Brachytherapy for high grade prostate cancer induces distinct changes in circulating CD4 and CD8 T cells - Implications for systemic control

This exploratory study is a follow up to our previous investigation of immune response in the circulation of high-grade Gleason 9 prostate cancer patients treated with EBRT + BT compared to EBRT alone. Notably, EBRT + BT demonstrates the potential to elicit an effect on CD4/CD8 ratio which may have attributed to improved clinical response to therapy. Our findings show promise for leveraging circulating immune cells as predictive biomarkers for radiotherapy response.

Multimodal Biomarkers That Predict the Presence of Gleason Pattern 4: Potential Impact for Active Surveillance

PURPOSE

Latent grade group ≥2 prostate cancer can impact the performance of active surveillance protocols. To date, molecular biomarkers for active surveillance have relied solely on RNA or protein. We trained and independently validated multimodal (mRNA abundance, DNA methylation, and/or DNA copy number) biomarkers that more accurately separate grade group 1 from grade group ≥2 cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients were assigned to training (n=333) and validation (n=202) cohorts. We profiled the abundance of 342 mRNAs, 100 DNA copy number alteration loci, and 14 hypermethylation sites at 2 locations per tumor. Using the training cohort with cross-validation, we evaluated methods for training classifiers of pathological grade group ≥2 in centrally reviewed radical prostatectomies. We trained 2 distinct classifiers, PRONTO-e and PRONTO-m, and validated them in an independent radical prostatectomy cohort.

RESULTS

PRONTO-e comprises 353 mRNA and copy number alteration features. PRONTO-m includes 94 clinical, mRNAs, copy number alterations, and methylation features at 14 and 12 loci, respectively. In independent validation, PRONTO-e and PRONTO-m predicted grade group ≥2 with respective true-positive rates of 0.81 and 0.76, and false-positive rates of 0.43 and 0.26. Both classifiers were resistant to sampling error and identified more upgrading cases than a well-validated presurgical risk calculator, CAPRA (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Two grade group classifiers with superior accuracy were developed by incorporating RNA and DNA features and validated in an independent cohort. Upon further validation in biopsy samples, classifiers with these performance characteristics could refine selection of men for active surveillance, extending their treatment-free survival and intervals between surveillance.

Four-year Prostate-specific Antigen Response Rate as a Predictive Measure in Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer Treated With Ablative Therapies: The SPRAT Analysis

AIMS

There is a lack of early predictive measures of outcome for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim of the present study was to explore 4-year prostate-specific antigen response rate (4yPSARR) as an early predictive measure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Individual patient data from six institutions for patients with intermediate-risk PCa treated with SBRT between 2006 and 2016 with a 4-year (42-54 months) PSA available were analysed. Cumulative incidences of biochemical failure and metastasis were calculated using Nelson-Aalen estimates and overall survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Biochemical failure-free survival was analysed according to 4yPSARR, with groups dichotomised based on PSA <0.4 ng/ml or ≥0.4 ng/ml and compared using the Log-rank test. A multivariable competing risk analysis was carried out to predict for biochemical failure and the development of metastases.

RESULTS

Six hundred and thirty-seven patients were included, including 424 (67%) with favourable and 213 (33%) with unfavourable intermediate-risk disease. The median follow-up was 6.2 years (interquartile range 4.9-7.9). The cumulative incidence of biochemical failure and metastasis was 7 and 0.6%, respectively; overall survival at 6 years was 97%. The cumulative incidence of biochemical failure at 6 years if 4yPSARR <0.4 ng/ml was 1.7% compared with 27% if 4yPSARR ≥0.4 ng/ml (P < 0.0001). On multivariable competing risk analysis, 4yPSARR was a statistically significant predictor of biochemical failure-free survival (subdistribution hazard ratio 15.3, 95% confidence interval 7.5-31.3, P < 0.001) and metastasis-free survival (subdistribution hazard ratio 31.2, 95% confidence interval 3.1-311.6, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

4yPSARR is an encouraging early predictor of outcome in patients with intermediate-risk PCa treated with SBRT. Validation in prospective trials is warranted.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: an Updated Systematic Review

There has been growing utilisation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MPMRI) as a non-invasive tool to diagnose and localise clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa). This updated systematic review examines the use of MPMRI in patients with an elevated risk of CSPCa who have had a prior negative transrectal ultrasound systematic biopsy (TRUS-SB) and who were biopsy naïve. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for existing systematic reviews published up to September 2020. The literature search of the electronic databases combined disease-specific terms (prostate cancer, prostate carcinoma, etc.) and treatment-specific terms (magnetic resonance, etc.). Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MPMRI to template transperineal mapping biopsy (TPMB) or to TRUS-SB. Thirty-six RCTs were eligible. For biopsy-naïve men, accuracy of diagnosis of CSPCa showed sensitivities from 87 to 96% and specificities ranging from 29 to 45%. Meta-analyses for CSPCa showed increased detection favouring MPMRI-targeted biopsy over TRUS-SB by 3% (95% confidence interval 0-7%, P = 0.03) and decreased detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer (CISPCa) favouring MPMRI by 8% (95% confidence interval -11 to 5%, P < 0.00001). Accuracy of MPMRI for men with prior negative biopsy showed sensitivities of 78-100% and specificities of 30-100%. Meta-analyses comparing MPMRI to TRUS-SB showed increased detection of 5% (95% confidence interval 3-7%, P < 0.0001) with a reduction of CISPCa detection of 7% (95% confidence interval 4-9%, P < 0.00001). The growing acceptance of MPMRI utilisation internationally and the recent publication of several RCTs regarding MPMRI in reducing CISPCa detection rates, particularly in biopsy-naïve men, without loss of sensitivity for CSPCa necessitates the synthesis of updated evidence examining MPMRI in the diagnosis of CSPCa.

Immune cell profiling in Gleason 9 prostate cancer patients treated with brachytherapy versus external beam radiotherapy: An exploratory study

This exploratory study evaluates immunological changes in high-risk Gleason 9 prostate cancer patients treated with EBRT+BT compared to EBRT alone. Notably, BT demonstrates the potential to elicit a T cell response which may support further investigation using circulating immune cells as predictive and prognostic biomarkers for radiotherapy response.

Complex surgery and perioperative systemic therapy for genitourinary cancer of the retroperitoneum

Objective

The purpose of the present guideline is to recommend surgical or systemic treatment for metastatic testicular cancer; T3b or T4, or node-positive, and metastatic renal cell cancer (rcc); and T3, T4, or node-positive upper tract urothelial (utuc) cancer.

Methods

Draft recommendations were formulated based on evidence obtained through a systematic review of randomized controlled trials, comparative retrospective studies, and guideline endorsement. The draft recommendations underwent an internal review by clinical and methodology experts, and an external review by clinical practitioners.

Results

The primary literature search yielded eight guidelines, five systematic reviews, and twenty-seven primary studies that met the eligibility criteria.

Conclusions

Cytoreductive nephrectomy should no longer be considered the standard of care in patients with T3b or T4, or node-positive, and metastatic rcc. Eligible patients should be treated with systemic therapy and have their primary tumour removed only after review at a multidisciplinary case conference (mcc). Adjuvant sunitinib after surgery is not recommended. Patients with venous tumour thrombus should be considered for surgical intervention. Patients with T3, T4, or node-positive utuc should have their tumour removed without delay. Decisions concerning lymph node dissection should be done at a mcc and be based on stage, expertise, and imaging. Adjuvant systemic treatment is recommended for resected high-risk utuc. Patients with metastasis-positive testicular cancer with residual tumour after systemic treatment should be treated at specialized centres. For all complex retroperitoneal surgeries, the evidence shows that higher-volume centres are associated with lower rates of procedure-related mortality, and patients should be referred to higher-volume centres for surgical resection.

Results of 15 Gy HDR-BT boost plus EBRT in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: Analysis of over 500 patients

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

To report biochemical control associated with single fraction 15 Gy high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost followed by external beam radiation (EBRT) in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all patients with intermediate-risk disease treated with a real-time ultrasound-based 15 Gy HDR-BT boost followed by EBRT between 2009 and 2016 at a single quaternary cancer center was performed. Freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), cumulative incidence of androgen deprivation therapy use for biochemical or clinical failure post-treatment (CI of ADT) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) outcomes were measured.

RESULTS

518 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. Median age at HDR-BT was 67 years (IQR 61-72). 506 (98%) had complete pathologic information available. Of these, 146 (28%) had favorable (FIR) and 360 (69%) had unfavorable (UIR) intermediate-risk disease. 83 (16%) received short course hormones with EBRT + HDR. Median overall follow-up was 5.2 years. FFBF was 91 (88-94)% at 5 years. Five-year FFBF was 94 (89-99)% and 89 (85-94)% in FIR and UIR patients, respectively (p = 0.045). CI of ADT was 4 (2-6)% at 5 years. Five-year CI of ADT was 1 (0-3)% and 5 (2-8)% in FIR and UIR patients, respectively (p = 0.085). MFS was 97 (95-98)% at 5 years. Five-year MFS was 100 (N/A-100)% and 95 (92-98)% in FIR and UIR patients, respectively (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients, 15 Gy HDR-BT boost plus EBRT results in durable biochemical control and low rates of ADT use for biochemical failure.

Prostate-specific Antigen Bounce After Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Four Prospective Trials

AIMS

We conducted a pooled analysis of four prospective stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) trials of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer to evaluate the incidence of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) bounce and its correlation with the time-dose-fraction schedule. The correlation between bounce with PSA response at 4 years (nadir PSA < 0.4 ng/ml) and biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS) was also explored.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included four treatment groups: 35 Gy/five fractions once per week (QW) (TG-1; n = 84); 40 Gy/five fractions QW (TG-2; n = 100); 40 Gy/five fractions every other day (TG-3; n = 73); and 26 Gy/two fractions QW (TG-4; n = 30). PSA bounce was defined as a rise in PSA by 0.2 ng/ml (nadir + 0.2) or 2 ng/ml (nadir + 2.0) above nadir followed by a decrease back to nadir. Patients with fewer than three follow-up PSA tests were excluded from the pooled analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 287 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 5.0 years. The pooled 5-year cumulative incidence of bounce by nadir + 2.0 was 8%. The 2-year cumulative incidences of PSA bounce by nadir + 0.2 were 28.9, 21, 19.6 and 16.7% (P = 0.12) and by nadir + 2.0 were 7.2, 8, 2.7 and 6.7% (P = 0.32) for TG-1 to TG-4, respectively. Multivariable analysis revealed that for nadir + 2.0, pre-treatment PSA (odds ratio 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.97) correlated with PSA bounce. Although PSA bounce by nadir + 0.2 (odds ratio 0.10; 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.24) and nadir + 2.0 (odds ratio 0.29; 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.93) was associated with a lower probability of PSA response at 4 years, there was no association between bounce by nadir + 0.2 (hazard ratio 0.36; 95% confidence interval 0.08-1.74) or nadir + 2 (hazard ratio 1.77; 95% confidence interval 0.28-11.07) with BFFS.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PSA bounce was independent of time-dose-fraction schedule for prostate SBRT. One in 13 patients experienced a bounce high enough to be misinterpreted as biochemical failure, and clinicians should avoid early salvage interventions in these patients. There was no association between PSA bounce and BFFS.

Absolute percentage of biopsied tissue positive for Gleason pattern 4 disease (APP4) appears predictive of disease control after high dose rate brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy in intermediate risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To identify if, in intermediate risk prostate cancer (IR-PCa), the absolute percentage of biopsied tissue positive for pattern 4 disease (APP4) may be a predictor of outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

411 patients with IR-PCa were retrospectively reviewed. APP4 was calculated based on biopsy reports. Multivariable competing risk analysis was then performed on optimized APP4 cutpoints to predict for biochemical failure (BF), androgen deprivation use for BF (ADT-BF) and development of metastases (MD).

RESULTS

Median follow-up for the cohort was 5.2 (Inter Quartile Range: 2.9-6.6) years. Median baseline PSA was 7.3 (5.3-9.8) ng/mL. 234 (56.9%) patients had T1 and 177 (43.1%) had T2 disease. Median APP4 was 2.00 (0.75-7.50)%. 38 (9.3%) patients experienced BF. The optimal cutpoint of APP4 for BF was >3.3% with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.66. 17 (4.1%) received ADT-BF. The ADT-BF cutpoint was >6.6% with an AUC of 0.72. Eight (2.0%) developed MD. The MD cutpoint was >17.5% with an AUC of 0.86. Using APP4 >3.3 vs ≤ 3.3, log-transformed baseline PSA ln(PSA) (HR 2.5, 1.1-6.1; p = 0.037) and APP4 (HR 2.3, 1.1-4.7; p = 0.031) predicted for BF. Using APP4 >6.6 vs ≤ 6.6, ln(PSA) (HR 4.2, 1.4-12.4; p = 0.010) and APP4 (HR 3.7, 1.4-10.0; p = 0.009) were predictive of ADT-BF. APP4 >17.5 vs ≤ 17.5 alone was predictive of MD (HR 25.7, 4.9-135.3; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

APP4 cutpoints of >3.3%, >6.6% and >17.5% were strongly associated with increased risk of BF, ADT-BF and developing MD respectively. These findings may inform future practice when treating IR-PCa but require external validation.

Randomised Phase II Feasibility Trial of Image-guided External Beam Radiotherapy With or Without High Dose Rate Brachytherapy Boost in Men with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (CCTG PR15/ NCT01982786)

AIMS

We conducted a multicentre feasibility study to assess the ability to randomise patients between image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and IGRT + high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost and to adhere to appropriate radiation quality assurance standards.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The primary end point was to determine the ability to randomise 60 patients over an 18 month period. Arm 1 (IGRT) patients received 78 Gy in 39 fractions or 60 Gy in 20 fractions (physician's preference), whereas arm 2 (IGRT + HDR) received 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions with HDR boost of 15 Gy. The secondary end points included >grade 3 acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity, using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 at 3 months, validation of a prospectively defined radiation oncology quality assurance to assess treatment compliance. All analyses were descriptive; no formal comparisons between treatment arms were carried out.

RESULTS

Between April 2014 and September 2015, 57 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-defined intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients were randomised between IGRT alone (arm 1; n = 29) and IGRT plus HDR brachytherapy boost (arm 2; n = 28). Overall, 93% received the treatment as randomised. There were four patients (one on IGRT arm 1 and three patients on the IGRT + HDR arm 2) who were treated differently from randomisation assignment. For the 29 patients receiving IGRT (arm 1), there were 14 cases reported with minor deviations and three with major deviations. For patients on IGRT + HDR (arm 2), there were 18 cases reported with minor deviations and two with major deviations. At 3 months in the IGRT group (arm 1), one patient reported grade 3 diarrhoea, whereas in the IGRT + HDR group (arm 2), two patients reported grade 3 haematuria. No other gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were reported.

CONCLUSION

The pilot study showed the feasibility of randomisation between treatment with IGRT alone versus IGRT + HDR boost. Treatment compliance was good, including adherence to quality assurance standards.

Follow-up Care for Survivors of Prostate Cancer - Clinical Management: a Program in Evidence-Based Care Systematic Review and Clinical Practice Guideline

AIMS

This clinical practice guideline was developed to provide evidence-based guidance on the frequency by which prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels should be tested in men after curative-intent treatment for prostate cancer and to define the most appropriate diagnostic testing if biochemical recurrence occurs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search using OVID was used to systematically search the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for systematic reviews and primary literature. A systematic review and practice guideline was written, reviewed and approved by the Guideline Development Group (GDG) and Program in Evidence-Based Care Report Approval Panel. External review by three prostate experts was completed, as well as an online consultation with healthcare professionals who were intended users of the guideline.

RESULTS

Three systematic reviews and seven primary studies were included in the evidence base. All identified literature reported on diagnostic imaging properties of diagnostic tests following biochemical recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to a lack of empirical research, few evidenced-based recommendations could be made with respect to a follow-up schedule of PSA testing for prostate cancer survivors following curative-intent treatment, or detailing diagnostic testing upon detection of biochemical recurrence. Accordingly, the GDG focused substantial effort on critical examination of the identified evidence, existing clinical practice guidelines and on obtaining clinical expertise consensus using a modified Delphi method. Overall, the recommendations embedded in this guideline reflect the best practice to date for the efficient and effective clinical follow-up care of prostate cancer survivors.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy versus Low Dose Rate Brachytherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: a Cost-Utility Analysis

AIMS

To conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) for localised prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision-analytic Markov model was developed from the healthcare payer perspective to simulate the history of a 66-year-old man with low-risk PCa. The model followed patients yearly over their remaining lifetimes. Health states included 'recurrence-free', 'biochemical recurrence' (BR), 'metastatic' and 'death'. Transition probabilities were based on a retrospective cohort analysis undertaken at our institution. Utilities were derived from the literature. Costs were assigned in 2015 Canadian dollars ($) and reflected Ontario's health system and departmental costs. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY was used.

RESULTS

SBRT was the dominant strategy with 0.008LYs and 0.029QALYs gained and a reduction in cost of $2615. Under base case conditions, our results were sensitive to the BR probability associated with both strategies. LDR-BT becomes the preferred strategy if the BR with SBRT is 1.3*[baseline BR_SBRT] or if the BR with LDR-BT is 0.76*[baseline BR_LDR-BT]. When assuming the same BR for both strategies, LDR-BT becomes marginally more effective with 0.009QALYs gained at a cost of $272 848/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT represents an economically attractive radiation strategy. Further research should be carried out to provide longer-term follow-up and high-quality evidence.

Exercise for people with cancer: a systematic review

Background This systematic review was completed by the Exercise for People with Cancer Guideline Development Group, a group organized by Cancer Care Ontario’s Program in Evidence-Based Care (pebc). It provides background and guidance for clinicians with respect to exercise for people living with cancer in active and post treatment. It focuses on the benefits of specific types of exercise, pre-screening requirements for new referrals, safety concerns, and delivery models.Methods Using the pebc’s standardized approach, medline and embase were systematically searched for existing guidelines, systematic reviews, and primary literature.Results The search identified two guidelines, eighteen systematic reviews, and twenty-nine randomized controlled trials with relevance to the topic. The present review provides conclusions about the duration, frequency, and intensity of exercise appropriate for people living with cancer.Conclusions The evidence shows that exercise is safe and provides benefit in quality of life and in muscular and aerobic fitness for people with cancer both during and after treatment. The evidence is sufficient to support the promotion of exercise for adults with cancer, and some evidence supports the promotion of exercise in group or supervised settings and for a long period of time to improve quality of life and muscular and aerobic fitness. Exercise at moderate intensities could also be sustainable for longer periods and could encourage exercise to be continued over an individual’s lifetime. It is important that a pre-screening assessment be conducted to evaluate the effects of disease, treatments, and comorbidities.

Exercise for people with cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review was completed by the Exercise for People with Cancer Guideline Development Group, a group organized by Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-Based Care (pebc). It provides background and guidance for clinicians with respect to exercise for people living with cancer in active and post treatment. It focuses on the benefits of specific types of exercise, pre-screening requirements for new referrals, safety concerns, and delivery models.

METHODS

Using the pebc's standardized approach, medline and embase were systematically searched for existing guidelines, systematic reviews, and primary literature.

RESULTS

The search identified two guidelines, eighteen systematic reviews, and twenty-nine randomized controlled trials with relevance to the topic. The present review provides conclusions about the duration, frequency, and intensity of exercise appropriate for people living with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence shows that exercise is safe and provides benefit in quality of life and in muscular and aerobic fitness for people with cancer both during and after treatment. The evidence is sufficient to support the promotion of exercise for adults with cancer, and some evidence supports the promotion of exercise in group or supervised settings and for a long period of time to improve quality of life and muscular and aerobic fitness. Exercise at moderate intensities could also be sustainable for longer periods and could encourage exercise to be continued over an individual's lifetime. It is important that a pre-screening assessment be conducted to evaluate the effects of disease, treatments, and comorbidities.

Exercise for people with cancer: a clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

Development of this guideline was undertaken by the Exercise for People with Cancer Guideline Development Group, a group organized by Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-Based Care (pebc). The purpose of the guideline was to provide guidance for clinicians with respect to exercise for patients living with cancer, focusing on the benefits of specific types of exercise, recommendations about screening requirements for new referrals, and safety concerns.

METHODS

Consistent with the pebc's standardized approach, a systematic search was conducted for existing guidelines, and systematic literature searches were performed in medline and embase for both systematic reviews and primary literature. Content and methodology experts performed an internal review, which was followed by an external review by targeted experts and intended users.

RESULTS

The search identified three guidelines, eighteen systematic reviews, and twenty-nine randomized controlled trials with relevance to the topic. The present guideline provides recommendations for the duration, frequency, and intensity of exercise appropriate for people living with cancer. It also provides recommendations for pre-exercise assessment, safety concerns, and delivery models.

CONCLUSIONS

There is sufficient evidence to show that exercise provides benefits in quality of life and muscular and aerobic fitness for people with cancer both during and after treatment, and that it does not cause harm. The present guideline is intended to support the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology's Canadian physical activity guidelines. The recommendations are intended for clinicians and institutions treating cancer patients in Ontario, and for policymakers and program planners involved in the delivery of exercise programs for cancer patients.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

A systematic review was conducted to investigate the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MPMRI) followed by targeted biopsy in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPC) and to compare it with transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS-guided) systematic biopsy in patients with an elevated risk of prostate cancer who are either biopsy-naive or who have a previous negative TRUS-guided biopsy. MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE (1997 to April 2014), the Cochrane Library and six relevant conferences were searched to find eligible studies. Search terms indicative of 'prostate cancer' and 'magnetic resonance imaging' with their alternatives were used. Twelve systematic reviews, 52 full texts and 28 abstracts met the preplanned study selection criteria; data from 15 articles were extracted. In patients with an elevated risk of prostate cancer who were biopsy-naive, MPMRI followed by targeted biopsy could detect 2-13% of CSPC patients whom TRUS-guided systematic biopsy missed; TRUS-guided systematic biopsy could detect 0-7% of CSPC patients whom MPMRI followed by targeted biopsy missed. In patients with an elevated risk of prostate cancer who had a previous negative TRUS-guided biopsy, MPMRI followed by targeted biopsy detected more CSPC patients than repeated TRUS-guided systematic biopsy in all four studies, with a total of 516 patients, but only one study reached a statistically significant difference. In patients with an elevated risk of prostate cancer who are biopsy-naive, there is insufficient evidence for MPMRI followed by targeted biopsy to be considered the standard of care. In patients who had a prior negative TRUS-guided systematic biopsy and show a growing risk of having CSPC, MPMRI followed by targeted biopsy may be helpful to detect more CSPC cases as opposed to a repeat TRUS-guided systematic biopsy.

Accelerated hypofractioned postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a prospective phase I/II study

AIMS

To present the initial findings of a single institution, phase I/II study investigating hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients undergoing post-prostatectomy treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients requiring postoperative radiotherapy were prospectively enrolled. Dose was prescribed to the prostate bed with 51 Gy in 17 daily fractions. Androgen deprivation was optional. Acute and late gastrointestinal/genitourinary toxicity were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 and quality of life was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite evaluation tool. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was evaluated at every follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled between 2009 and 2011. The median age was 65 years and most had Gleason 7 disease (86%) with pT2c or pT3a (82%). Positive margins were documented in 67% of the patients. The median pre-treatment PSA was 0.12 ng/ml. The median follow-up was 24 months. Overall toxicity was low, with >80% of patients having ≤ grade 1 acute toxicity in both genitourinary and gastrointestinal realms. Similarly, only two patients (6%) experienced grade 2/3 late gastrointestinal/genitourinary toxicity. Quality of life scores were also indicative of a well-tolerated treatment. PSA failure was seen in five patients (17%).

CONCLUSIONS

We present a hypofractionated schedule of postoperative prostate radiotherapy that is both well tolerated in terms of both toxicity and quality of life measures. Initial PSA control is encouraging. Further evaluation with a longer follow-up and a larger cohort is warranted.

Dexamethasone for the prophylaxis of radiation-induced pain flare after palliative radiotherapy for symptomatic bone metastases: a phase II study

AIMS

Pain flare occurs in over one-third of patients receiving palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases. A single dose of dexamethasone can decrease the incidence of pain flare during the first 2 days immediately after radiotherapy. We conducted a phase II prospective study to investigate the prophylactic role of prolonged dexamethasone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with bone metastases treated with a single 8Gy were prescribed 8mg dexamethasone just before palliative radiotherapy and for 3 consecutive days after treatment. Worst pain score and analgesic consumption data were collected at baseline and daily for 10 days after treatment. Analgesic consumption was converted into a total daily oral morphine equivalent dose in the analysis. Pain flare was defined (a priori) as a two-point increase in worst pain on an 11-point numeric rating scale compared with baseline with no decrease in analgesic intake, or a 25% increase in analgesic intake with no decrease in worst pain score. To distinguish pain flare from progressive disease, we required that the worst pain score and analgesic intake returned to baseline levels after the increase/flare.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were evaluable (32 men, nine women). Their median age was 67 years. The overall incidence of pain flare was 9/41 (22%) within 10 days after the completion of radiotherapy. Most (55%) of these pain flares occurred on day 5. Absence of pain flare was 34/41(83%) and 39/41 (95%) for days 1-5 and 6-10 after the completion of radiotherapy, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone is effective in the prophylaxis of radiotherapy-induced pain flare after palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases. Randomised studies are needed to confirm this finding.