Management of Dry Eye Toxicity After Treatment With 177Lu-PSMA-617 Radioligand Therapy

Treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer include use of radioligand therapy with 177Lu-PSMA-617. 177Lu-PSMA-617 is used to target prostate cancer cells selectively by targeting prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA); however, PSMA is also expressed on lacrimal glands among other tissues. Herein, we report on a case of a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5 grade 3 dry eye event with concomitant blepharitis after administration of 177Lu-PSMA-617. The patient was managed with neomycin-polymyxin-dexamethasone 3.5-10000-0.1 ophthalmic suspension, artificial tears, lubricating ointments, lid scrubs, and oral antihistamines.

Bothersome Hot Flashes Following Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves local cancer control in unfavorable localized prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. ADT is known to cause hormonally related symptoms that resolve with testosterone recovery. Hot flashes are particularly burdensome. This study sought to evaluate the timeline of hot flashes following short-course ADT and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as well as its relationship with testosterone recovery.

METHODS

Institutional IRB approval was obtained for this retrospective review of prospectively collected data (IRB#: 2009-510). ADT was initiated three months prior to the start of SBRT. Hot flashes were self-reported via question 13a of the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26 prior to ADT initiation, the first day of robotic SBRT, and at each follow-up (one, three, six, nine, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months). The responses were grouped into three relevant categories (no problem, very small-small problem, and moderate-big problem). Scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale with higher scores reflecting less bother. Testosterone levels were measured at each follow-up.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2010, 122 localized prostate cancer patients (nine low-, 64 intermediate-, and 49 high-risk according to the D'Amico classification) at a median age of 72 years (range 54.5-88.3) were treated with short course ADT (three to six months) and SBRT (35-36.25 Gy) at Georgetown University Hospital. Thirty-two percent were Black and 27% were obese. Seventy-seven percent of patients received three months of ADT. At baseline, 2% of men experienced hot flashes that were a "moderate to big problem" and that proportion peaked at the start of SBRT (45%) before returning to baseline (2%) nine months post-SBRT with a cumulative incidence of 52.4%. The median baseline EPIC-26 hot flash score of 94 declined to 50 at the start of SBRT but this returned to baseline (92) by six months post SBRT. These changes were both statistically and clinically significant (MID = 9.5083, p<0.01). Testosterone recovery (> 230 ng/dL) occurred in approximately 70% of patients by 12 months post SBRT. Resolution of hot flashes correlated with testosterone recovery.

CONCLUSION

Bothersome hot flashes occur in greater than 50% of men treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Resolution of hot flashes occurs in the majority of patients within one year after treatment. Reassurance of the temporary nature of hot flashes may assist in reducing patient anxiety. Measuring testosterone levels at follow-up visits may allow for anticipatory counseling that may limit the associated bother.

Bothersome Hot Flashes Following Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may improve cancer control in unfavorable localized prostate cancer treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). ADT is known to cause hormonally related symptoms that resolve with testosterone recovery. Hot flashes are particularly burdensome. This study sought to evaluate the timeline of hot flashes following short-course ADT and SBRT as well as its relationship with testosterone recovery.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Institutional IRB approval was obtained for this retrospective review of prospectively collected data (IRB#: 2009-510). ADT was initiated three months prior to the start of SBRT. Hot flashes were self-reported via question 13a a healthcare software prior to ADT initiation, the first day of robotic SBRT, and at each follow-up (1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months). The responses were grouped into three relevant categories (no problem, very small-small problem and moderate-big problem). Scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale with higher scores reflecting less bother. Testosterone levels were measured at each follow-up.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2010, 122 localized prostate cancer patients (9 low-, 64 intermediate-, and 49 high-risk according to the D'Amico classification) at a median age of 72 years (range 54.5-88.3) were treated with short course ADT (3-6 months) and SBRT (35-36.25 Gy) at Georgetown University Hospital. Thirty-two percent were black and 27% were obese. 77% of patient received three months of ADT. At baseline, 2% of men experienced hot flashes that were a "moderate to big problem" and that proportion peaked at the start of SBRT (45%) before returning to baseline 9 months post-SBRT with a cumulative incidence of 52.4%. The median baseline healthcare software hot flash score of 94 declined to 50 at the start of SBRT but this returned to baseline by six months post SBRT. These changes were both statistically and clinically significant (MID = 9.5083). Testosterone recovery (> 230 ng/dL) occurred in approximately 70% of patients by 12 months post SBRT. Resolution of hot flashes correlated with testosterone recovery.

CONCLUSION

Bothersome hot flashes occur in greater than 50% of men treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Resolution of hot flashes occurs in the majority of patients within one year after treatment. Reassurance of the temporary nature of hot flashes may assist in reducing patient anxiety. Measuring testosterone levels at follow-up visits may allow for anticipatory counseling that may limit the associated bother.

Testosterone as a Biomarker for Quality of Life (QOL) Following Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT)

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) causes fatigue and sexual dysfunction. The time to testosterone recovery depends on patient and treatment-specific characteristics. The kinetics of testosterone recovery in men treated with neoadjuvant ADT and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is not well established. This study seeks to characterize testosterone recovery and evaluate its relationship with the improvement in patient-reported hormonal and sexual function.

METHODS

Institutional review board (IRB) approval was obtained for retrospective review of prospectively collected data. All patients with localized prostate cancer treated with short-course ADT (3-6 months of Leuprolide) and robotic SBRT (35-36.25 Gy in five fractions) at a single institution were included in this analysis. Testosterone levels were measured at the start of radiation, every 3 months for the first year, and every 6 months thereafter. Total testosterone recovery was defined as a serum level of >230 ng/dL. Sexual and hormonal function was recorded using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26 prior to ADT initiation, the first day of SBRT, and at each follow-up. The EPIC-26 subdomain scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale with higher scores reflecting less bother.

RESULTS

Between January 2009 and May 2018, 122 men with a median age of 72 years (range: 55-89 years) received ADT followed by SBRT. Thirty-two percent (N=39) were black and 27% [N=39 were obese (BMI > 30)]. The median pre-SBRT testosterone level was 15 ng/dL (range: 3-89 ng/dL). Around 77% (N=94) of patients received 3 months of ADT. The median pre-ADT EPIC-26 Hormone and Sexual Domain Scores were 94 and 41, respectively. At 12 months, 71% (N=87) of patients recovered to a eugonadal state with a mean recovery time of 4 months post-SBRT. Hormonal and sexual subdomain scores declined significantly following ADT but recovered to within the minimally important difference (MID) for sexual and hormonal domain scores by 12 months post-SBRT.

CONCLUSIONS

Testosterone recovery following short-course ADT with leuprolide and SBRT occurs rapidly in the majority of patients within one year after treatment. Quality of life domain improvements followed the testosterone recovery trend closely. Testosterone testing at follow-up appointments would allow for anticipatory counseling that may limit the bother associated with temporary quality of life decrements.

Patient-Reported Financial Burden Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Introduction and Objectives

In patients with localized prostate cancer, 5-fraction, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been found to offer comparable oncologic outcomes and potential for improved treatment compliance compared to conventional, 40-plus fraction radiation therapy (RT). Recent studies of oncologic patient experiences have highlighted both the impact of therapy-associated financial toxicity (FT) on treatment adherence and health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

Methods

A cross-sectional assessment of FT after SBRT was performed using the 12-item COST questionnaire. The total questionnaire score (range 0–44) was used to evaluate the FT grade (0–3), with a higher COST value representing lower grade. The patient zip code was used to approximate the distance from the index hospital. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the average COST score (0–4) are performed.

Results

The response rate was 57.5% (332 of 575 consented patients) with 90.7%, 8.2%, and 1.1% experiencing grade 0, 1, and 2 FT, respectively, with no grade 3. Unemployment or disability, non-white race, low income, and concurrent hormonal therapy were associated with a statistically significant worse FT (lower COST value) on univariate and multivariate analyses (p < 0.05). Education level and insurance status significant were evaluated on univariate analysis only. There was a non-statistically significant difference in age, marital status, time since treatment, and distance from the index hospital.

Conclusions

SBRT was associated with low FT. However, statistically significant socioeconomic disparities in FT remain despite ultra-hypofractionated treatment.

Bothersome Hematospermia Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Background

Hematospermia following prostate radiation therapy is a benign and often self-limiting side effect. However, it may be bothersome to some men and their partners with a negative impact on sexual quality of life (QOL). This study sought to evaluate the incidence, duration, and resolution of hematospermia in patients following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer.

Methods

227 patients treated with SBRT from 2013 to 2019 at Georgetown University Hospital for localized prostate carcinoma with a minimum follow up of two years were included in this retrospective review of data that was prospectively collected. Patients who were greater than 70 years old and/or received hormonal therapy were excluded. Hematospermia was defined as bright red blood in the ejaculate. Time points for data collection included initial consultation, pre-treatment, 1-, 3-, 6-, 9-, 12-, 18-, 24-month. All patients were treated with the CyberKnife Radiosurgical System (Accuray). Data on hematospermia including duration, resolution and recurrence was collected. Utilization of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors was documented at each visit.

Results

227 patients (45 low-, 177 intermediate-, and 5 high-risk according to the D’Amico classification) at a median age of 65 years (range 47-70) received SBRT for their localized prostate cancer. The 2-year cumulative incidence of hematospermia was 5.6%(14 patients). For these patients, all but one patient (93%) saw resolution of their hematospermia by two years post-SBRT. The median time for hematospermia was 9 months post-treatment. Of the 14 patients who reported hematospermia, 70% were managed with 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. Hematospermia was transient in most patients with 70% of the men reporting resolution by the next follow-up visit.

Conclusion

The incidence of bothersome hematospermia following SBRT was low. Hematospermia, as noted by other studies, often self-resolves. 5-alpha reductase inhibitors may lead to quicker resolution of bothersome hematospermia.

Refining the definition of biochemical failure in the era of stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer: The Phoenix definition and beyond

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The Phoenix definition for biochemical failure (BCF) after radiotherapy uses nadir PSA (nPSA) + 2 ng/mL to classify a BCF and was derived from conventionally fractionated radiotherapy, which produces significantly higher nPSAs than stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). We investigated whether an alternative nPSA-based threshold could be used to define post-SBRT BCFs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PSA kinetics data on 2038 patients from 9 institutions were retrospectively analyzed for low- and intermediate-risk PCa patients treated with SBRT without ADT. We evaluated the performance of various nPSA-based definitions. We also investigated the relationship of relative PSA decline (rPSA, PSA_18month/PSA_6month) and timing of reaching nPSA + 2 with BCF.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 71.9 months. BCF occurred in 6.9% of patients. Median nPSA was 0.16 ng/mL. False positivity of nPSA + 2 was 30.2%, compared to 40.9%, 57.8%, and 71.0% for nPSA + 1.5, nPSA + 1.0, and nPSA + 0.5, respectively. Among patients with BCF, the median lead time gained from an earlier nPSA + threshold definition over the Phoenix definition was minimal. Patients with BCF had significantly lower rates of early PSA decline (mean rPSA 1.19 vs. 0.39, p < 0.0001) and were significantly more likely to reach nPSA + 2 ≥ 18 months (83.3% vs. 21.1%, p < 0.0001). The proposed criterion (rPSA ≥ 2.6 or nPSA + 2 ≥ 18 months) had a sensitivity and specificity of 92.4% and 81.5%, respectively, for predicting BCF in patients meeting the Phoenix definition and decreased its false positivity to 6.4%.

CONCLUSION

The Phoenix definition remains an excellent definition for BCF post-SBRT. Its high false positivity can be mitigated by applying additional criteria (rPSA ≥ 2.6 or time to nPSA + 2 ≥ 18 months).

Bleeding Risk Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer in Men on Baseline Anticoagulant or Antiplatelet Therapy

Purpose

Patients on anticoagulant/antiplatelet medications are at a high risk of bleeding following external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. SBRT may reduce the bleeding risk by decreasing the volume of bladder/rectum receiving high doses. This retrospective study sought to evaluate the rates of hematuria and hematochezia following SBRT in these patients.

Methods

Localized prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT from 2007 to 2017 on at least one anticoagulant/antiplatelet at baseline were included. The minimum follow-up was 3 years with a median follow-up of 72 months. Patients who had a rectal spacer placed prior to SBRT were excluded. Radiotherapy was delivered in 5 fractions to a dose of 35 Gy or 36.25 Gy utilizing the CyberKnife system. Hematuria and hematochezia were prospectively assessed before and after treatment using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26). Toxicities were scored using the CTCAE v4. Cystoscopy and colonoscopy findings were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Forty-four men with a median age of 72 years with a history of taking at least one anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medication received SBRT. Warfarin (46%), clopidogrel (34%) and rivaroxaban (9%) were the most common medications. Overall, 18.2% experienced hematuria with a median time of 10.5 months post-SBRT. Altogether, 38.6% experienced hematochezia with a median time of 6 months post-SBRT. ≥ Grade 2 hematuria and hematochezia occurred in 4.6% and 2.5%, respectively. One patient required bladder neck fulguration and one patient underwent rectal cauterization for multiple non-confluent telangiectasia. There were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Cystoscopy revealed bladder cancer (40%) and benign prostatic bleeding (40%) as the most common hematuria etiology. Colonoscopy demonstrated hemorrhoids (54.5%) and radiation proctitis (9.1%) as the main causes of hematochezia. There was no significant change from the mean baseline EPIC-26 hematuria and hematochezia scores at any point during follow up.

Conclusion

In patients with baseline anticoagulant usage, moderate dose prostate SBRT was well tolerated without rectal spacing. High grade bleeding toxicities were uncommon and resolved with time. Baseline anticoagulation usage should not be considered a contraindication to prostate SBRT.

Toxicity After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Multi-institutional Matched Case-Control Series

Purpose

To evaluate the safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer in men with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Methods and Materials

We queried a consortium database for patients with IBD receiving SBRT for prostate cancer between 2006 and 2012. Identified patients were matched with patients without a history of IBD in a 3:1 fashion based on dose, fractionation, use of androgen deprivation therapy, and age distribution. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between having IBD and experiencing acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities as scored on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scale. Time to late toxicity was evaluated using proportional hazard Cox models. Our study was limited by absence of data on prostate size, baseline International Prostate Symptom Score, and rectal dose-volume histogram parameters.

Results

Thirty-nine patients with flare-free IBD at time of treatment (median follow-up 83.9 months) and 117 matched controls (median follow-up 88.7 months) were identified. A diagnosis of IBD was associated with increased odds of developing any late grade GI toxicity (odds ratio [OR] 6.11, P <.001) and GU toxicity (odds ratio 6.14, P < .001), but not odds of developing late grade ≥2 GI (P = .08) or GU toxicity (P = .069). Acute GI and GU toxicity, both overall and for grade ≥2 toxicities, were more frequent in men with IBD (P < .05). Time to late GI and GU toxicity of any grade was significantly shorter in patients with IBD (P < .001). Time to late grade ≥2 GU, but not grade ≥2 GI toxicity, was also shorter in patients with IBD (P = .044 for GU and P = .144 for GI).

Conclusions

Patients with IBD who received SBRT for PCa had a higher likelihood of developing acute GI and GU toxicity, in addition to experiencing lower grade late toxicities that occurred earlier. However, patients with IBD did not have a higher likelihood for late grade ≥2 GI or GU toxicity after SBRT compared with the control cohort. Interpretation of this data are limited by the small sample size. Thus, men with IBD in remission should be properly counseled about these risks when considering SBRT.

Impact of Age on Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Purpose

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivers large radiation doses to the prostate while minimizing exposure to adjacent normal tissues. Large fraction sizes may increase the risks of functional decrements. Elderly men may be at an increased risk of these toxicities due to poor baseline function and hence limited reserve. This study describes patient-reported outcomes following SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer in the elderly.

Methods

Between 2007 and 2017, 179 hormone-naive elderly patients (≥ 70 years old) and 210 patients under 70 years old with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with 35-36.25 Gy SBRT in five fractions utilizing the CyberKnife Radiosurgical System (Accuray Inc.). Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite-Short Form (EPIC-26) questionnaire at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months following the completion of treatment. EPIC scores range from 0 to 100, with lower values representing worsening symptoms.

Results

EPIC scores in the elderly cohort mirrored those in the younger cohort. EPIC urinary obstructive/irritative scores declined at one month post-SBRT (mean change from baseline ≥70: -7.9; <70: -11.1) before returning to baseline at three months post-SBRT (mean change from baseline ≥70: -0.4; <70: -1.4). The EPIC urinary incontinence scores declined slowly over the three years following treatment without recovery (mean change from baseline ≥70: -6.6; <70: -4.8). EPIC Bowel scores transiently declined at one month post-SBRT (mean change from baseline ≥70: -8.5; <70: -9.1) and then experienced a second more protracted decline over the next three years without recovery (mean change from baseline ≥70: -4.5; <70: -1.8). Hormonal EPIC scores were not impacted by radiation treatment or age. Older men had lower baseline and post-treatment EPIC sexual summary scores at all time points. However, there was no clinically significant difference in the EPIC sexual bother score between younger and older men at baseline and following treatment.

Conclusions

In the first three years following treatment, the impact of SBRT treatment on patient-reported outcomes was minimal. Our findings suggest that SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer should not be deferred in older men solely due to concerns of increased morbidity. Further studies should be conducted to evaluate the impact of age on outcomes or morbidity following SBRT.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Prostate Cancer in Men With a High Baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS ≥ 15)

Background: Patients with a high pretreatment IPSS may have higher rates of late urinary morbidity after radiation therapy for prostate cancer (1). Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivers fewer high-dose fractions of radiation, which may be radiobiologically favorable to the conventional low-dose external beam fractions. The urinary toxicity associated with SBRT, however, remains unclear in patients with a high IPSS (1). We report our experience using SBRT for localized prostate cancer in patients with pretreatment IPSS ≥ 15.

Methods: Localized prostate cancer patients with a pre-treatment IPSS ≥ 15 treated with SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital from 2009 to 2016 were included in this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. These patients were treated to 35–36.25 Gy in five fractions delivered via CyberKnife (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). Urinary toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v4). Urinary quality of life was assessed using validated questionnaires (IPSS and EPIC-26).

Results: 53 patients at a median age of 71 years (range 57–89 years) received SBRT with a minimum follow up of 3 years. The median prostate size was 37 cm³ (range 12–100 cm³) and 30.2% patients received ADT. The 3-years incidence rate of Grade 3 urinary toxicity was 7.5% with median time to toxicity of 2.9 years. There were no Grade 4 or 5 toxicities. A mean baseline IPSS score of 19.8 significantly decreased to 12.9 at 3 months post-SBRT (p = 0.002) and remained stable at 36 months (13.7). A mean baseline EPIC-26 obstructive/irritative score of 64.1 significantly improved to 80.2 at 3 months (p = 0.002). This improvement was maintained to 36 months. There was no significant change from the mean baseline EPIC-26 urinary incontinence score at any point during follow up.

Conclusions: SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer was well-tolerated in men with baseline IPSS ≥ 15 (1). Grade 3 toxicities occurred but resolved with time. Our data suggest that poor baseline urinary function does not worsen following SBRT and may even improve. High baseline IPSS score should not be considered a contraindication to SBRT.

Urinary Morbidity in Men Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Localized Prostate Cancer Following Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP)

Background: Clinical data suggest that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) provides similar clinical outcomes as other radiation modalities for prostate cancer. However, data reporting on the safety of SBRT after TURP is limited. Herein, we report our experience using SBRT to deliver hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with a history of TURP including physician-reported toxicities and patient-reported quality of life.

Methods: Forty-seven patients treated with SBRT from 2007 to 2016 at Georgetown University Hospital for localized prostate carcinoma with a history of prior TURP were included in this retrospective analysis. Treatment was delivered using the CyberKnife® (Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA) with doses of 35 Gy or 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions without prostatic urethral sparing. Toxicities were recorded and scored using the CTCAE v.4. Cystoscopy findings were retrospectively reviewed. Urinary quality of life data was assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Scoring (IPSS) and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26 (EPIC-26). A Wilcoxon signed-rank sum test was used to determine if there was a statistically significant increase or decrease in IPSS or EPIC scores between timepoints. Minimally important differences were calculated by obtaining half the standard deviation at time of start of treatment.

Results: Forty-seven patients at a median age of 72 years (range 63–84) received SBRT. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years (range 2–10 years). Late Grade 2 and grade 3 urinary toxicity occurred in 23 (48.9%) and 3 (6.4%) men, respectively. There were no Grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Approximately 51% of patients experienced hematuria following treatment. Mean time to hematuria was 10.5 months. Twenty-five cystoscopies were performed during follow-up and the most common finding was hyperemia, varices of the bladder neck/TURP defect, and/or necrotic tissue in the TURP defect. Baseline urinary QOL composite scores were low, but they did not clinically significantly decline in the first 2 years following treatment.

Conclusions: In patients with prior TURP, prostate SBRT was well-tolerated. GU toxicity rates were comparable to similar patients treated with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy. Urinary quality of life was poor at baseline, but did not worsen clinically over time. Stricter dosimetric criteria could potentially improve the rate of high-grade late toxicity, but may increase the risk of peri-urethral recurrence.

Self-Reported Burden in Elderly Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT)

Purpose: Retaining quality of life in patients treated with SBRT for prostate cancer remains paramount. As such, balancing the benefits of treatment against the effects of therapy on elderly patients is essential. The EORTC QLQ-ELD14 (ELD-14) is a validated questionnaire with a domain dedicated to burden of illness and treatment in the elderly. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC)-26 is a validated questionnaire which measures urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal symptoms. This study reports trends in self-reported burden in patients with prostate cancer treated with SBRT and reveals convergence of self-reported burden with treatment related side effects obtained from the EPIC-26 questionnaire.

Methods: All patients ≥70 years old, with localized prostate cancer treated with SBRT ± ADT at Medstar Georgetown University Hospital from 2013 to 2018 and had completed the ELD-14 were eligible for inclusion in this cross-sectional cohort study. Percentage of responses to questions related to disease and treatment burden were counted for each category (“not at all” and “a little” vs. “quite a bit” and “very much”). Additional demographic features were derived from available medical records. A total of 111 patients (median age of 74) responded to the ELD-14 questionnaire at onset of treatment and at the 2-year mark. Responses to EPIC questionnaires at matched follow-ups were scored and correlated with the self-reported burden domain of the ELD-14 using the Spearman correlation coefficient.

Results: Number of patients reporting “quite a bit” or “very much” burden from prostate cancer was 6.3% prior to treatment. This was highest at 1-month (10.8%) and decreased to 9.0% at 24 months post-SBRT (X² = 3.836, p = 0.6986). By comparison, 3.6 and 5.4% reported “quite a bit” or “very much” burden from treatment at start of treatment and 24 months, respectively (X² = 1.046, p = 0.9838). Patient reported treatment burden was found to converge well with individual domains of EPIC-26. Patients undergoing ADT experienced more burden than their non-ADT counterparts.

Conclusions: This cross-sectional study suggests a minority of patients reported high burden from their clinically localized prostate cancer or from their SBRT treatment. Self-reported burden converged well with lower EPIC scores in multiple domains.

Abstract PD6-12: Evaluating racial disparities in breast cancer referrals for hereditary risk assessment

Background: There is a pronounced onco-racial disparity in Washington, D.C., which had the highest national incidence of breast cancer in African Americans (AA) patients in between 2010-2015 and the worst outcomes (American Cancer Society). Recent data indicates a higher incidence of deleterious BRCA1 [and BRCA2] mutations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in AA patients compared to Caucasian (C) patients when controlled for patients of Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) populations (Hall 2009). Despite this, AA women meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic testing are less likely to complete such testing compared to C women nationally. Studies have investigated psycho-social drivers of minority patient aversion to genetic testing. We hypothesize that lack of physician referral for cancer genetic counseling and testing for AA women contributes to this disparity.

Methods: The George Washington Cancer Center (GWCC) Registry was used to identify non-Hispanic African Americans (BNH) and non-Hispanic whites (WNH) treated for breast cancer between 2014-2018. Of those individuals selected for inclusion were those who met select NCCN criteria for referral for genetic evaluation including breast cancer diagnosis under age 50, triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) under age 60, and two primary breast cancers. Only BNH and WNH individuals were included. Excluded patients were those who were not BNH or WNH or who did not meet the NCCN criteria listed above. Patients were then stratified by race according to who underwent genetic evaluation, whether at our Ruth Paul Cancer Genetics and Prevention Service (RPCGPS) or elsewhere, by reviewing GWCC, RPCGPS, and patient clinic records for genetic testing results from outside institutions. Patient charts were used to identify individuals who received a physician referral over the course of their cancer care.

Results: 1180 patients were treated at the GWCC for breast cancer (both in situ and invasive carcinoma) between 2014–2018. Of those, BNH n=502; WNH n=435. Twenty-seven percent of BNH and WNH patients met the study criteria for referral for genetic evaluation (n=252; BNH n=115, WNH n=137), including breast cancer diagnosis under age 50 (BNH n=76; WNH n=108), TNBC under age 60 (BNH n=14; WNH n=5), and two primary breast cancers (BNH n=18, WNH n=16). Several patients identified met two or more criteria for referral (BNH n=7, WNH n=8). Physician referral rates differed significantly by race (BNH 76%, n=87 and WNH 91%; n=125; χ2=11.4, p-value&lt;0.001). Of referred patients, there was no significant difference in those who followed-up at RPCGPS by race (BNH 93%, n=81; WNH= 93%, n=116, χ2 =0.0072, p-value=0.93).

Conclusions: Low genetic testing rates for AA breast cancer patients are an impediment to resolving the prominent onco-racial breast cancer disparities. This study identified physician referral as a potential contributor to racial disparity in the utilization of cancer genetics services. Potential reasons for the discrepancy in referral may include lag in physician education on the topic of hereditary risk and barriers in physician-patient communication. These findings need to be confirmed and explored at other sites to help improve the identification of at-risk women in the AA community.

Citation Format: Pepin A, Peterson J, Thomas R, Johnson K, Stark E, Biagi T, Kaltman R. Evaluating racial disparities in breast cancer referrals for hereditary risk assessment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD6-12.

Self-reported burden in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)

51

Background: Retaining quality of life in patients treated with SBRT for prostate cancer remains paramount. As such, balancing the benefits of treatment against the effects of therapy on patients is essential. The quality of life is influenced by the disease and treatment related burden. The EORTC QLQ-ELD14 (ELD14) is a validated questionnaire that can assess burden. This study reports burden trends in patients with prostate cancer treated with SBRT. Methods: All patients with localized prostate cancer treated with SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital from 2007 to 2016 were eligible for inclusion in this cross-sectional cohort. The ELD14 questionnaire was used to assess self-reported patient quality of life at time points before and following treatment. Initially, 267 patients (Median age of 70) responded to the ELD14 questionnaire. Approximately 30% received ADT. The specific questions reviewed for this study were focused on burden of disease and treatment. The responses to these questions were grouped into three clinically relevant categories (not at all, a little and quite a bit to very much). Results: Number of patients reporting quite a bit or very much burden from prostate cancer declined over time from 13% prior to treatment to 8% at 36 months post-SBRT. This was highest at one month post-SBRT (15%) and resolved to baseline by 6 months. Treatment burden similarly decreased over time from 10% to 3%. Patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) experienced greater burden than others. At initial consult, 19% of patients on ADT reported quite a bit or very much burden from their illness. At one month post-SBRT, this had increased to 27% and subsequently decreased to 16% at 36 months. Of those not receiving ADT, 12% reported having quite a bit or very much burden from illness initially, 9% at one month and 6% at 36 months. Conclusions: This cross-sectional study suggests that the burden of clinically localized prostate and its treatment with SBRT improves over time. Increased burden was noted in patients receiving ADT. These findings can inform decision making in improving quality of life for patients with prostate cancer treated with SBRT.

Patient-reported anxiety with localized prostate cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)

52

Background: Anxiety is a common aliment among elderly men. It may be negatively impacted by the diagnosis of cancer. Effective cancer treatment may alleviate anxiety. The EORTC QLQ-ELD14 (ELD14) is a validated questionnaire, which evaluates patient reported anxiety. Using the ELD14 questionnaire, this study assesses the trends in prostate cancer patient’s anxiety before and after treatment with SBRT. Methods: All patients with localized prostate cancer who received SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital from 2007 to 2016 were eligible for inclusion in this cross-sectional cohort. The ELD14 questionnaire was used to assess quality of life before and following treatment. Initially, approximately 267 patients (median age of 70) responded to the ELD14 questionnaire. This study is focused on questions related to patient’s anxiety regarding their families, future, health and end of life. The responses to these questions were grouped into three clinically relevant categories (not at all, a little and quite a bit to very much). Results: Prior to treatment, 19% of patients felt quite a bit or very much worried about their families coping with their illness. This decreased to 9% at 24 months post-SBRT (p = 0.007). Initially, 27% of patients reported concerns for the future of their families, which subsequently decreased to 20% at 24 months (p = 0.15). At initial consult, 32% of patients reported being worried about their future health. This decreased to 13% at 24 months (p < 0.001). Twenty percent of patient reported concern about their future at initial consult; this declined to 11% at 24 months (p = 0.03). And finally, self reported anxiety about end of life was 18% at the initial consult and 12% at 24 months (p = 0.16). Conclusions: Self-reported anxiety surrounding family, health and future is prevalent amongst prostate cancer patients at initial evaluation. Significant reduction in anxiety is observed in our cohort post-SBRT. Further investigations in the causes of pre and post-treatment anxiety may offer valuable insight into preventable root causes and improvement in patient’s quality of life.

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

Background

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

Materials and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Expression of bone-regulatory proteins in human valve allografts

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that valve allograft (VA) calcification results from an ossification process in which bone-regulatory proteins are expressed.

METHODS

15 VA that were explanted at the time of surgery for dysfunction were studied. VA were analysed and compared with normal aortic valves (n = 20).

RESULTS

All the VA (5 aortic, 10 pulmonary) exhibited heavy calcification and important fibrosis. Immunohistochemistry studies showed that the bone-specific transcription factor Cbfa-1 was expressed by stromal cells. Bone alkaline phosphatase was expressed in calcified regions. Immunostaining for alpha smooth muscle (alpha-SM) actin was increased in VA compared with normal valves and in 6 of the 15 valves formed cellular clusters close to the calcified nodules. In VA osteopontin and osteonectin were expressed by stromal cells, whereas osteocalcin was closely associated with the calcified regions. Furthermore, analysis of the bone-regulatory proteins that control bone resorption showed that receptor activator of nuclear factor kappaB ligand (RANKL), receptor activator of nuclear factor kappaB (RANK) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) were differentially expressed in calcified VA and normal valves. Normal valve leaflets expressed OPG, whereas OPG expression was absent or faint in calcified VA. RANKL and RANK were not detected in normal valves, whereas calcified VA expressed RANKL and RANK.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that calcification of VA results from an ossification process, which relies on tight control of bone-regulatory protein expression. The expression pattern of the RANKL/RANK/OPG system suggests that it may have a regulatory role not only in osteoclastogenesis but also in the calcification of human VA.

A treadmill apparatus and harness support for evaluation and rehabilitation of gait

This report describes a treadmill apparatus for the evaluation and rehabilitation of gait in disabled persons. The apparatus incorporates a body weight support system as well as mechanisms to change certain conditions: treadmill belt speed, upward-downward and lateral slopes, and provision of obstacles. The apparatus enables elements of a treadmill walking pattern to be visible in persons for whom gait evaluation or rehabilitation may not otherwise be possible. It also allows for exploration of factors that limit the adaptability of gait in person after disease or injury by changing the mechanical demand of the locomotor task.