Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the HYPO-RT-PC randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial

A phase I dose-escalation trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy using 4 fractions for patients with localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To report results from our phase I dose-escalation study of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using 4 fractions for patients with localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Fraction sizes of 8 Gy, 8.5 Gy, and 9 Gy were defined as levels 1, 2, and 3. The prescribed dose was delivered to at least 95% of the planning target volume. Image-guided, intensity-modulated radiotherapy was delivered to all patients. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as acute toxicity of Grade 3 or higher. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as the level at which ≥30% of patients showed DLT. The recommended dose (RD) was defined to be one dose level below the MTD. If no patients at level 3 showed DLT, level 3 was defined as the recommended dose (RD).

RESULTS

Nine patients were enrolled in each level. All patients were low or intermediate risk. Median durations of follow-up for patients at levels 1-3 were 48.9 months, 42.6 months, and 18.4 months, respectively. Protocol treatment was completed for all patients. No patient showed DLT at each dose level. Level 3 was therefore designated as the RD for the phase II study. Although most toxicities were Grade 1, genitourinary toxicity was common compared to gastrointestinal toxicity. Three-year biochemical control rate was 90.3%.

CONCLUSION

The dose level of 36 Gy in 4 fractions with a 2-day break was tolerable and highly encouraging for SBRT of localized prostate cancer. The phase II trial to confirm the efficacy and toxicity of this treatment is now on going.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN, UMIN000010236 . Registered 13 March 2013.

[Moderate or extreme hypofractionation and localized prostate cancer: The times are changing]

There are many treatment options for localized prostate cancers, including active surveillance, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, and radical prostatectomy. Quality of life remains a primary objective in the absence of superiority of one strategy over another in terms of specific survival with similar long-term biochemical control rates. Despite a significant decrease in digestive and urinary toxicities thanks to IMRT and IGRT, external radiotherapy remains a treatment that lasts approximately 2 months or 1.5 months, when combined with a brachytherapy boost. Given the specific radiosensitivity of this tumor, several randomized studies have shown that a hypofractionated scheme is not inferior in terms of biochemical control and toxicities, allowing to divide the number of fractions by a factor 2 to 8. Given that SBRT becomes a validated therapeutic option for a selected population of patients with localized prostate cancer, extreme hypofractionation is becoming a strong challenger of conventional external radiotherapy or brachytherapy.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: When and for Whom?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize recent evidence concerning the use of moderately hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy, defined as 2.4-3.4 Gy per fraction, and ultrahypofractionated external beam radiotherapy (also known as stereotactic body radiotherapy [SBRT]), defined as at least 5 Gy per fraction, in men with localized prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Taken together, a number of recently completed randomized trials show that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy confers similar biochemical control compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy without increasing late toxicity. These effects appear to extend across all baseline clinical risk groups. Several single-arm phase II studies, as well as a recently published large-scale randomized trial comparing SBRT with conventional fractionation, show very promising biochemical control and favorable acute and late treatment-related morbidity with the use of SBRT in predominantly low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. As it is associated with similar prostate cancer control and toxicity while improving patient convenience and reducing cost, moderate hypofractionation is a preferred alternative to conventional fractionation in a majority of men with localized prostate cancer choosing radiotherapy as their primary treatment modality. To date, studies conducted largely in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer report encouraging oncologic outcomes and acceptable toxicity with SBRT. Mature results of phase III trials evaluating five-fraction SBRT regimens are eagerly awaited.

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

Purpose

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

Methods and Materials

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Planning feasibility of extremely hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy on a 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging guided linear accelerator

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Recently, intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients have been treated in a multicenter phase II trial with extremely hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy (hypo-FLAME trial). The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether a 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging guided linear accelerator (MRI-linac) could achieve complex dose distributions of a quality similar to conventional linac state-of-the-art prostate treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinically delivered treatment plans of 20 hypo-FLAME patients (volumetric modulated arc therapy, 10 MV, 5 mm leaf width) were included. Prescribed dose to the prostate was 5 × 7 Gy, with a focal tumor boost up to 5 × 10 Gy. MRI-linac treatment plans (intensity modulated radiotherapy, 7 MV, 7 mm leaf width, fixed collimator angle and 1.5 T magnetic field) were calculated. Dose distributions were compared.

RESULTS

In both conventional and MRI-linac treatment plans, the V35Gy to the whole prostate was >99% in all patients. Mean dose to the gross tumor volume was 45 Gy for conventional and 44 Gy for MRI-linac plans, respectively. Organ at risk doses were met in the majority of plans, except for a rectal V35Gy constraint, which was exceeded in one patient, by 1 cc, for both modalities. The bladder V32Gy and V28Gy constraints were exceeded in two and one patient respectively, for both modalities.

CONCLUSION

Planning of stereotactic radiotherapy with focal ablative boosting in prostate cancer on a high field MRI-linac is feasible with the current MRI-linac properties, without deterioration of plan quality compared to conventional treatments.