcomes compared with prostate only radiation therapy (PORT) in some subsets of men with prostate cancer, as in the POP-RT trial. However, there is concern about increased risk of adverse effects with WPRT, including the development of radiation-induced second malignancies (SM). Given the rarity of SM, little is known about relative rates of SM between WPRT and PORT.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed of men with nonmetastatic, node-negative prostate cancer with at least 60 months of follow-up using a national database. SM probabilities were compared in men receiving either WPRT or PORT using multivariable logistic models adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic factors. Temporal sensitivity analyses stratified by year of diagnosis and length of follow-up were also conducted.

RESULTS

Of 50,237 patients in the study, 39,338 (78.4%) received PORT, and 10,899 (21.7%) received WPRT. Median follow-up was 106.2 months (interquartile range 82.32-132.25). Crude probabilities of SM were 9.16% for WPRT and 8.88% for PORT. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for development of SM with PORT versus WPRT was 1.046 (95% confidence interval 0.968-1.130). Temporal sensitivity analyses by stratifying by year of diagnosis and follow-up length also did not demonstrate any significant difference in rates of SM between WPRT and PORT using AORs with WPRT as the referent.

CONCLUSIONS

Retrospective analysis of over 50,000 patients did not demonstrate an association between WPRT and an increased probability of SM compared to PORT. Given the findings of POP-RT, the use of WPRT may become widespread for certain subsets of men. Thus, our findings could help guide how we counsel patients deciding between WPRT and PORT and suggest the need for prospective assessment of SM risk with WPRT and PORT.

Common iliac node positive prostate cancer treated with curative radiotherapy: N1 or M1a?

PURPOSE

Common iliac (CI) nodes are staged as (oligo)metastatic M1a for prostate cancer. It is unclear if outcomes of pelvic node-positive (cN1) differ from CI node-positive (CI-M1a) prostate cancer after curative treatment. Present study compares outcomes in these patients treated with radical whole pelvic radiotherapy and long-term ADT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with node positive adenocarcinoma prostate were identified, either CI-M1a or cN1, from a prospectively maintained database. Over 75% of these patients were staged with Ga68PSMA-PETCT at diagnosis. All patients received long-term ADT and moderately or extremely hypofractionated radiotherapy to the prostate and pelvis including the CI region. At biochemical failure (BCF), restaging was done with Ga68PSMA-PETCT to establish the patterns of failure. CI-M1a cohort was classified as proximal or distal CI nodal location and studied for outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 130 patients analyzed, 87 had cN1 and 43 had CI-M1a stage. Median duration of ADT before RT was 7 months and total duration was atleast 24 months. Majority (65%) had Gleason grade group IV-V while 75% had ≥T3 disease. After a median FU of 61 months, BCF in the 2 groups were similar, cN1, 21/87 (24.1%); CI-M1a, 11/43 (25.6%), p=0.86. At BCF, restaging Ga68-PSMA-PET-CT located distant metastases in 20 (63%) of the 32 patients (57% in cN1, and 73% in CI-M1a, p=0.47). Five-year biochemical failure-free survival (cN1; 77.4% and CI-M1a; 70.4%, p=0.43), distant metastasis-free survival (cN1; 86.9% and CI-M1a; 79.4%, p=0.23) and overall survival (cN1 92.6% and CI-M1a 90.1%, p=0.80) were similar in the two groups. Outcomes within CI-M1a were similar for proximal versus distal CI nodal location, 5-year BFFS 73.6% vs 58.6% (p=0.81).

CONCLUSION

Oligometastatic CI-M1a and cN1 prostate cancer patients showed similar outcomes when treated with curative whole pelvic radiotherapy and long-term ADT. The treatment for these 'oligometastatic' patients should be prospectively evaluated and optimized accordingly.

What Experts Think About Prostate Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021

Patients with advanced prostate cancer (APC) may be at greater risk for severe illness, hospitalisation, or death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to male gender, older age, potential immunosuppressive treatments, or comorbidities. Thus, the optimal management of APC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is complex. In October 2021, during the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2021, the 73 voting members of the panel members discussed and voted on 13 questions on this topic that could help clinicians make treatment choices during the pandemic. There was a consensus for full COVID-19 vaccination and booster injection in APC patients. Furthermore, the voting results indicate that the expert's treatment recommendations are influenced by the vaccination status: the COVID-19 pandemic altered management of APC patients for 70% of the panellists before the vaccination was available but only for 25% of panellists for fully vaccinated patients. Most experts (71%) were less likely to use docetaxel and abiraterone in unvaccinated patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For fully vaccinated patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer, there was a consensus (77%) to follow the usual treatment schedule, whereas in unvaccinated patients, 55% of the panel members voted for deferring radiation therapy. Finally, there was a strong consensus for the use of telemedicine for monitoring APC patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021, the panellists reached a consensus regarding the recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccine in prostate cancer patients and use of telemedicine for monitoring these patients.

Impact of the First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic on Radiotherapy Practice at Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Delivery of cancer care during the pandemic required adopting various changes in the standard management. We analyzed the impact of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on radiation oncology treatment practices at Tata Memorial Hospital in India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From March 1 to October 31, 2020, all consecutive patients who attended the radiation oncology department for radiotherapy treatment were included in this study. Electronic medical records, patient files, and telephonic consult were used to collect patient's data including changes in the standard treatment practice, COVID-19 testing and its results, and subsequent impact on radiotherapy treatment. Comparison was done with the same period data of 2019 for the number of the caseload, radiotherapy regimen, referral rates, and noncompliance rates.

RESULTS

Our study included 4,256 patients with a median age of 52 years (interquartile range 41-61 years). There was a significant drop in the new-patient registrations (approximately 63%), radiotherapy consultations (44.9%), and referrals to other centers (27.8%). The reduction in the caseload was highest for genitourinary cases (–58.5%) and the lowest for breast cases (–11.5%) when compared with the 2019 cohort. Among those treated with radical intent, the noncompliance rate was 15%. Hypofractionation was the commonly adopted regimen across all sites. Compared with 2019, the maximum reduction in the average fractions per patient was seen in the breast cancer cases (–8.2 fraction), followed by genitourinary cases (–4.9 fraction). Of the 27.8% of patients tested for COVID-19, 13.4% turned positive and 3.4% died due to the disease.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected the number of radiotherapy consultations and treatments at our institute. However, our department offered uninterrupted services despite grave challenges. Hypofractionated regimen was used across disease sites to minimize patient visits and allow planned treatment completion. Radiotherapy was delivered safely, and patients experienced low rates of COVID positivity during radiotherapy and even lower mortality.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021

BACKGROUND

Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but various areas of management still lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The 2021 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) addressed some of these questions to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To present the voting results from APCCC 2021.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The experts identified three major areas of controversy related to management of advanced prostate cancer: newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the use of prostate-specific membrane antigen ligands in diagnostics and therapy, and molecular characterisation of tissue and blood. A panel of 86 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 107 pre-defined questions, which were developed by both voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting reflected the opinions of panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients to navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised according to patient characteristics, such as the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), comorbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations, and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Enrolment in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2021 once again identified salient questions that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference is a forum for discussing current diagnosis and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. An expert panel votes on predefined questions focused on the most clinically relevant areas for treatment of advanced prostate cancer for which there are gaps in knowledge. The voting results provide a practical guide to help clinicians in discussing treatment options with patients as part of shared decision-making.