The impact of dose-escalated radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation for prostate cancer using 2 linked nomograms

Significance of androgen-deprivation therapy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with high-dose radiotherapy: A literature review

The real-world benefits of adding androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and its optimal duration when combined with current standard high-dose radiation therapy (RT) remain unknown. We aimed to assess the efficacy of and toxicities associated with ADT in the setting of combination with high-dose RT for intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa). This article is a modified and detailed version of the commentary on Clinical Question 8 described in the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer (ver. 2023). A qualitative systematic review was performed according to the Minds Guide. All relevant published studies between September 2010 and August 2020, which assessed the outcomes of IR or HR PCa treated with high-dose RT, were screened using two databases (PubMed and ICHUSHI). A total of 41 studies were included in this systematic review, mostly consisting of retrospective studies (N = 34). The evidence basically supports the benefit of adding ADT to high-dose RT to improve tumor control. Regarding IR populations, many studies suggested the existence of a subgroup for which adding ADT had no impact on either overall survival or the BF-free duration. On the other hand, regarding HR populations, several studies suggested the positive impact of adding ADT for ≥1 year on overall survival. Adding ADT increases not only the risk of sexual dysfunction but also that of cardiovascular toxicities or bone fracture. Although the benefit of adding ADT was basically suggested for both IR and HR populations, further investigations are warranted to identify subgroups of patients for whom ADT has no benefit, as well as the appropriate duration of ADT for those who do derive benefit.

Longitudinal Changes and Predictive Value of Multiparametric MRI Features for Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with MRI-Guided Lattice Extreme Ablative Dose (LEAD) Boost Radiotherapy

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.

Patterns of practice of androgen deprivation therapy combined to radiotherapy in favorable and unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer. Results of The PROACT Survey from the French GETUG Radiation Oncology group

PURPOSE

The intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) group is heterogeneous in terms of prognosis. For unfavorable or favorable IR PCa treated by radiotherapy, the optimal strategy remains to be defined. In routine practice, the physician's decision to propose hormonal therapy (HT) is controversial. The PROACT survey aimed to evaluate pattern and preferences of daily practice in France in this IR population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A web questionnaire was distributed to French radiotherapy members of 91 centers of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Uro-Genitales (GETUG). The questionnaire included four sections concerning: (i) the specialists who prescribe treatments and multidisciplinary decisions (MTD) validation; (ii) the definition of IR subsets of patients; (iii) radiotherapy parameters; (iv) the pattern of practice regarding cardiovascular (CV) and (iv) metabolic evaluation. A descriptive presentation of the results was used.

RESULTS

Among the 82 responses (90% of the centers), HT schedules and irradiation techniques were validated by specific board meetings in 54% and 45% of the centers, respectively. Three-fourths (76%) of the centers identified a subset of IR patients for a dedicated strategy. The majority of centers consider PSA>15 (77%) and/or Gleason 7 (4+3) (87%) for an unfavorable IR definition. Overall, 41% of the centers performed systematically a CV evaluation before HT prescription while 61% consider only CV history/status in defining the type of HT. LHRH agonists are more frequently prescribed in both favorable (70%) and unfavorable (98%) IR patients. Finally, weight (80%), metabolic profile (70%) and CV status (77%) of patients are considered for follow-up under HT.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first survey on HT practice in IR PCa. The PROACT survey indicates that three-quarters of the respondents identify subsets of IR-patients in tailoring therapy. The CV status of the patient is considered in guiding the HT decision, its duration and type of drug.

Salvage Therapy Options for Local Prostate Cancer Recurrence After Primary Radiotherapy: a Literature Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

While recurrence after primary treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) is not uncommon, there is currently no consensus on the most appropriate management after radiation treatment failure. This article seeks to explore the currently utilized modalities for salvage treatment for radiorecurrent PCa. We focused our review on the oncologic outcomes and reported toxicity rates in the latest studies examining salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP), salvage cryotherapy (SCT), salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and re-irradiation.

RECENT FINDINGS

There does not appear to be any significant difference in overall survival for more invasive salvage radical prostatectomy compared to the minimally invasive salvage approaches. Additionally, there seems to be a trend towards lower morbidity rates associated with minimally invasive and focal salvage treatment. We are encouraged by the results presented in this review and find that there is clearly a role for emerging minimally invasive and focal therapies as durable options for salvage treatment in patients with radiorecurrent PCa.

Effects of dose-escalated radiotherapy in combination with long-term androgen deprivation on prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine the effects of a dose escalation for prostate cancer patients receiving long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 605 patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) and long-term ADT (National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria-defined intermediate-risk, minimum 10 months; high-risk and very-high-risk, minimum 20 months) was performed. The median ADT time was 31 months. Cox's proportional hazards models were used to compare biochemical disease-free survival (bDFS), clinical relapse-free survival (cRFS) and overall survival (OS) between the ≥70, <78 Gy group and 78 Gy group in a univariate analysis and to assess the effects of the dose escalation on bDFS in a multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 70 months, 5-year bDFS was significantly better in the 78 Gy group than in the ≥70, <78 Gy group [96 vs 83%; hazard ratio 3.6 (95% confidence interval 2.2-6.1); p < 0.001]. 5-year cRFS and OS were similar between the two groups. The multivariate analysis showed that RT dose was still an independent prognostic factor of bDFS (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study suggest that dose escalations result in significant improvements in bDFS, even when used in combination with long-term ADT. A longer follow-up is needed to clarify the effects of dose escalations on cRFS and OS. Advances in knowledge: It remains unclear whether high-dose RT is necessary for improving the outcomes of patients receiving long-term ADT. The results suggest that dose escalations result in significant improvements in biochemical control.

Clinical outcome and toxicity evaluation of simultaneous integrated boost pelvic IMRT/VMAT at different dose levels combined with androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer patients

Background

The role of dose escalation in patients receiving long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is still a controversial issue. The aim of the current study was to evaluate whether dose escalation for ≥76–80 Gy had any advantage in terms of biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), or overall survival outcomes over the dose levels from 70 to <76 Gy.

Patients and methods

The study included a cohort of 24 patients classified with high- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer. All patients received ADT, starting at 4–6 months before radiation therapy and continued for a total period of 12–24 months in high-risk patients. The treatment plan was given in two phases. In the first phase, the nodal planning target volume (PTV) and the prostate PTV received 48.6 and 54 Gy, respectively, over 27 fractions. The treatment was applied through intensity-modulated radiation therapy or volumetric modulated arc therapy with a simultaneous integrated boost technique.

Results

More than half of the patients were in T3–T4 stage, 79.1% of the patients were in the high-risk category, and all patients received ADT. The rate of acute grade II gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities in all patients were 41.7% and 62.5%, respectively. The rate of freedom from grade II rectal toxicity at 2 years was 89% and 83% for patients treated with dose levels <76 and ≥76 Gy, respectively. The rate of BDFS at 2 years was 90% and 85% for doses <76 and ≥76 Gy, respectively. The DMFS at 2 years was 100% and 76% for dose levels <76 and ≥76 Gy, respectively.

Conclusion

In the current study, there were no significant differences in the BDFS and DMFS between patients treated with a dose of <76 and ≥76 Gy, including elective pelvic lymph nodes irradiation combined with ADT.

Prospective Validation of Diagnostic Tumor Biomarkers in Men Treated With Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Background

In prior retrospective studies, we assessed a number of prostate tumor tissue biomarkers that were associated independently with the clinical outcome of men treated with radiotherapy (RT) ± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In this report, the associations of selected biomarkers with biochemical or clinical disease failure (BCDF) were prospectively evaluated in men with T1-T3 prostate cancer on a randomized hypofractionation trial.

Methods

Biomarkers were analyzed in 263 of 303 men randomly assigned to standard vs moderate hypofractionation. Median follow-up was 65.9 months. Archival tissue was analyzed for Ki-67 (n = 231), MDM2 (n = 209), p16 (n = 195), Cox-2 (n = 126), p53 (n = 206), bcl2 (n = 223), bax (n = 210), and PKA (n = 160). The base model for multivariable Fine-Gray regression analysis included treatment assignment and risk groups. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

Each biomarker was tested one at a time relative to the base model and selected for inclusion in multivariable analysis. Ki-67 (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19 to 4.48, P = .01) and bcl2&bax (HR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.08 to 4.46, P = .03) were statistically significantly related to higher BCDF and were independently statistically significant when considered jointly (Ki-67: HR = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.12 to 4.58, P = .02; bcl2&bax: HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.03 to 4.41, P = .04). At 2.5 years postradiotherapy, the C-index of Ki-67 was 73.2%, while for the base model was only 46.2%; Ki-67 was the most statistically significant when tested without bcl2&bax.

Conclusions

In this prospective multiple biomarker analysis in men with prostate cancer treated with RT±ADT, both Ki-67 and bcl2&bax were independently related to early BCDF; however, Ki-67 alone is indicated to be the most clinically meaningful by C-index analysis and is universally available.

Can we avoid high levels of dose escalation for high-risk prostate cancer in the setting of androgen deprivation?

Aim

Both dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (DE-EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. However, there is little evidence specifically evaluating DE-EBRT for patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving ADT, particularly for EBRT doses >74 Gy. We aimed to determine whether DE-EBRT >74 Gy improves outcomes for patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving long-term ADT.

Patients and methods

Patients with high-risk prostate cancer were treated on an institutional protocol prescribing 3–6 months neoadjuvant ADT and DE-EBRT, followed by 2 years of adjuvant ADT. Between 2006 and 2012, EBRT doses were escalated from 74 Gy to 76 Gy and then to 78 Gy. We interrogated our electronic medical record to identify these patients and analyzed our results by comparing dose levels.

Results

In all, 479 patients were treated with a 68-month median follow-up. The 5-year biochemical disease-free survivals for the 74 Gy, 76 Gy, and 78 Gy groups were 87.8%, 86.9%, and 91.6%, respectively. The metastasis-free survivals were 95.5%, 94.5%, and 93.9%, respectively, and the prostate cancer-specific survivals were 100%, 94.4%, and 98.1%, respectively. Dose escalation had no impact on any outcome in either univariate or multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

There was no benefit of DE-EBRT >74 Gy in our cohort of high-risk prostate patients treated with long-term ADT. As dose escalation has higher risks of radiotherapy-induced toxicity, it may be feasible to omit dose escalation beyond 74 Gy in this group of patients. Randomized studies evaluating dose escalation for high-risk patients receiving ADT should be considered.

Can we avoid dose escalation for intermediate-risk prostate cancer in the setting of short-course neoadjuvant androgen deprivation?

Background

Both dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (DE-EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve the outcomes in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Despite this, there are only few reports evaluating DE-EBRT for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer receiving neoadjuvant ADT, and virtually no studies investigating dose escalation >74 Gy in this setting. We aimed to determine whether DE-EBRT >74 Gy improved the outcomes for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received neoadjuvant ADT.

Findings

In our institution, patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with neoadjuvant ADT and DE-EBRT, with doses sequentially increasing from 74 Gy to 76 Gy and then to 78 Gy between 2006 and 2012. We identified 435 patients treated with DE-EBRT and ADT, with a median follow-up of 70 months. For the 74 Gy, 76 Gy, and 78 Gy groups, five-year biochemical disease-free survival rates were 95.0%, 97.8%, and 95.3%, respectively; metastasis-free survival rates were 99.1%, 100.0%, and 98.6%, respectively; and prostate cancer-specific survival rate was 100% for all three dose levels. There was no significant benefit for dose escalation either on univariate or multivariate analysis for any outcome.

Conclusion

There was no benefit for DE-EBRT >74 Gy in our cohort of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Given the higher risks of toxicity associated with dose escalation, it may be feasible to omit dose escalation in this group of patients. Randomized studies evaluating dose de-escalation should be considered.

Three linked nomograms for predicting biochemical failure in prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation therapy

BACKGROUND

Nomograms were established to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radiotherapy (RT) with a low weight of the characteristic variables of RT and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Our aim is to provide a new stratified tool for predicting BCR at 4 and 7 years in patients treated using RT with radical intent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, nonrandomized analysis was performed on 5044 prostate cancer (PCa) patients with median age 70 years, who received RT-with or without ADT-between November 1992 and May 2007. Median follow-up was 5.5 years. BCR was defined as a rise in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 2 ng/ml over the post-treatment PSA nadir. Univariate association between predictor variables and BCR was assessed by the log-rank test, and three linked nomograms were created for multivariate prognosis of BCR-free survival. Each nomogram corresponds to a category of the Gleason score-either 6,7, or 8-10-and all of them were created from a single proportional hazards regression model stratified also by months of ADT (0, 1-6, 7-12, 13-24, 25-36, 36-60). The performance of this model was analyzed by calibration, discrimination, and clinical utility.

RESULTS

Initial PSA, clinical stage, and RT dose were significant variables (p < 0.01). The model showed a good calibration. The concordance probability was 0.779, improving those obtained with other nomograms (0.587, 0.571, 0.554) in the database. Survival curves showed best clinical utility in a comparison with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk groups.

CONCLUSION

For each Gleason score category, the nomogram provides information on the benefit of adding ADT to a specific RT dose.

Development of ProCaRS Clinical Nomograms for Biochemical Failure-free Survival Following Either Low-Dose Rate Brachytherapy or Conventionally Fractionated External Beam Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Purpose: Although several clinical nomograms predictive of biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS) for localized prostate cancer exist in the medical literature, making valid comparisons can be challenging due to variable definitions of biochemical failure, the disparate distribution of prognostic factors, and received treatments in patient populations. The aim of this investigation was to develop and validate clinically-based nomograms for 5-year BFFS using the ASTRO II “Phoenix” definition for two patient cohorts receiving low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy or conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) from a large Canadian multi-institutional database.

Methods and Materials: Patients were selected from the GUROC (Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada) Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification (ProCaRS) database if they received (1) LDR brachytherapy ≥ 144 Gy (n=4208) or (2) EBRT ≥ 70 Gy  (n=822). Multivariable Cox regression analysis for BFFS was performed separately for each cohort and used to generate clinical nomograms predictive of 5-year BFFS. Nomograms were validated using calibration plots of nomogram predicted probability versus observed probability via Kaplan-Meier estimates.

Results: Patients receiving LDR brachytherapy had a mean age of 64 ± 7 years, a mean baseline PSA of 6.3 ± 3.0 ng/mL, 75% had a Gleason 6, and 15% had a Gleason 7, whereas patients receiving EBRT had a mean age of 70 ± 6 years, a mean baseline PSA of 11.6 ± 10.7 ng/mL, 30% had a Gleason 6, 55% had a Gleason 7, and 14% had a Gleason 8-10. Nomograms for 5-year BFFS included age, use and duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), baseline PSA, T stage, and Gleason score for LDR brachytherapy and an ADT (months), baseline PSA, Gleason score, and biological effective dose (Gy) for EBRT.

Conclusions: Clinical nomograms examining 5-year BFFS were developed for patients receiving either LDR brachytherapy or conventionally fractionated EBRT and may assist clinicians in predicting an outcome. Future work should be directed at examining the role of additional prognostic factors, comorbidities, and toxicity in predicting survival outcomes.

Prostate cancer nomograms: a review of their use in cancer detection and treatment

As prostate cancer treatment discussions have grown more complex, increasing numbers of nomograms to guide decision-making have been found in the literature. Such nomograms can influence every step in the prostate cancer therapeutic process, from determining the need for biopsy to the need for adjuvant therapy. With a properly counseled patient who is aware of the limitations of nomograms, such tools assist in the shared decision-making that characterizes modern informed consent.

FROGG high-risk prostate cancer workshop: patterns of practice and literature review: part I: intact prostate

Australian and New Zealand radiation oncologists with an interest in uro-oncology were invited to participate in a pattern-of-practice survey dealing with the management of intact high-risk prostate cancer. Responses from 46 practitioners (representing 73% of all potential respondents) revealed that high-dose radiation therapy is the standard of care. However, there is variability in practice with regard to the methods used to achieve dose escalation, the use of whole-pelvic radiation therapy and the optimal duration of androgen deprivation therapy employed. A review of the literature outlining the current body of knowledge and the planned and ongoing studies in intact high-risk prostate cancer is presented.