1
|
Adams ES, Deivasigamani S, Mottaghi M, Huang J, Gupta RT, Polascik TJ. Evaluation of Recurrent Disease after Radiation Therapy for Patients Considering Local Salvage Therapy: Past vs. Contemporary Management. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:5883. [PMID: 38136427 PMCID: PMC10741753 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15245883] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2023] [Revised: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 12/14/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Recurrent prostate cancer after primary treatment with radiation therapy is a common problem. Patients with localized recurrence may benefit from salvage therapy, but careful patient selection is crucial because not all patients will benefit from local salvage therapy, and salvage therapy has increased morbidity compared to primary treatments for prostate cancer. This review aims to provide an overview of the evaluation of patients with recurrent disease after radiation therapy and how it is continuing to evolve with increasing data on outcomes, as well as improving technologies and techniques. Our enhanced understanding of treatment outcomes and risk stratification has influenced the identification of patients who may benefit from local salvage treatment. Advances in imaging and biopsy techniques have enhanced the accuracy of locating the recurrence, which affects treatment decisions. Additionally, the growing interest in image-targeted ablative therapies that have less morbidity and complications than whole-gland therapies for suitable patients influences the evaluation process for those considering focal salvage therapy. Although significant changes have been made in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with recurrent disease after radiation therapy, it remains unclear whether these changes will ultimately improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric S. Adams
- Department of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | | | - Mahdi Mottaghi
- Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | - Jiaoti Huang
- Department of Pathology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | - Rajan T. Gupta
- Department of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
- Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | - Thomas J. Polascik
- Department of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
- Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
- Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gorovets D, Wibmer AG, Moore A, Lobaugh S, Zhang Z, Kollmeier M, McBride S, Zelefsky MJ. Local Failure after Prostate SBRT Predominantly Occurs in the PI-RADS 4 or 5 Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion. Eur Urol Oncol 2023; 6:275-281. [PMID: 35307323 PMCID: PMC9481979 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2021] [Revised: 02/07/2022] [Accepted: 02/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A positive post-treatment prostate biopsy following definitive radiotherapy carries significant prognostic implications. OBJECTIVE To determine whether local recurrences after prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) are associated with the presence of and occur more commonly within the region of a PI-RADS 4 or 5 dominant intra-prostatic lesion (DIL) identified on pre-treatment multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS 247 patients with localized prostate cancer treated with SBRT at our institution from 2009-2018 underwent post-treatment biopsies (median time to biopsy: 2.2 years) to evaluate local control. INTERVENTIONS Prostate SBRT (median 40 Gy in 5 fractions). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS MRIs were read by a single diagnostic radiologist blinded to other patient characteristics and treatment outcomes. The DIL presence, size, location, and extent were then analyzed to determine associations with the post-treatment biopsy outcomes. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Among patients who underwent post-treatment biopsies, 39/247 (15.8%) were positive for Gleason-gradable prostate adenocarcinoma, of which 35/39 (90%) had a DIL initially present and 29/39 (74.4%) had a positive biopsy within the DIL. Factors independently associated with post-treatment biopsy outcomes included the presence of a DIL (OR 6.95; p = 0.001), radiographic T3 disease (OR 5.23, p < 0.001), SBRT dose ≥40 Gy (OR 0.26, p = 0.003), and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; OR 0.28, p = 0.027). Among patients with a DIL (N = 149), the only factors associated with post-treatment biopsy outcomes included ≥50% percent cores positive (OR 2.4, p = 0.037), radiographic T3 disease (OR 4.04, p = 0.001), SBRT dose ≥40 Gy (OR 0.22, p < 0.001), and use of ADT (OR 0.21, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that men with PI-RADS 4 or 5 DILs have a higher risk of local recurrence after prostate SBRT and that most recurrences are located within the DIL. PATIENT SUMMARY We found the presence of a dominant tumor on pre-treatment MRI was strongly associated with residual cancer within the prostate after SBRT and that most recurrences were within the dominant tumor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Gorovets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Andreas G Wibmer
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Assaf Moore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Stephanie Lobaugh
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| | - Zhigang Zhang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| | - Marisa Kollmeier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sean McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Corkum MT, Buyyounouski MK, Chang AJ, Chung HT, Chung P, Cox BW, Crook JM, Davis BJ, Frank SJ, Henriquez I, Horwitz EM, Hoskin P, Hsu IC, Keyes M, King MT, Kollmeier MA, Krauss DJ, Kukielka AM, Morton G, Orio PF, Pieters BR, Potters L, Rossi PJ, Showalter TN, Solanki AA, Song D, Vanneste B, Vigneault E, Wojcieszek PA, Zelefsky MJ, Kamrava M. Salvage Prostate Brachytherapy in Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: An International Delphi Consensus Study. Radiother Oncol 2023; 184:109672. [PMID: 37059334 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109672] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2023] [Revised: 03/29/2023] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 04/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Local recurrences after previous radiotherapy (RT) are increasingly being identified in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Salvage prostate brachytherapy (BT) is an effective and well tolerated treatment option. We sought to generate international consensus statements on the use and preferred technical considerations for salvage prostate BT. MATERIALS AND METHODS International experts in salvage prostate BT were invited (n=34) to participate. A three-round modified Delphi technique was utilized, with questions focused on patient- and cancer-specific criteria, type and technique of BT, and follow-up. An a priori threshold for consensus of ≥ 75% was set, with a majority opinion being ≥ 50%. RESULTS Thirty international experts agreed to participate. Consensus was achieved for 56% (18/32) of statements. Consensus was achieved in several areas of patient selection: 1) A minimum of 2-3 years from initial RT to salvage BT; 2) MRI and PSMA PET should be obtained; and 3) Both targeted and systematic biopsies should be performed. Several areas did not reach consensus: 1) Maximum T stage/PSA at time of salvage; 2) Utilization/duration of ADT; 3) Appropriateness of combining local salvage with SABR for oligometastatic disease and 4) Repeating a second course of salvage BT. A majority opinion preferred High Dose-Rate salvage BT, and indicated that both focal and whole gland techniques could be appropriate. There was no single preferred dose/fractionation. CONCLUSION Areas of consensus within our Delphi study may serve as practical advice for salvage prostate BT. Future research in salvage BT should address areas of controversy identified in our study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark T Corkum
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
| | | | - Albert J Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Hans T Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Peter Chung
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Brett W Cox
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Solaris Health, Chicago, IL
| | | | - Brian J Davis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Ivan Henriquez
- Radiation Oncology Department. Hospital Universitari Sant Joan, Reus, Spain
| | - Eric M Horwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Peter Hoskin
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre and University of Manchester, United Kingdom, Northwood, United Kingdom
| | - I-Chow Hsu
- University of California San Francisco, Department of Radiation Oncology, San Francisco, CA
| | | | - Martin T King
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Marisa A Kollmeier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Daniel J Krauss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, MI
| | - Andrzej M Kukielka
- NU-MED Cancer Diagnostics and Therapy Centre, Zamość, Poland; Department of Brachytherapy, University Hospital in Kraków, Kraków, Poland
| | - Gerard Morton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Peter F Orio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Bradley R Pieters
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Louis Potters
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, Lake Success, NY
| | - Peter J Rossi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
| | | | - Abhishek A Solanki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Chicago, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Maywood, IL
| | - Daniel Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Ben Vanneste
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Eric Vigneault
- CHU de Quebec-Centre intégré de cancérologie Hôpitl de L'Enfant-Jésus, Québec, QC, Canada
| | - Piotr A Wojcieszek
- Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Mitchell Kamrava
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Collins K, Cheng L. Reprint of: morphologic spectrum of treatment-related changes in prostate tissue and prostate cancer: an updated review. Hum Pathol 2023; 133:92-101. [PMID: 36898948 DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2023.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2022] [Accepted: 06/05/2022] [Indexed: 03/11/2023]
Abstract
A wide range of treatment options are available to patients with prostate cancer. Some treatments are standard (currently used) while some are emerging therapies. Androgen deprivation therapy is typically reserved for localized or metastatic prostate cancer not amenable to surgery. Radiation therapy may be offered to individuals for local therapy with curative intent in low- or intermediate-risk disease that may have a high probability of progression on active surveillance or where surgery is not suitable. Focal therapy/ablation treatment is an alternative approach for those who prefer to avoid radical prostatectomy for localized disease of low- or intermediate-risk or as salvage therapy after failed radiation therapy. Chemotherapy and immunotherapy remain under investigation and are currently used for androgen-independent disease or hormone-refractory prostate cancer; however, a better understanding of therapeutic efficacy is needed. Histopathologic changes observed in benign and malignant prostate tissue induced by hormonal therapies and radiation therapy are well described, whereas treatment-related effects secondary to novel therapies continue to be documented although their clinical significance is not absolutely clear. An informed and accurate evaluation of post-treatment prostate specimens requires pathologists with diagnostic acumen and knowledge relating to the histopathologic spectrum associated with each treatment option. In situations when clinical history is lacking, but morphologic features are suggestive of prior treatment, pathologists are encouraged to consult clinical colleagues regarding prior treatment history including details of when treatment was initiated and duration of therapy. This review aims to provide a concise update of current and emerging therapies for prostate cancer, histologic alterations and recommendations on Gleason grading.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katrina Collins
- Department of Pathology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
| | - Liang Cheng
- Department of Pathology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Greco C, Pares O, Pimentel N, Louro V, Nunes B, Kociolek J, Marques J, Fuks Z. Health-related quality of life of salvage prostate reirradiation using stereotactic ablative radiotherapy with urethral-sparing. Front Oncol 2022; 12:984917. [PMID: 36276100 PMCID: PMC9582606 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.984917] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2022] [Accepted: 09/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To explore whether prostate motion mitigation using the rectal distension-mediated technique is safe and effective in stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) salvage treatment of intraprostatic cancer recurrences following initial radiotherapy for primary prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between July 2013 and December 2020, 30 patients received salvage SABR for 68Ga- PSMA-11 PET/CT-detected intra-prostatic relapses. Median time from primary RT to salvage reirradiation was 70.2 (IQR, 51.3-116.0) months. Median PSA at retreatment was 3.6 ng/mL (IQR, 1.9-6.2). Rectal distension-mediated SABR was achieved with a 150-cm3 air-inflated endorectal balloon and a Foley catheter loaded with 3 beacon transponders was used for urethra visualization and on-line tracking. MRI-based planning employed a 2-mm expansion around the planned target volume (PTV), reduced to 0-mm at the interface with critical organs at risk (OARs). Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) permitted a 20% dose reduction of the urethra. VMAT simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of the dominant intraprostatic lesion was deployed when indicated. Median SABR dose was 35 Gy (7 Gy per fraction over 5 consecutive days; range 35-40 Gy). Toxicity assessment used CTCAE v.4 criteria. RESULTS Median follow-up was 44 months (IQR, 18-60). The actuarial 3- and 4-year biochemical relapse free survival was 53.4% and 47.5%, respectively. Intraprostatic post-salvage relapse by PSMA PET/CT was 53.3%. Acute grade 2 and 3 genitourinary (GU) toxicities were 20% and 0%, respectively. There were no instances of acute grade ≥2 rectal (GI) toxicity. Late grade 2 and 3 GU toxicities occurred in 13.3% and 0% of patients, respectively. There were no instances of grade ≥2 late rectal toxicity. Patient-reported QOL measures showed an acute transient deterioration in the urinary domain 1 month after treatment but returned to baseline values at 3 months. The median IPSS scores rose over baseline (≥5 points in 53% of patients) between month 6 and 12 post-treatment as a result of urinary symptoms flare, eventually receding at 18 months. The bowel domain metrics had no appreciable changes over time. CONCLUSION Pursuit of local control in intraprostatic failures is feasible and can be achieved with an acceptably low toxicity profile associated with effective OAR sparing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlo Greco
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal,*Correspondence: Carlo Greco,
| | - Oriol Pares
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Nuno Pimentel
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Vasco Louro
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Beatriz Nunes
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Justyna Kociolek
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Joao Marques
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Zvi Fuks
- The Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lisbon, Portugal,Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Department of Radiation Oncology Center, New York, NY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Shah RB, Palsgrove DN, Desai NB, Gagan J, Mennie A, Raj G, Hannan R. Enrichment of "Cribriform" morphologies (intraductal and cribriform adenocarcinoma) and genomic alterations in radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 2022; 35:1468-1474. [PMID: 35606411 DOI: 10.1038/s41379-022-01093-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2022] [Revised: 04/23/2022] [Accepted: 04/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Locally relapsed prostate cancer (PCa) after radiation therapy (RT) is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Morphological and molecular consequences that may contribute to RT resistance and local recurrence remain poorly understood. Locally recurrent PCa tissue from 53 patients with clinically localized PCa who failed with primary RT and subsequently underwent salvage radical prostatectomy (RP) was analyzed for tumor focality, clinicopathological, molecular, and genomic characteristics. Targeted next-generation sequencing with full exon coverage of 1,425 cancer-related genes was performed on 10 representative radiorecurrent PCas exhibiting no RT effect with matched adjacent benign prostate tissue. At RP, 37 (70%) of PCas had no RT effect with the following characteristics: grade group (GG) ≥ 3 (70%), unifocal tumor (75%), extraprostatic disease (78%), lymph node metastasis (8%), and "cribriform" morphologies (84%) [cribriform PCa (78%) or intraductal carcinoma (IDC-P) (61%)] at a median percentage of approximately 80% of tumor volume. In the setting of multifocal tumors (25%) at RP, the cribriform morphologies were restricted to index tumors. Of 32 patients with available pre-RT biopsy information, 16 had GG1 PCa, none had cribriform morphologies at baseline but 81% demonstrated cribriform morphologies at RP. Notable alterations detected in the sequenced tumors included: defects in DNA damage response and repair (DDR) genes (70%) (TP53, BRCA2, PALB2, ATR, POLQ), PTEN loss (50%), loss of 8p (80%), and gain of MYC (70%). The median tumor mutational burden was 4.18 mutations/Mb with a range of 2.16 to 31.86. Our findings suggest that most radiorecurrent PCas are enriched in cribriform morphologies with potentially targetable genomic alterations. Understanding this phenotypic and genotypic diversity of radiorecurrent PCa is critically important to facilitate optimal patient management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rajal B Shah
- Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
| | - Doreen N Palsgrove
- Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Neil B Desai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Jeffrey Gagan
- Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Amanda Mennie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Ganesh Raj
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Raquibul Hannan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Algohary A, Alhusseini M, Breto AL, Kwon D, Xu IR, Gaston SM, Castillo P, Punnen S, Spieler B, Abramowitz MC, Dal Pra A, Kryvenko ON, Pollack A, Stoyanova R. Longitudinal Changes and Predictive Value of Multiparametric MRI Features for Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with MRI-Guided Lattice Extreme Ablative Dose (LEAD) Boost Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14184475. [PMID: 36139635 PMCID: PMC9496901 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14184475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2022] [Revised: 09/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
We investigated the longitudinal changes in multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) (T2-weighted, Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC), and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced (DCE-)MRI) of prostate cancer patients receiving Lattice Extreme Ablative Dose (LEAD) radiotherapy (RT) and the capability of their imaging features to predict RT outcome based on endpoint biopsies. Ninety-five mpMRI exams from 25 patients, acquired pre-RT and at 3-, 9-, and 24-months post-RT were analyzed. MRI/Ultrasound-fused biopsies were acquired pre- and at two-years post-RT (endpoint). Five regions of interest (ROIs) were analyzed: Gross tumor volume (GTV), normally-appearing tissue (NAT) and peritumoral volume in both peripheral (PZ) and transition (TZ) zones. Diffusion and perfusion radiomics features were extracted from mpMRI and compared before and after RT using two-tailed Student t-tests. Selected features at the four scan points and their differences (Δ radiomics) were used in multivariate logistic regression models to predict the endpoint biopsy positivity. Baseline ADC values were significantly different between GTV, NAT-PZ, and NAT-TZ (p-values < 0.005). Pharmaco-kinetic features changed significantly in the GTV at 3-month post-RT compared to baseline. Several radiomics features at baseline and three-months post-RT were significantly associated with endpoint biopsy positivity and were used to build models with high predictive power of this endpoint (AUC = 0.98 and 0.89, respectively). Our study characterized the RT-induced changes in perfusion and diffusion. Quantitative imaging features from mpMRI show promise as being predictive of endpoint biopsy positivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmad Algohary
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Mohammad Alhusseini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Adrian L. Breto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Deukwoo Kwon
- Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Shared Resource, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Isaac R. Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Sandra M. Gaston
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Patricia Castillo
- Department of Radiology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Sanoj Punnen
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Desai Sethi Urology Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Benjamin Spieler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Matthew C. Abramowitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Alan Dal Pra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Oleksandr N. Kryvenko
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Desai Sethi Urology Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Alan Pollack
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Radka Stoyanova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-305-243-5856
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Collins K, Cheng L. Morphologic spectrum of treatment-related changes in prostate tissue and prostate cancer: An Updated Review. Hum Pathol 2022; 127:56-66. [PMID: 35716730 DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2022.06.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2022] [Accepted: 06/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
A wide range of treatment options is available to patients with prostate cancer. Some treatments are standard (currently used) while some are emerging therapies. Androgen deprivation therapy is typically reserved for localized or metastatic prostate cancer not amenable to surgery. Radiation therapy may be offered to individuals for local therapy with curative intent in low- or intermediate-risk disease that may have a high probability of progression on active surveillance or where surgery is not suitable. Focal therapy/ablation treatment is an alternative approach for those who prefer to avoid radical prostatectomy for localized disease of low- or intermediate-risk or as salvage therapy following failed radiation therapy. Chemotherapy and immunotherapy remain under investigation and are currently used for androgen-independent disease or hormone-refractory prostate cancer; however a better understand therapeutic efficacy is needed. Histopathologic changes observed in benign and malignant prostate tissue induced by hormonal therapies and radiation therapy is well described, while treatment-related effects secondary to novel therapies continue to be documented although their clinical significance is not absolutely clear. An informed and accurate evaluation of post-treatment prostate specimens requires pathologists with diagnostic acumen and knowledge relating to the histopathologic spectrum associated with each treatment option. In situations when clinical history is lacking, but morphologic features are suggestive of prior treatment, pathologists are encouraged to consult clinical colleagues regarding prior treatment history including details of when treatment was initiated and duration of therapy. This review aims to provide a concise update of current and emerging therapies for prostate cancer, histologic alterations and recommendations on Gleason grading.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katrina Collins
- Department of Pathology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Liang Cheng
- Department of Pathology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Liu W, Loblaw A, Laidley D, Fakir H, Mendez L, Davidson M, Kassam Z, Lee TY, Ward A, Thiessen J, Bayani J, Conyngham J, Bailey L, Andrews JD, Bauman G. Imaging Biomarkers in Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: A Review and Clinical Trial Protocol. Front Oncol 2022; 12:863848. [PMID: 35494042 PMCID: PMC9043802 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.863848] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Advances in imaging have changed prostate radiotherapy through improved biochemical control from focal boost and improved detection of recurrence. These advances are reviewed in the context of prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and the ARGOS/CLIMBER trial protocol. ARGOS/CLIMBER will evaluate 1) the safety and feasibility of SBRT with focal boost guided by multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 2) imaging and laboratory biomarkers for response to SBRT. To date, response to prostate SBRT is most commonly evaluated using the Phoenix Criteria for biochemical failure. The drawbacks of this approach include lack of lesion identification, a high false-positive rate, and delay in identifying treatment failure. Patients in ARGOS/CLIMBER will receive dynamic 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and mpMRI prior to SBRT for treatment planning and at 6 and 24 months after SBRT to assess response. Imaging findings will be correlated with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and biopsy results, with the goal of early, non-invasive, and accurate identification of treatment failure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei Liu
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre and Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Center, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David Laidley
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, St. Joseph's Health Centre and Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Hatim Fakir
- Department of Oncology and Department of Medical Biophysics, London Health Sciences Centre and Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Lucas Mendez
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre and Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Melanie Davidson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Center, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Zahra Kassam
- Department of Medical Imaging, St. Joseph's Health Care and Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Ting-Yim Lee
- Department of Medical Biophysics, Western University and Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada
| | - Aaron Ward
- Department of Medical Biophysics, Western University and Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada
| | - Jonathan Thiessen
- Department of Medical Biophysics, Western University and Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada
| | - Jane Bayani
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Laura Bailey
- Clinical Research Unit, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada
| | - Joseph D Andrews
- Clinical Research Unit, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada
| | - Glenn Bauman
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre and Western University, London, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Evaristo G, Khadang B, Kool R, Marcq G, Farag MS, Kassouf W, Brimo F. Morphologic alterations post trimodal therapy in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma: Understanding the impact of post-treatment changes on the pathological interpretation and their potential clinical correlates. Hum Pathol 2022; 126:2-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2022.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2022] [Revised: 04/20/2022] [Accepted: 04/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
|
11
|
Sargos P, Supiot S, Créhange G, Fromont-Hankard G, Barret E, Beauval JB, Brureau L, Dariane C, Fiard G, Gauthé M, Mathieu R, Roubaud G, Ruffion A, Renard-Penna R, Neuzillet Y, Rouprêt M, Ploussard G. Oncologic Impact and Safety of Pre-Operative Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate and Bladder Cancer: A Comprehensive Review from the Cancerology Committee of the Association Française d'Urologie. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13236070. [PMID: 34885179 PMCID: PMC8656987 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13236070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2021] [Revised: 11/26/2021] [Accepted: 11/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Radiotherapy may have an interesting role of reinforcing the loco-regional control of cancer, in addition to surgery, when used as a preoperative treatment. This sequence has demonstrated its efficacy and safety in various malignancies, but no strong data exist in the era of uro-oncology. In this review article, we aim to highlight the potential usefulness of preoperative radiotherapy in prostate and muscle-invasive bladder cancer, aiming to enhance pathological response and local control and to prevent intraoperative tumor seeding. We also emphasize the need for further clinical studies assessing the functional safety of subsequent surgical procedures in a competitive context of new systemic agents that have proven to demonstrate a survival benefit in locally advanced urologic cancers. Abstract Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) is commonly used for the treatment of various malignancies, including sarcomas, rectal, and gynaecological cancers, but it is preferentially used as a competitive treatment to radical surgery in uro-oncology or as a salvage procedure in cases of local recurrence. Nevertheless, preoperative RT represents an attractive strategy to prevent from intraoperative tumor seeding in the operative field, to sterilize microscopic extension outside the organ, and to enhance the pathological and/or imaging tumor response rate. Several clinical works support this research field in uro-oncology. In this review article, we summarized the oncologic impact and safety of preoperative RT in localized prostate and muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Preliminary studies suggest that both modalities can be complementary as initial primary tumor treatments and that a pre-operative radiotherapy strategy could be beneficial in a well-defined population of patients who are at a very high-risk of local relapse. Future prospective trials are warranted to evaluate the oncologic benefit of such a combination of local treatments in addition to new life-prolonging systemic therapies, such as immunotherapy, and new generation hormone therapies. Moreover, the safety and the feasibility of salvage surgical procedures due to non-response or local recurrence after pelvic RT remain poorly evaluated in that context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, 33000 Bordeaux, France;
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiotherapy, Insitut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest, 44800 St-Herblain, France;
| | - Gilles Créhange
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Curie, 75005 Paris, France;
| | | | - Eric Barret
- Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France;
| | | | - Laurent Brureau
- Department of Urology, CHU de Pointe-à-Pitre, University of Antilles, University of Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, Irset (Institut de Recherche en Santé, Environnement et Travail)—UMR_S 1085, 97110 Pointe-à-Pitre, France;
| | - Charles Dariane
- Department of Urology, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, APHP, Paris—Paris University—U1151 Inserm-INEM, Necker, 75015 Paris, France;
| | - Gaëlle Fiard
- Department of Urology, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC-IMAG, 38000 Grenoble, France;
| | - Mathieu Gauthé
- Unité de Recherche Clinique en Économie de la Santé, CRESS METHODS INSERM UMR 1153, 75000 Paris, France;
| | - Romain Mathieu
- Department of Urology, CHU Rennes, 35033 Rennes, France;
| | - Guilhem Roubaud
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Bergonié, 33000 Bordeaux, France;
| | - Alain Ruffion
- Service d’Urologie Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69002 Lyon, France;
- Equipe 2, Centre d’Innovation en Cancérologie de Lyon (EA 3738 CICLY), Faculté de Médecine Lyon Sud, Université Lyon 1, 69002 Lyon, France
| | - Raphaële Renard-Penna
- Department of Radiology, Sorbonne University, AP-HP, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, 75013 Paris, France;
| | - Yann Neuzillet
- Department of Urology, Hôpital Foch, 92151 Suresnes, France;
| | - Morgan Rouprêt
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, 75013 Paris, France;
| | - Guillaume Ploussard
- Department of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hôpital, 31130 Quint Fonsegrives, France;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +33-5-32027202; Fax: +33-5-32027203
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ma TM, Roy S, Wu X, Mantz C, Fuller D, Miszczyk L, Napieralska A, Namysł-Kaletka A, Bagshaw HP, Buyyounouski MK, Glicksman R, Loblaw DA, Katz A, Upadhyaya SK, Nickols N, Steinberg ML, Philipson R, Aghdam N, Suy S, Pepin A, Collins SP, Boutros P, Rettig MB, Calais J, Wang M, Zaorsky N, Kishan AU. Refining the definition of biochemical failure in the era of stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer: The Phoenix definition and beyond. Radiother Oncol 2021; 166:1-7. [PMID: 34774650 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2021] [Revised: 11/01/2021] [Accepted: 11/02/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
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, PSA18month/PSA6month) 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).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ting Martin Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, USA
| | - Soumyajit Roy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA
| | - Xue Wu
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, USA
| | | | - Donald Fuller
- Division of Genesis Healthcare Partners Inc, CyberKnife Centers of San Diego Inc, USA
| | - Leszek Miszczyk
- Department of Radiotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Gliwice Branch, Poland
| | - Alexandra Napieralska
- Department of Radiotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Gliwice Branch, Poland
| | - Agnieska Namysł-Kaletka
- Department of Radiotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Gliwice Branch, Poland
| | - Hilary P Bagshaw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, USA
| | - Mark K Buyyounouski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, USA
| | | | - D Andrew Loblaw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Canada
| | | | - Shrinivasa K Upadhyaya
- Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of California, Davis, USA
| | - Nicholas Nickols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, USA
| | | | | | - Nima Aghdam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, USA
| | - Simeng Suy
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington D.C., USA
| | - Abigail Pepin
- University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, USA
| | - Sean P Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington D.C., USA
| | - Paul Boutros
- University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, USA
| | | | - Jeremie Calais
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, University of California Los Angeles, USA
| | - Ming Wang
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, USA
| | - Nicholas Zaorsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, USA
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Anderson E, Smyth LML, O'Sullivan R, Ryan A, Lawrentschuk N, Grummet J, See AW. Focal low dose-rate brachytherapy for low to intermediate risk prostate cancer: preliminary experience at an Australian institution. Transl Androl Urol 2021; 10:3591-3603. [PMID: 34733655 PMCID: PMC8511546 DOI: 10.21037/tau-21-508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2021] [Accepted: 08/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Focal treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a hybrid approach combining ablative treatment of the involved prostate gland and continued active surveillance (AS) of the unaffected gland. Low dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy can be used as a lesion-targeted focal therapy, however, further studies are required to support its use. The aim of this study is to evaluate the dosimetry, toxicity and oncological outcomes of men receiving lesion-targeted focal LDR brachytherapy for low to intermediate risk PCa. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of 26 men with unifocal, low to intermediate grade PCa diagnosed on a combination of multiparametric-magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and targeted plus template transperineal (TP) biopsy, who received focal LDR brachytherapy at a single institution. Brachytherapy involved a single monotherapy implant using iodine-125 seeds to deliver a prescribed dose of 145 Gy to the index lesion. Results The mean focal planning target volume (F-PTV) as a percentage of the prostate volume was 24.5%. The percentage of the focal gross tumour volume (F-GTV) receiving 100% of the prescription dose was 100% for 12 patients and ≥98% for 18 patients. The median follow-up for toxicity and biochemical control outcomes was 23.1 [interquartile range (IQR) 19.1–31.3] and 24.2 (IQR 17.9–30.0) months, respectively. Grade 2 urinary and erectile toxicities were reported by 29.2% and 45.8% of patients, respectively, with resolution of urinary symptoms to baseline by last follow-up. There were no grade ≥3 urinary or erectile toxicities or grade ≥2 rectal toxicity. All 21 patients who underwent a repeat mp-MRI and TP biopsy at 12–24 months post-treatment were negative for clinically significant disease and 25 (96.2%) patients were free from biochemical failure (FFBF). Conclusions Focal LDR brachytherapy is associated with a favourable toxicity profile and a high rate of control of significant PCa at 12–18 months post-treatment. We have commenced the LIBERATE prospective registry in focal LDR brachytherapy based on the highly encouraging outcomes of this initial experience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elliot Anderson
- Department of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | - Richard O'Sullivan
- Healthcare Imaging Services, Richmond, Australia.,Department of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Andrew Ryan
- TissuPath Specialist Pathology Services, Mount Waverley, Australia
| | - Nathan Lawrentschuk
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.,EJ Whitten Centre for Prostate Cancer Research, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jeremy Grummet
- Department of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.,Epworth Healthcare, Richmond, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Zelefsky MJ, Goldman DA, Hopkins M, Pinitpatcharalert A, McBride S, Gorovets D, Ehdaie B, Fine SW, Reuter VE, Tyagi N, Happersett L, Teyateeti A, Zhang Z, Kollmeier MA. Predictors for post-treatment biopsy outcomes after prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2021; 159:33-38. [PMID: 33587971 PMCID: PMC10187562 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2020] [Revised: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate predictors associated with post-treatment biopsy outcomes after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS 257 patients treated with prostate SBRT to dose levels of 32.5 Gy to >40 Gy in 5-6 fractions underwent a post-treatment biopsy performed approximately two years after treatment to evaluate local control status. 73 had% intermediate-risk disease (n = 187) and the remaining 17% (n = 43) and 10% (n = 27) had low-risk and high-risk disease, respectively. RESULTS The incidence of positive, negative, and treatment-effect post-treatment biopsies were 15.6%, 57.6%, and 26.8%, respectively. The incidence of a positive biopsy according to dose was 37.5% (n = 9/24), 21.4% (n = 6/28), 19.4% (n = 6/31), and 10.9% (n = 19/174) for 32.5 Gy, 35 Gy, 37.5 Gy, and >40 Gy, respectively. In a multivariable model, patients treated with SBRT doses of <40 Gy and those with unfavorable-intermediate-risk or high-risk disease had higher likelihood of a positive post-treatment biopsy. A positive post-SBRT biopsy was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of subsequent PSA relapse at five years (Positive biopsy: 57%, 95% CI: 29-77% compared to negative biopsy: 7%, 95% CI: 3-14%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Based on two-year post-SBRT biopsies, excellent tumor control was achieved when dose levels of 40 Gy or higher were used. Standard SBRT dose levels of 35-37.5 Gy were associated with a higher likelihood of a positive post-treatment biopsy. Two-year positive post-treatment biopsies pre-dated the development of PSA failure in the majority of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
| | - Debra A Goldman
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Margaret Hopkins
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | | | - Sean McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Daniel Gorovets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Samson W Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Victor E Reuter
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Neelam Tyagi
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Laura Happersett
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - Achiraya Teyateeti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA; Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Zhigang Zhang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
| | - Marisa A Kollmeier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Hsu IC, Rodgers JP, Shinohara K, Purdy J, Michalski J, Roach M, Vigneault E, Ivker RA, Pryzant RM, Kuettel M, Taussky D, Gustafson GS, Raben A, Sandler HM. Long-Term Results of NRG Oncology/RTOG 0321: A Phase II Trial of Combined High Dose Rate Brachytherapy and External Beam Radiation Therapy for Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 110:700-707. [PMID: 33186617 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2020] [Revised: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 11/19/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report the long-term outcome of patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy and high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy from a prospective multi-institutional trial conducted by NRG Oncology/RTOG. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with clinically localized (T1c-T3b) prostate cancer without prior history of transurethral resection of prostate or hip prosthesis were eligible for this study. All patients were treated with a combination of 45 Gy in 25 fractions from external beam radiation therapy and one HDR implant delivering 19 Gy in 2 fractions. Adverse events (AE) were collected using Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3. Cumulative incidence was used to estimate time to severe late gastrointestinal (GI)/genitourinary (GU) toxicity, biochemical failure, disease-specific mortality, local failure, and distant failure. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS One hundred and twenty-nine patients were enrolled from July 2004 to May 2006. AE data was available for 115 patients. Patients were National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate to very high risk. The median age was 68, T1c-T2c 91%, T3a-T3b 9%, PSA ≤10 70%, PSA >10 to ≤20 30%, GS 6 10%, GS 7 72%, and GS 8 to 10 18%. Forty-three percent of patients received hormonal therapy. At a median follow-up time of 10 years, there were 6 (5%) patients with grade 3 GI and GU treatment-related AEs, and no late grade 4 to 5 GI and GU AEs. At 5 and 10 years, the rate of late grade 3 gastrointestinal and genitourinary AEs was 4% and 5%, respectively. Five- and 10-year overall survival rates were 95% and 76%. Biochemical failure rates per Phoenix definition at 5 and 10 years were 14% and 23%. The 10-year rate of disease-specific mortality was 6%. At 5 and 10 years, the rates of distant failure were 4% and 8%, respectively. The rates of local failure at 5 and 10 years were 2% at both time points. CONCLUSIONS Combined modality treatment using HDR prostate brachytherapy leads to excellent long-term clinical outcomes in this prospective multi-institutional trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I-Chow Hsu
- University of California, San Francisco, California.
| | | | | | - James Purdy
- University of California Davis, Davis, California
| | | | - Mack Roach
- University of California, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | | | | | - Daniel Taussky
- Center Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal-Notre Dame
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, Simko JP, Kurhanewicz J, Santos RD, Feng FY, Reiter RE, Rettig MB, Nickols NG, Kishan AU, Slavik R, Carroll PR, Lawhn-Heath C, Herrmann K, Czernin J, Hope TA. False positive PSMA PET for tumor remnants in the irradiated prostate and other interpretation pitfalls in a prospective multi-center trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 48:501-508. [PMID: 32808077 PMCID: PMC7835157 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-04945-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2020] [Accepted: 06/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Purpose Readers need to be informed about potential pitfalls of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET interpretation. Methods Here we report [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET findings discordant with the histopathology/composite reference standard in a recently published prospective trial on 635 patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Results Consensus reads were false positive in 20 regions of 17/217 (8%) patients with lesion validation. Majority of the false positive interpretations (13 of 20, 65%) occurred in the context of suspected prostate (bed) relapse (T) after radiotherapy (n = 11); other false positive findings were noted for prostate bed post prostatectomy (T, n = 2), pelvic nodes (N, n = 2), or extra pelvic lesions (M, n = 5). Major sources of false positive findings were PSMA-expressing residual adenocarcinoma with marked post-radiotherapy treatment effect. False negative interpretation occurred in 8 regions of 6/79 (8%) patients with histopathology validation, including prostate (bed) (n = 5), pelvic nodes (n = 1), and extra pelvic lesions (n = 2). Lesions were missed mostly due to small metastases or adjacent bladder/urine uptake. Conclusion [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET at biochemical recurrence resulted in less than 10% false positive interpretations. Post-radiotherapy prostate uptake was a major source of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET false positivity. In few cases, PET correctly detects residual PSMA expression post-radiotherapy, originating however from treated, benign tissue or potentially indolent tumor remnants. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02940262 and NCT03353740. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00259-020-04945-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wolfgang P Fendler
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. .,Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
| | - Jeremie Calais
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Matthias Eiber
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jeffrey P Simko
- Department of Anatomic Pathology and Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - John Kurhanewicz
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Romelyn Delos Santos
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Felix Y Feng
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Robert E Reiter
- Department of Urology, UCLA Medical Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Matthew B Rettig
- Department of Urology, UCLA Medical Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Nicholas G Nickols
- Department of Urology, UCLA Medical Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Roger Slavik
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Peter R Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Courtney Lawhn-Heath
- Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Johannes Czernin
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Thomas A Hope
- Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Pollack A, Chinea FM, Bossart E, Kwon D, Abramowitz MC, Lynne C, Jorda M, Marples B, Patel VN, Wu X, Reis I, Studenski MT, Casillas J, Stoyanova R. Phase I Trial of MRI-Guided Prostate Cancer Lattice Extreme Ablative Dose (LEAD) Boost Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 107:305-315. [PMID: 32084522 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.01.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2019] [Revised: 01/23/2020] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE A phase I clinical trial was designed to test the feasibility and toxicity of administering high-dose spatially fractionated radiation therapy to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined prostate tumor volumes, in addition to standard treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS We enrolled 25 men with favorable to high-risk prostate cancer and 1 to 3 suspicious multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) gross tumor volumes (GTVs). The mpMRI-GTVs were treated on day 1 with 12 to 14 Gy via dose cylinders using a lattice extreme ablative dose technique. The entire prostate, along with the proximal seminal vesicles, was then treated to 76 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction. For some high-risk patients, the distal seminal vesicles and pelvic lymph nodes received 56 Gy at 1.47 Gy/fraction concurrently in 38 fractions. The total dose to the lattice extreme ablative dose cylinder volume(s) was 88 to 90 Gy (112-123 Gy in 2.0 Gy equivalents, assuming an α-to-β ratio of 3). RESULTS Dosimetric parameters were satisfactorily met. Median follow-up was 66 months. There were no grade 3 acute/subacute genitourinary or gastrointestinal adverse events. Maximum late genitourinary toxicity was grade 1 in 15 (60%), grade 2 in 4 (16%), and grade 4 in 1 (4%; sepsis after a posttreatment transurethral resection). Maximum late gastrointestinal toxicity was grade 1 in 11 (44%) and grade 2 in 4 (16%). Two patients experienced biochemical failure. CONCLUSIONS External beam radiation therapy delivered with an upfront spatially fractionated, stereotactic high-dose mpMRI-GTV boost is feasible and was not associated with any unexpected events. The technique is now part of a follow-up phase II randomized trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Pollack
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
| | - Felix M Chinea
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Elizabeth Bossart
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Deukwoo Kwon
- Departments of Public Health Sciences and Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Shared Resource, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Matthew C Abramowitz
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Charles Lynne
- Departments of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Merce Jorda
- Departments of Pathology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Brian Marples
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Vivek N Patel
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Xiaodong Wu
- Biophysics Research Institute of America, Miami, Florida
| | - Isildinha Reis
- Departments of Public Health Sciences and Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Shared Resource, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Matthew T Studenski
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Javier Casillas
- Department of Radiology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Radka Stoyanova
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Yang C, Humphrey PA. False-Negative Histopathologic Diagnosis of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2019; 144:326-334. [DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2019-0456-ra] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Context.—Histopathologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the prostate is based on light-microscopic examination of hematoxylin-eosin–stained tissue sections. Multiple factors, including preanalytic and analytic elements, affect the ability of the pathologist to accurately diagnose prostatic adenocarcinoma. False-negative diagnosis, that is, failure to diagnose prostatic adenocarcinoma, may have serious clinical consequences. It is important to delineate and understand those factors that may affect and cause histopathologic false-negative diagnoses of prostatic adenocarcinoma.Objectives.—To review common factors involved in histopathologic underdiagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma, including the following: (1) tissue processing and sectioning artifacts, (2) minimal adenocarcinoma, (3) deceptively benign appearing variants of acinar adenocarcinoma, (4) single cell adenocarcinoma, and (5) treatment effects.Data Sources.—Data sources included published, peer-reviewed literature and personal experiences of the senior author.Conclusions.—Knowledge of the reasons for histopathologic false-negative diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the prostate is an important component in the diagnostic assessment of prostate tissue sections. Diagnostic awareness of the histomorphologic presentations of small (minimal) adenocarcinoma; deceptively benign appearing variants including atrophic, foamy gland, microcystic, and pseudohyperplastic variants; single cell carcinoma; and treatment effects is critical for establishment of a definitive diagnosis of adenocarcinoma and the prevention of false-negative diagnoses of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chen Yang
- From the Department of Pathology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Peter A. Humphrey
- From the Department of Pathology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Abstract
Since its development between 1966 and 1977, the Gleason grading system has remained one of the most important prognostic indicators in prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma. The grading system was first majorly revised in 2005 and again in 2014. With the publication of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging manual in 2018, the classification of prostate cancer and its reporting have further evolved and are now included as part of staging criteria. This article reflects the aspects that are most influential on daily practice. A brief summary of 3 ancillary commercially available genomic tests is also provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beth L Braunhut
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1400 North West 12th Avenue, Miami, FL, 33136 USA
| | - Sanoj Punnen
- Department of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1150 North West 14th Street, Miami, FL 33136, USA; Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1475 North West 12th Ave, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Oleksandr N Kryvenko
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1400 North West 12th Avenue, Miami, FL, 33136 USA; Department of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1150 North West 14th Street, Miami, FL 33136, USA; Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1475 North West 12th Ave, Miami, FL 33136, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Åström L, Sandin F, Holmberg L. Good prognosis following a PSA bounce after high dose rate brachytherapy and external radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2018; 129:561-566. [PMID: 30193693 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2018] [Revised: 08/05/2018] [Accepted: 08/20/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND PSA kinetics after curative radiotherapy for prostate cancer is an important part of the posttreatment evaluation. We analysed PSA bounce occurrence after combined high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) and external radiotherapy (ERT). MATERIAL & METHODS We analysed 623 patients treated from 1995 to 2008. The median age was 66 years (47-79). The median initial PSA was 12 ng/ml (0.1-224). Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy was given to 429 patients. ERT was given with 2 Gy fractions to 50 Gy and HDR-BT in two 10 Gy fractions. The median follow-up was 11 years (range 2-266 months). PSA bounce was defined as a temporary rise in PSA >0.2 ng/ml. PSA failure was defined according to the Phoenix definition. RESULTS PSA bounce occurred in 159 patients (26%), where 56 patients had a bounce amplitude >2 ng/ml and 31 patients had multiple bounces. Median time to bounce peak was 15 (3-103) months with a median bounce value of 1.5 (0.3-12)ng/ml. Younger age and lower Gleason scores were associated with PSA bounce. In a Cox regression analysis with PSA bounce as a time-dependent covariate and adjusted for other prognostic factors, PSA bounce was associated with a lower risk for PSA failure (HR = 0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.70). CONCLUSION PSA bounce after HDR-BT combined with ERT is common and associated with a good prognosis. As the relapse risk after an early bounce is very low, the findings should alert clinicians not to initiate salvage treatment too early. Research in prospective identification of PSA bounce is clinically relevant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lennart Åström
- Section of Clinical and Experimental Oncology, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, University of Uppsala, Sweden.
| | | | - Lars Holmberg
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Uppsala, Sweden; Translational Oncology & Urology Research (TOUR), School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Yang F, Ford JC, Dogan N, Padgett KR, Breto AL, Abramowitz MC, Dal Pra A, Pollack A, Stoyanova R. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based radiomics for prostate cancer radiotherapy. Transl Androl Urol 2018; 7:445-458. [PMID: 30050803 PMCID: PMC6043736 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2018.06.05] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2018] [Accepted: 06/05/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
In radiotherapy (RT) of prostate cancer, dose escalation has been shown to reduce biochemical failure. Dose escalation only to determinate prostate tumor habitats has the potential to improve tumor control with less toxicity than when the entire prostate is dose escalated. Other issues in the treatment of the RT patient include the choice of the RT technique (hypo- or standard fractionation) and the use and length of concurrent/adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Up to 50% of high-risk men demonstrate biochemical failure suggesting that additional strategies for defining and treating patients based on improved risk stratification are required. The use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is rapidly gaining momentum in the management of prostate cancer because of its improved diagnostic potential and its ability to combine functional and anatomical information. Currently, the Prostate Imaging, Reporting and Diagnosis System (PIRADS) is the standard of care for region of interest (ROI) identification and risk classification. However, PIRADS was not designed for 3D tumor volume delineation; there is a large degree of subjectivity and PIRADS does not accurately and reproducibly elucidate inter- and intra-lesional spatial heterogeneity. "Radiomics", as it refers to the extraction and analysis of large number of advanced quantitative radiological features from medical images using high throughput methods, is perfectly suited as an engine to effectively sift through the multiple series of prostate mpMRI sequences and quantify regions of interest. The radiomic efforts can be summarized in two main areas: (I) detection/segmentation of the suspicious lesion; and (II) assessment of the aggressiveness of prostate cancer. As related to RT, the goal of the latter is in particular to identify patients at high risk for metastatic disease; and the aim of the former is to identify and segment cancerous lesions and thus provide targets for radiation boost. The article is structured as follows: first, we describe the radiomic approach; and second, we discuss the radiomic pipeline as tailored for RT of prostate cancer. In this process we summarize the current efforts and progress in integrating mpMRI radiomics into the radiotherapeutic management of prostate cancer with emphasis placed on its role in treatment target definition, treatment plan strategizing, and prognostic assessment. The described concepts, methods and tools are not currently applicable to the radiation oncology practice outside of the research setting. More data are required in the form of clinical trials to assess the robustness of radiomics-based predictive models, and to maximize the efficacy of these models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fei Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - John C. Ford
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Nesrin Dogan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Kyle R. Padgett
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Adrian L. Breto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Matthew C. Abramowitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Alan Dal Pra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Alan Pollack
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| | - Radka Stoyanova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Tisseverasinghe SA, Crook JM. The role of salvage brachytherapy for local relapse after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol 2018; 7:414-435. [PMID: 30050801 PMCID: PMC6043745 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2018.05.09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer amongst men. For localized disease, there currently exist several reliable treatment modalities including surgery, radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Our growing understanding of this disease indicates that local control plays a very important role in prevention of subsequent dissemination. Many improvements to external beam radiotherapy over recent years have decreased toxicity and improved outcomes, but nonetheless, local relapse remains common. Many salvage options exist for locally recurrent prostate cancer, but are rarely offered, partly because of the fear of toxicity. Many men with isolated local recurrence therefore do not receive potentially curative second line treatment and are instead treated with palliative androgen suppression. Selection plays an important role in determining which individuals are likely to benefit from salvage. Those at high risk of pre-existing micro-metastatic disease despite negative staging scans are unlikely to benefit. Prostate brachytherapy has evolved over the more than 3 decades of experience. Modern techniques allow more precise tumor localization and dose delivery. Better understanding of dosimetric parameters can distinguish optimal from suboptimal implants. Salvage brachytherapy can be an effective treatment for locally recurrent prostate cancer after prior external beam radiotherapy. We review the literature pertaining to both low dose rate (LDR) and high dose rate (HDR) salvage brachytherapy and discuss patient selection, optimal dose, treatment volume and toxicity avoidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven A Tisseverasinghe
- BC Cancer Agency Centre for the Southern Interior, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Juanita M Crook
- BC Cancer Agency Centre for the Southern Interior, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Kass-Iliyya A, Jovic G, Murphy C, Fisher C, Syndikus I, Jose C, Scrase CD, Graham JD, Nicol D, Sydes MR, Dearnaley D. Two-years Postradiotherapy Biopsies: Lessons from MRC RT01 Trial. Eur Urol 2018; 73:968-976. [PMID: 29307509 PMCID: PMC5954168 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.12.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2017] [Accepted: 12/14/2017] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The importance of 2-yr postradiotherapy prostate biopsy status remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE To assess the value of 2 year post treatment biopsies in a randomised trial of radiotherapy dose escalation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Between 1998 and 2001, 843 men with localised prostate cancer were randomised to receive either control-64Gy or escalated-74Gy conformal radiotherapy (CFRT) in the MRC RT01 trial in combination with 3-6-mo neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Prostate biopsies were planned at 2 yr from start of CFRT in suitable men. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Prostate biopsy results and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels performed at 2 yr post-CFRT were evaluated with long-term biochemical progression free survival (bPFS) and overall survival. Outcome measures were timed from the 2-yr biopsy using a landmark approach. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A 2-yr biopsy was performed in 312/843 patients. One hundred and seventy-seven patients were included in the per-protocol group with median follow-up of 7.8 yr from biopsy. Median PSA at biopsy was 0.5ng/ml. Sixty-four bPFS events were reported: 46/145 (32%) in patients with negative, 6/18 (33%) suspicious, and 12/14 (86%) positive biopsies. A positive biopsy was prognostic of worse bPFS, going forward, compared with negative and suspicious biopsies, hazard ratio (HR)=4.81 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.50-9.26, p<0.001). The estimate for survival was HR=1.58 (95% CI: 0.52-4.78, p=0.42). PSA values at 2 yr between 1.01ng/ml and 2.09ng/ml were also associated with subsequent PSA failures (HR=2.71, 95% CI: 1.98-3.71), bPFS events (HR=2.45, 95% CI: 1.81-3.32), and prostate cancer-specific survival (HR=2.87, 95% CI: 1.08-7.64) compared with PSA ≤1.0ng/ml. CONCLUSIONS Two-year postradiotherapy prostate biopsies have limited value in patients with PSA control but both positive biopsy and higher PSA status are strongly associated with future bPFS events. A policy of selected biopsy may provide an opportunity for early salvage interventions. PATIENT SUMMARY Routine 2-yr postradiotherapy biopsy is not recommended but can be considered in selected patients with unfavourable post-treatment prostate-specific antigen levels who are suitable for early salvage treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antoine Kass-Iliyya
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK; North Bristol Trust, Bristol, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Chakiath Jose
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | - John D Graham
- Taunton & Somerset National Health Service Foundation Trust, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK
| | | | | | - David Dearnaley
- Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospitals, Sutton and London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Treatment effects in prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 2018; 31:S110-121. [PMID: 29297495 DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2017.158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2017] [Revised: 09/24/2017] [Accepted: 09/24/2017] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
Nonsurgical treatments for prostate cancer include androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), radiation therapy (RT), ablative therapies, chemotherapy, and newly emerging immunotherapies. These approaches can be used alone or in combination depending on the clinical scenario. ADT is typically reserved for high-risk locally or systemically advanced disease that is not amenable to curative surgery. Radiation therapy can be used instead of surgery as primary therapy with curative intent for low-intermediate-risk disease as well as for control of locally advanced disease not suitable for surgery. Ablative therapies can be used as primary therapy for low-intermediate-risk disease or as salvage therapy for clinically localized disease where RT has failed. Chemotherapy and immune-based therapies are currently used for androgen-independent disease, although the indications for these approaches may well change as new data from clinical trials accrue. Pathologists should be able to recognize tissue changes associated with these treatments to provide information that will optimize patient management. This is particularly true in situations where clinical history of recent or remote nonsurgical treatment is not provided with the specimen. In the absence of this information, pathologists encountering the features described herein are encouraged to review patient records or communicate directly with clinical colleagues to determine how a given patient was treated and when.
Collapse
|
25
|
Abstract
This review focuses on histopathological aspects of carcinoma of the prostate. A tissue diagnosis of adenocarcinoma is often essential for establishing a diagnosis of prostate cancer, and the foundation for a tissue diagnosis is currently light microscopic examination of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained tissue sections. Markers detected by immunohistochemistry on tissue sections can support a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma that is primary in the prostate gland or metastatic. Histological variants of carcinoma of the prostate are important for diagnostic recognition of cancer or as clinicopathologic entities that have prognostic and/or therapeutic significance. Histological grading of adenocarcinoma of the prostate, including use of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) modified Gleason grades and the new grade groups, is one of the most powerful prognostic indicators for clinically localized prostate cancer, and is one of the most critical factors in determination of management of these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter A Humphrey
- Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06437
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Metcalfe MJ, Troncoso P, Guo CC, Chen HC, Bozkurt Y, Ward JF, Pisters LL. Salvage prostatectomy for post-radiation adenocarcinoma with treatment effect: Pathological and oncological outcomes. Can Urol Assoc J 2017; 11:E277-E284. [PMID: 28761588 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.4304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Prostate biopsies following localized radiation therapy for prostate cancer often demonstrate residual prostatic carcinoma with treatment effect (CTE). The final oncological outcome of prostatic CTE is currently uncertain. We studied the pathological and oncological outcomes for a large cohort of patients who had CTE on post-radiation therapy biopsy and subsequently underwent salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP). METHODS A single-centre retrospective review of all SRPs performed from 1995-2014 was performed. Cases were selected for this analysis if they had had a post-radiation "for-cause" biopsy. Biopsy results were compared to final pathology results following SRP. Pathological and clinical outcomes were compared by extent of treatment effect seen on the post-radiation biopsy. RESULTS A total of 70 patients who had salvage prostatectomy at MD Anderson Cancer Centre from 2007-2015 met study criteria. CTE was found on biopsy in the absence of other adenocarcinoma in 16 patients. Among them, one (7%) patient had no evidence of carcinoma at the time of salvage prostatectomy, four (27%) had CTE, three (20%) had adenocarcinoma with minimal or partial treatment effect (PTE), and seven (47%) had adenocarcinoma with no treatment effect (NTE). For those with CTE on biopsy, 69% had biochemical recurrence at a median time of 0.4 years (interquartile range [IQR] 0.22-1.52) vs. 52% for all patients (median 0.44 years, IQR 0.11-1.70) and 47% for those with no treatment effect (median 0.62 years, IQR 0.05-1.90). Metastasis developed after salvage prostatectomy in 11.8% of the whole cohort (8/68, median time to metastasis was 3.03 years, IQR 2.45-4.47), 26.7% of patients with CTE (median 3.2 years, IQR 1.96-4.44), and 6.7% of patients with NTE (median 2.45 years, IQR 0.98-2.86). Median recurrence-free survival was 2.78 years (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-5.43) for all patients, 0.51 years (95% CI 0.22-2.35) for those with CTE, and 4.95 years (95% CI 0.95-7.08) for those with NTE; the difference was not significant (p=0.13). On multivariate analysis, pre-SRP biopsy Gleason grade <7 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.38; 95% CI 0.14-1.02) and number of biopsy cores positive for carcinoma (HR 1.11; 95% CI 1.00-1.22) were significant for prediction of cancer recurrence. CONCLUSIONS Patients undergoing salvage prostatectomy for CTE or PTE demonstrated in a for-cause biopsy after radiation therapy had pathological evidence of viable, untreated cancer in more than 50% of cases and were at significant risk of adverse pathological features. Patients with CTE may therefore benefit from salvage radical prostatectomy. Our study is limited by its retrospective nature and sample size. More studies are required to further validate our findings and assess the benefit of SRP in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Metcalfe
- Department of Urology; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Patricia Troncoso
- Department of Pathology; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Charles C Guo
- Department of Pathology; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Hsiang-Chun Chen
- Department of Biostatistics; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Yasar Bozkurt
- Department of Urology; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| | - John F Ward
- Department of Urology; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Louis L Pisters
- Department of Urology; University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Centre, Houston, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Tetreault-Laflamme A, Crook J. Options for Salvage of Radiation Failures for Prostate Cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol 2017; 27:67-78. [DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2016.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
|
28
|
Nichols E, Kesmodel SB, Bellavance E, Drogula C, Tkaczuk K, Cohen RJ, Citron W, Morgan M, Staats P, Feigenberg S, Regine WF. Preoperative Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Preliminary Results of a Prospective, Phase 2 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 97:747-753. [PMID: 28244410 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.11.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2016] [Revised: 11/07/2016] [Accepted: 11/19/2016] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the feasibility of utilizing 3-dimensional conformal accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) in the preoperative setting followed by standard breast-conserving therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a prospective trial testing the feasibility of preoperative APBI followed by lumpectomy for patients with early-stage invasive ductal breast cancer. Eligible patients had T1-T2 (<3 cm), N0 tumors. Patients received 38.5 Gy in 3.85-Gy fractions delivered twice daily. Surgery was performed >21 days after radiation therapy. Adjuvant therapy was given as per standard of care. RESULTS Twenty-seven patients completed treatment. With a median follow-up of 3.6 years (range, 0.5-5 years), there have been no local or regional failures. A complete pathologic response according to hematoxylin and eosin stains was seen in 4 patients (15%). There were 4 grade 3 seromas. Patient-reported cosmetic outcome was rated as good to excellent in 79% of patients after treatment. CONCLUSIONS Preoperative 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy-APBI is feasible and well tolerated in select patients with early-stage breast cancer, with no reported local recurrences and good to excellent cosmetic results. The pathologic response rates associated with this nonablative APBI dose regimen are particularly encouraging and support further exploration of this paradigm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Nichols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| | - Susan B Kesmodel
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Emily Bellavance
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Cynthia Drogula
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Katherine Tkaczuk
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Randi J Cohen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Wendla Citron
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Michelle Morgan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Paul Staats
- Department of Pathology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Steven Feigenberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - William F Regine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Feasibility and Initial Dosimetric Findings for a Randomized Trial Using Dose-Painted Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Defined Targets in Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 95:827-34. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.01.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2015] [Revised: 01/22/2016] [Accepted: 01/27/2016] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
30
|
Kryvenko ON, Epstein JI. Prostate Cancer Grading: A Decade After the 2005 Modified Gleason Grading System. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016; 140:1140-52. [PMID: 26756649 DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2015-0487-sa] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Since 1966, when Donald Gleason, MD, first proposed grading prostate cancer based on its histologic architecture, there have been numerous changes in clinical and pathologic practices relating to prostate cancer. Patterns 1 and 2, comprising more than 30% of cases in the original publications by Gleason, are no longer reported on biopsy and are rarely diagnosed on radical prostatectomy. Many of these cases may even have been mimickers of prostate cancer that were described later with the use of contemporary immunohistochemistry. The original Gleason system predated many newly described variants of prostate cancer and our current concept of intraductal carcinoma. Gleason also did not describe how to report prostate cancer on biopsy with multiple cores of cancer or on radical prostatectomy with separate tumor nodules. To address these issues, the International Society of Urological Pathology first made revisions to the grading system in 2005, and subsequently in 2014. Additionally, a new grading system composed of Grade Groups 1 to 5 that was first developed in 2013 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and subsequently validated in a large multi-institutional and multimodal study was presented at the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology meeting and accepted both by participating pathologists as well as urologists, oncologists, and radiation therapists. In the present study, we describe updates to the grading of prostate cancer along with the new grading system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oleksandr N Kryvenko
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Department of Urology, and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida (Dr Kryvenko); and the Departments of Pathology, Urology, and Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland (Dr Epstein)
| | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Jalloh M, Leapman MS, Cowan JE, Shinohara K, Greene KL, Roach M, Chang AJ, Chan JM, Simko JP, Carroll PR. Patterns of Local Failure following Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2015; 194:977-82. [DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.04.111] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/22/2015] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mohamed Jalloh
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- Service d'Urologie-Andrologie, Hopital General de Grand Yoff, Dakar, Senegal
| | - Michael S. Leapman
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Janet E. Cowan
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Katsuto Shinohara
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Kirsten L. Greene
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Mack Roach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Albert J. Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - June M. Chan
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Jeffry P. Simko
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Peter R. Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
- University of California-San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Ennis RD, Quinn SA, Trichter F, Ryemon S, Jain A, Saigal K, Chandrashekhar S, Romas NA, Feleppa EJ. Phase I/II prospective trial of cancer-specific imaging using ultrasound spectrum analysis tissue-type imaging to guide dose-painting prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2015; 14:801-8. [PMID: 26235201 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2015.06.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2015] [Revised: 06/25/2015] [Accepted: 06/29/2015] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the technical feasibility, toxicity, dosimetry, and preliminary efficacy of dose-painting brachytherapy guided by ultrasound spectrum analysis tissue-type imaging (TTI) in low-risk, localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Fourteen men with prostate cancer who were candidates for brachytherapy as sole treatment were prospectively enrolled. Treatment planning goal was to escalate the tumor dose to 200% with a modest de-escalation of dose to remaining prostate compared with our standard. Primary end points included technical feasibility of TTI-guided brachytherapy and equivalent or better toxicity compared with standard brachytherapy. Secondary end points included dose escalation to tumor regions and de-escalated dose to nontumor regions on the preimplant plan, negative prostate biopsy at 2 years, and freedom from biochemical failure. RESULTS Thirteen of fourteen men successfully completed the TTI-guided brachytherapy procedure for a feasibility rate of 93%. A software malfunction resulted in switching one patient from TTI-guided to standard brachytherapy. An average of 2.7 foci per patient was demonstrated and treated with an escalated dose. Dosimetric goals on preplan were achieved. One patient expired from unrelated causes 65 days after brachytherapy. Toxicity was at least as low as standard brachytherapy. Two-year prostate biopsies were obtained from six men; five (83%) were definitively negative, one showed evidence of disease with treatment effect, and none were positive. No patients experienced biochemical recurrence after a median followup of 31.5 (24-52) months. CONCLUSIONS We have demonstrated that TTI-guided dose-painting prostate brachytherapy is technically feasible and results in clinical outcomes that are encouraging in terms of low toxicity and successful biochemical disease control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ronald D Ennis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY.
| | - S Aidan Quinn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Frieda Trichter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Shannon Ryemon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Anudh Jain
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Kunal Saigal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| | | | - Nicholas A Romas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Ernest J Feleppa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Bayne CE, Williams SB, Cooperberg MR, Gleave ME, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Novara G, Smaldone MC, Sooriakumaran P, Wiklund PN, Chapin BF. Treatment of the Primary Tumor in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Current Concepts and Future Perspectives. Eur Urol 2015; 69:775-87. [PMID: 26003223 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2015] [Accepted: 04/22/2015] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Multimodal treatment for men with locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) using neoadjuvant/adjuvant systemic therapy, surgery, and radiation therapy is being increasingly explored. There is also interest in the oncologic benefit of treating the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic PCa (mPCa). OBJECTIVE To perform a review of the literature regarding the treatment of the primary tumor in the setting of mPCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Medline, PubMed, and Scopus electronic databases were queried for English language articles from January 1990 to September 2014. Prospective and retrospective studies were included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS There is no published randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing local therapy and systemic therapy to systemic therapy alone in the treatment of mPCa. Prospective studies of men with locally advanced PCa and retrospective studies of occult node-positive PCa have consistently shown the addition of local therapy to a multimodal treatment regimen improves outcomes. Molecular and genomic evidence further suggests the primary tumor may have an active role in mPCa. CONCLUSIONS Treatment of the primary tumor in mPCa is being increasingly explored. While preclinical, translational, and retrospective evidence supports local therapy in advanced disease, further prospective studies are under way to evaluate this multimodal approach and identify the patients most likely to benefit from the inclusion of local therapy in the setting of metastatic disease. PATIENT SUMMARY In this review we explored preclinical and clinical evidence for treatment of the primary tumor in metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). We found evidence to support clinical trials investigating mPCa therapy that includes local treatment of the primary tumor. Currently, treating the primary tumor in mPCa is controversial and lacks high-level evidence sufficient for routine recommendation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher E Bayne
- Department of Urology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Stephen B Williams
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Matthew R Cooperberg
- Departments of Urology and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Martin E Gleave
- The Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Giacomo Novara
- Department of Surgery, Oncology, and Gastroenterology-Urology Clinic, University of Padua, Italy
| | - Marc C Smaldone
- Division of Urologic Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center-Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Prasanna Sooriakumaran
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Surgical Intervention Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Peter N Wiklund
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Brian F Chapin
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Post-radiotherapy prostate biopsies reveal heightened apex positivity relative to other prostate regions sampled. Radiother Oncol 2015; 115:101-6. [PMID: 25963053 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2014] [Revised: 03/09/2015] [Accepted: 03/10/2015] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Prostate biopsy positivity after radiotherapy (RT) is a significant determinant of eventual biochemical failure. We mapped pre- and post-treatment tumor locations to determine if residual disease is location-dependent. MATERIALS AND METHODS There were 303 patients treated on a randomized hypofractionation trial. Of these, 125 underwent prostate biopsy 2-years post-RT. Biopsy cores were mapped to a sextant template, and 86 patients with both pre-/post-treatment systematic sextant biopsies were analyzed. RESULTS The pretreatment distribution of positive biopsy cores was not significantly related to prostate region (base, mid, apex; p=0.723). Whereas all regions post-RT had reduced positive biopsies, the base was reduced to the greatest degree and the apex the least (p=0.045). In 38 patients who had a positive post-treatment biopsy, there was change in the rate of apical positivity before and after treatment (76 vs. 71%; p=0.774), while significant reductions were seen in the mid and base. CONCLUSION In our experience, persistence of prostate tumor cells after RT increases going from the base to apex. MRI was used in planning and image guidance was performed daily during treatment, so geographic miss of the apex is unlikely. Nonetheless, the pattern observed suggests that attention to apex dosimetry is a priority.
Collapse
|
35
|
D'Alimonte L, Helou J, Sherman C, Loblaw A, Chung HT, Ravi A, Deabreu A, Zhang L, Morton G. The clinical significance of persistent cancer cells on prostate biopsy after high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2015; 14:309-14. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2014.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2014] [Revised: 10/14/2014] [Accepted: 10/16/2014] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
36
|
Salvage low-dose-rate permanent seed brachytherapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer: Association between dose and late toxicity. Brachytherapy 2015; 14:342-9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2015.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2014] [Revised: 01/16/2015] [Accepted: 01/19/2015] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
|
37
|
Krauss DJ, Hu C, Bahary JP, Souhami L, Gore EM, Chafe SMJ, Leibenhaut MH, Narayan S, Torres-Roca J, Michalski J, Zeitzer KL, Donavanik V, Sandler H, McGowan DG, Jones CU, Shipley WU. Importance of Local Control in Early-Stage Prostate Cancer: Outcomes of Patients With Positive Post-Radiation Therapy Biopsy Results Treated in RTOG 9408. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2015; 92:863-73. [PMID: 26104939 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2015] [Revised: 03/16/2015] [Accepted: 03/18/2015] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess the association between positive post-radiation therapy (RT) biopsy results and subsequent clinical outcomes in males with localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Radiation Therapy Oncology Group study 94-08 analyzed 1979 males with prostate cancer, stage T1b-T2b and prostate-specific antigen concentrations of ≤ 20 ng/dL, to investigate whether 4 months of total androgen suppression (TAS) added to RT improved survival compared to RT alone. Patients randomized to receive TAS received flutamide with luteinizing hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist. According to protocol, patients without evidence of clinical recurrence or initiation of additional endocrine therapy underwent repeat prostate biopsy 2 years after RT completion. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of positive post-RT biopsy results on clinical outcomes. RESULTS A total of 831 patients underwent post-RT biopsy, 398 were treated with RT alone and 433 with RT plus TAS. Patients with positive post-RT biopsy results had higher rates of biochemical failure (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3-2.1) and distant metastasis (HR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.3-4.4) and inferior disease-specific survival (HR = 3.8; 95% CI = 1.9-7.5). Positive biopsy results remained predictive of such outcomes after correction for potential confounders such as Gleason score, tumor stage, and TAS administration. Prior TAS therapy did not prevent elevated risk of adverse outcome in the setting of post-RT positive biopsy results. Patients with Gleason score ≥ 7 with a positive biopsy result additionally had inferior overall survival compared to those with a negative biopsy result (HR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.04-2.35). CONCLUSIONS Positive post-RT biopsy is associated with increased rates of distant metastases and inferior disease-specific survival in patients treated with definitive RT and was associated with inferior overall survival in patients with high-grade tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel J Krauss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan.
| | - Chen Hu
- NRG Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jean-Paul Bahary
- Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal-Notre Dame, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Stone NN, Unger P, Crawford ED, Stock RG. Diagnosis and management of local recurrence after low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2015; 14:124-30. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2014.08.046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2014] [Revised: 08/05/2014] [Accepted: 08/07/2014] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|
39
|
Crook J. Commentary on "The clinical significance of persistent prostate cancer cells on prostate biopsy after high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for intermediate-risk prostate cancer". Brachytherapy 2014; 14:315. [PMID: 25547276 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2014.11.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2014] [Accepted: 11/21/2014] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Juanita Crook
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre for the Southern Interior, British Columbia Cancer Agency, 399 Royal Avenue, Kelowna, BC, Canada V1Y 5L3.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Faiena I, Singer EA, Pumill C, Kim IY. Cytoreductive prostatectomy: evidence in support of a new surgical paradigm (Review). Int J Oncol 2014; 45:2193-8. [PMID: 25340386 PMCID: PMC4215584 DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2014.2656] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2014] [Accepted: 06/13/2014] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) remains the second ranked cause of cancer deaths in the United States. The current standard of care for metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) includes systemic therapies with no option for surgery. In contrast, in other malignancies such as breast and kidney cancer, cyto-reduction plays an integral role in the treatment of metastatic disease. In this framework, there are emerging data that suggest a potential oncologic benefit to cytoreduction in mPCa. The majority of the data are retrospective in nature suggesting that patients with mPCa who had prior radical prostatectomy (RP) had a better survival, as well as improved response to systemic therapy. Similarly, patients who presented with metastatic disease and received definitive local therapy (RP or radiation) had greater survival than patients who received no treatment. In order to confer maximum potential benefit, operating in the setting of mPCa must be technically feasible with acceptable morbidity. It has been demonstrated in many studies that operating on locally advanced disease (T3a/b) does have similar morbidity as lower stage cancer. This may be applicable in the metastatic setting, because although PCa may have metastasized, it may remain locally advanced. On the molecular level there are a number of explanations concerning the potential benefit of cytoreduction. However, these ideas remain speculative with no concrete evidence to date.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Izak Faiena
- Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA
| | - Eric A Singer
- Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA
| | - Chris Pumill
- Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA
| | - Isaac Y Kim
- Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Salvage low-dose-rate (125)I partial prostate brachytherapy after dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2014; 6:304-10. [PMID: 25337135 PMCID: PMC4200181 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2014.45134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2014] [Revised: 07/17/2014] [Accepted: 09/30/2014] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To report outcomes on 5 patients treated with salvage partial low-dose-rate (LDR) 125-iodine (125I) permanent prostate seed brachytherapy (BT) for biopsy-proven locally persistent prostate cancer, following failure of dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Material and methods A retrospective review of the Fox Chase Cancer Center prostate cancer database identified five patients treated with salvage partial LDR 125I seed implant for locally persistent disease following dose-escalated EBRT to 76-84 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction equivalent. All patients had post-EBRT biopsies confirming unilateral locally persistent prostate cancer. Pre-treatment, EBRT and BT details, as well as post-treatment characteristics were documented and assessed. Results The median follow-up post-implant was 41 months. All five patients exhibited low acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities. Increased erectile dysfunction was noted in three patients. There were no biochemical failures following salvage LDR 125I seed BT to date, with a median post-salvage PSA of 0.4 ng/mL. Conclusions In carefully selected patients with local persistence of disease, partial LDR 125I permanent prostate seed implant appears to be a feasible option for salvage local therapy with an acceptable toxicity profile. Further study is needed to determine long-term results of this approach.
Collapse
|
42
|
Mazzucchelli R, Lopez-Beltran A, Galosi AB, Zizzi A, Scarpelli M, Bracarda S, Cheng L, Montironi R. Prostate changes related to therapy: with special reference to hormone therapy. Future Oncol 2014; 10:1873-86. [PMID: 25325826 DOI: 10.2217/fon.14.37] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Hormone and radiation therapy have traditionally been used in prostate cancer (PCa). Morphological effects are often identified in needle biopsies and surgical specimens. A range of histological changes are seen in the non-neoplastic prostate and in the pre-neoplastic and neoplastic areas. Other ablative therapies, including cryotherapy, and emerging focal therapies, such as high-intensity focused ultrasound, photodynamic therapy and interstitial laser thermotherapy, may induce changes on the prostate. As new compounds are developed for prostate cancer treatment, it is important to document their effects on benign and neoplastic prostate tissue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roberta Mazzucchelli
- Section of Pathological Anatomy, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region, School of Medicine, United Hospitals, Via Conca 71, I-60126 Torrette, Ancona, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Freytag SO, Stricker H, Lu M, Elshaikh M, Aref I, Pradhan D, Levin K, Kim JH, Peabody J, Siddiqui F, Barton K, Pegg J, Zhang Y, Cheng J, Oja-Tebbe N, Bourgeois R, Gupta N, Lane Z, Rodriguez R, DeWeese T, Movsas B. Prospective randomized phase 2 trial of intensity modulated radiation therapy with or without oncolytic adenovirus-mediated cytotoxic gene therapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 89:268-76. [PMID: 24837889 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2014] [Revised: 02/21/2014] [Accepted: 02/24/2014] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the safety and efficacy of combining oncolytic adenovirus-mediated cytotoxic gene therapy (OAMCGT) with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in intermediate-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Forty-four men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive either OAMCGT plus IMRT (arm 1; n=21) or IMRT only (arm 2; n=23). The primary phase 2 endpoint was acute (≤90 days) toxicity. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QOL), prostate biopsy (12-core) positivity at 2 years, freedom from biochemical/clinical failure (FFF), freedom from metastases, and survival. RESULTS Men in arm 1 exhibited a greater incidence of low-grade influenza-like symptoms, transaminitis, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia than men in arm 2. There were no significant differences in gastrointestinal or genitourinary events or QOL between the 2 arms. Two-year prostate biopsies were obtained from 37 men (84%). Thirty-three percent of men in arm 1 were biopsy-positive versus 58% in arm 2, representing a 42% relative reduction in biopsy positivity in the investigational arm (P=.13). There was a 60% relative reduction in biopsy positivity in the investigational arm in men with <50% positive biopsy cores at baseline (P=.07). To date, 1 patient in each arm exhibited biochemical failure (arm 1, 4.8%; arm 2, 4.3%). No patient developed hormone-refractory or metastatic disease, and none has died from prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS Combining OAMCGT with IMRT does not exacerbate the most common side effects of prostate radiation therapy and suggests a clinically meaningful reduction in positive biopsy results at 2 years in men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Svend O Freytag
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan.
| | - Hans Stricker
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Mei Lu
- Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Mohamed Elshaikh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Ibrahim Aref
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Deepak Pradhan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Kenneth Levin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Jae Ho Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - James Peabody
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Farzan Siddiqui
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Kenneth Barton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Jan Pegg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Yingshu Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Jingfang Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Nancy Oja-Tebbe
- Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Renee Bourgeois
- Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Nilesh Gupta
- Pathology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Zhaoli Lane
- Pathology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Ron Rodriguez
- Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Theodore DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Benjamin Movsas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Crook J, Ots AF. Prognostic factors for newly diagnosed prostate cancer and their role in treatment selection. Semin Radiat Oncol 2014; 23:165-72. [PMID: 23763882 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2013.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Adenocarcinoma of the prostate is extremely heterogeneous, ranging from an indolent chronic illness to an aggressive rapidly fatal systemic malignancy. The classic prognostic factors of tumor stage, prostate specific antigen level, and Gleason score have been used for over a decade to categorize patients at the time of diagnosis into broad risk groups that help to determine appropriate management. Although the grouping of patients into favorable, intermediate, and high-risk categories has become standard, and the categories continue to define distinct prognostic subgroups, considerable heterogeneity exists within each risk group. As a range of management options are available, additional prognostic factors can be considered when determining the treatment approach for an individual patient. We review these additional prognostic variables under the headings of patient-related, tumor-related, and treatment-related. The influence of each of these factors may vary depending on treatment factors such as dose, the radiation modality, or the use of concomitant androgen ablation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juanita Crook
- Department of Radiation Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Center for the Southern Interior, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada.
| | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Dearnaley DP, Jovic G, Syndikus I, Khoo V, Cowan RA, Graham JD, Aird EG, Bottomley D, Huddart RA, Jose CC, Matthews JHL, Millar JL, Murphy C, Russell JM, Scrase CD, Parmar MKB, Sydes MR. Escalated-dose versus control-dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: long-term results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15:464-73. [PMID: 24581940 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70040-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 328] [Impact Index Per Article: 32.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this trial was to compare dose-escalated conformal radiotherapy with control-dose conformal radiotherapy in patients with localised prostate cancer. Preliminary findings reported after 5 years of follow-up showed that escalated-dose conformal radiotherapy improved biochemical progression-free survival. Based on the sample size calculation, we planned to analyse overall survival when 190 deaths occurred; this target has now been reached, after a median 10 years of follow-up. METHODS RT01 was a phase 3, open-label, international, randomised controlled trial enrolling men with histologically confirmed T1b-T3a, N0, M0 prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen of less than 50 ng/mL. Patients were randomly assigned centrally in a 1:1 ratio, using a computer-based minimisation algorithm stratifying by risk of seminal vesicle invasion and centre to either the control group (64 Gy in 32 fractions, the standard dose at the time the trial was designed) or the escalated-dose group (74 Gy in 37 fractions). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to assignment. All patients received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy for 3-6 months before the start of conformal radiotherapy, which continued until the end of conformal radiotherapy. The coprimary outcome measures were biochemical progression-free survival and overall survival. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. Treatment-related side-effects have been reported previously. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN47772397. FINDINGS Between Jan 7, 1998, and Dec 20, 2001, 862 men were registered and 843 subsequently randomly assigned: 422 to the escalated-dose group and 421 to the control group. As of Aug 2, 2011, 236 deaths had occurred: 118 in each group. Median follow-up was 10·0 years (IQR 9·1-10·8). Overall survival at 10 years was 71% (95% CI 66-75) in each group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·99, 95% CI 0·77-1·28; p=0·96). Biochemical progression or progressive disease occurred in 391 patients (221 [57%] in the control group and 170 [43%] in the escalated-dose group). At 10 years, biochemical progression-free survival was 43% (95% CI 38-48) in the control group and 55% (50-61) in the escalated-dose group (HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·56-0·84; p=0·0003). INTERPRETATION At a median follow-up of 10 years, escalated-dose conformal radiotherapy with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy showed an advantage in biochemical progression-free survival, but this advantage did not translate into an improvement in overall survival. These efficacy data for escalated-dose treatment must be weighed against the increase in acute and late toxicities associated with the escalated dose and emphasise the importance of use of appropriate modern radiotherapy methods to reduce side-effects. FUNDING UK Medical Research Council.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David P Dearnaley
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London and Sutton, UK
| | - Gordana Jovic
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Vincent Khoo
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London and Sutton, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Robert A Huddart
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London and Sutton, UK
| | | | | | | | - Claire Murphy
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK
| | | | | | - Mahesh K B Parmar
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK
| | - Matthew R Sydes
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Bjerklund Johansen TE, Witzsch U, Greene D. Salvage treatment in prostate cancer: a clinical approach. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2014; 13:613-23. [DOI: 10.1586/era.13.35] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|
47
|
Mazzucchelli R, Scarpelli M, Lopez-Beltran A, Cheng L, Di Primio R, Montironi R. Treatment effects in prostate cancer following traditional and emerging therapies. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 2013; 26:291-8. [PMID: 23755744 DOI: 10.1177/039463201302600202] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Treatment options for prostate cancer consist of radical prostatectomy, hormonal therapy and radiation therapy. Hormonal and radiation therapy have well-known, often profound, effects on the histological appearance of benign and malignant prostate tissue. Novel therapies including focal ablative treatments, chemotherapies and targeted molecular therapies are beginning to emerge and pathologists will play a central role in documenting the effects of these treatments at the tissue level. As such, knowledge of treatment-related changes and access to clinical information are essential to ensure accurate interpretation and reporting of post-treatment prostate specimens by pathologists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Mazzucchelli
- Section of Pathological Anatomy, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region, School of Medicine, United Hospitals, Ancona, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Spiess PE, Levy DA, Mouraviev V, Pisters LL, Jones JS. Predictors of biochemical failure in patients undergoing prostate whole-gland salvage cryotherapy: a novel risk stratification model. BJU Int 2013; 112:E256-61. [PMID: 23469778 DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2012.11695.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED What's known on the subject? and what does the study add?: Previous studies have identified the most important prognostic factors of the likely outcomes of salvage prostate whole-gland ablation, including initial clinical stage, biopsy Gleason score, and PSA (total and doubling time). There is potential for further optimization of candidate selection for salvage cryoablation with curative intent and nadir PSA achieved after whole-gland cryotherapy may provide additional prognostic value. The study shows that the most important prognostic factors of biochemical progression-free survival for patients who have undergone whole-gland salvage prostate cryotherapy are nadir PSA achieved after therapy and pre-therapy biopsy Gleason score. Based on these two prognostic variables, we have identified risk stratification groups (low, intermediate and high) which help predict the expected outcomes of salvage whole-gland prostate cryotherapy in a given patient. This risk stratification constitutes a useful clinical tool in defining which patients maybe best suited for this local salvage treatment method. OBJECTIVE To assess the prognostic variables predicting the risk of biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) after salvage prostate whole-gland cryotherapy using the Phoenix definition of bPFS. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 132 patients underwent prostate whole-gland salvage cryotherapy with curative intent. No patient underwent neoadjuvant/adjuvant hormonal ablative therapy, and all had extended post-salvage prostate-specific antigen (PSA) follow-up data. Cox univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of potential predictors of bPFS were conducted. Kaplan-Meier analyses of bPFS was also performed. RESULTS At a mean (range) follow-up of 4.3 (0.9-12.7) years, the median (range) post-cryotherapy nadir PSA achieved was 0.17 (0-33.9) ng/mL. On multivariate analysis, predictors of bPFS were nadir PSA post-cryotherapy and pre-salvage biopsy Gleason score (P < 0.001 and 0.009, respectively). Risk stratification groups (low, intermediate and high) were developed based on the presence of zero, one or two adverse risk factors, the risk factors being either a nadir PSA >2.5 ng/mL or biopsy Gleason score ≥ 7, with the Kaplan-Meier bPFS curves of these risk groups being significantly different (P = 0.02 and <0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Post-salvage nadir PSA and pre-salvage biopsy Gleason score are important predictors of outcome in this patient cohort. Low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups can be determined based on these variables and can define patients best suited for prostate cryotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philippe E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Shao YHJ, Kim S, Moore DF, Shih W, Lin Y, Stein M, Kim IY, Lu-Yao GL. Cancer-specific survival after metastasis following primary radical prostatectomy compared with radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients: results of a population-based, propensity score-matched analysis. Eur Urol 2013; 65:693-700. [PMID: 23759328 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2012] [Accepted: 05/08/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Data regarding the difference in the clinical course from metastasis to prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) following radical prostatectomy (RP) compared with radiation therapy (RT) are lacking. OBJECTIVE To examine the association between primary treatment modality and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) after metastasis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database from 1994 to 2007 for patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (PCa). We used cancer stage and Gleason score to stratify patients into low and intermediate-high risks. INTERVENTION Radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Our outcome is time from onset of metastases to PCSM. Propensity score matching and Cox regression were used to analyze the PCSM hazard for the RP group compared with the RT group. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Our study consisted of 66,492 men diagnosed with PCa, 51,337 men receiving RT, and 15,155 men undergoing RP within 1 yr of cancer diagnosis. During the study period, 2802 men were diagnosed as having metastatic disease. A total of 916 men with metastases were included in the propensity-matched cohort; of these men, 186 died from PCa. During the follow-up, for the low-risk patients, the adjusted PCSS after metastasis was 86.2% and 79.3% in the RP and RT groups, respectively; for the intermediate-high-risk patients, the PCSS after metastasis was 76.3% and 63.3% in the RP and RT groups, respectively. The hazard ratios estimating the risk of PCSM between the RP and RT groups were 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-1.16) and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39-0.77) for the low- and intermediate-high-risk groups, respectively. Because of the nature of observational studies, the results may be affected by residual confounders and treatment indication. CONCLUSIONS Following the development of metastases, men who received primary RP have a longer PCSS than men who received primary RT. Our results may have implications for the timing and nature of local PCa treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Hsuan Joni Shao
- Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Sung Kim
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Dirk F Moore
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Biostatistics, UMDNJ School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Weichung Shih
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Biostatistics, UMDNJ School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Yong Lin
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Biostatistics, UMDNJ School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Mark Stein
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Isaac Yi Kim
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Grace L Lu-Yao
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Loblaw A, Cheung P, D’Alimonte L, Deabreu A, Mamedov A, Zhang L, Tang C, Quon H, Jain S, Pang G, Nam R. Prostate stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy using a standard linear accelerator: Toxicity, biochemical, and pathological outcomes. Radiother Oncol 2013; 107:153-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.03.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 138] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2012] [Revised: 03/31/2013] [Accepted: 03/31/2013] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|