Radiotherapy for Prevention and Therapy of Gynecomastia Due to Antiandrogen Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients

Treatment strategies to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group prostate cancer

Aim

To provide an overview on the available treatments to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer.

Methods

The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published and assessed the validity of the information on efficacy and treatment-related toxicity.

Results

Eight randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. Two randomized trials demonstrated that prophylactic radiation therapy (RT) using 1 × 10 Gy or 2 × 6 Gy significantly reduced the rate of gynecomastia but not breast pain, as compared to observation. A randomized dose-finding trial identified the daily dose of 20 mg tamoxifen (TMX) as the most effective prophylactic dose and another randomized trial described that daily TMX use was superior to weekly use. Another randomized trial showed that prophylactic daily TMX is more effective than TMX given at the onset of gynecomastia. Two other randomized trials described that TMX was clearly superior to anastrozole in reducing the risk for gynecomastia and/or breast pain. One comparative randomized trial between prophylactic RT using 1 × 12 Gy and TMX concluded that prophylactic TMX is more effective compared to prophylactic RT and furthermore that TMX appears to be more effective to treat gynecomastia and/or breast pain when symptoms are already present. A meta-analysis confirmed that both prophylactic RT and TMX can reduce the risk of gynecomastia and/or breast pain with TMX being more effective; however, the rate of side effects after TMX including dizziness and hot flushes might be higher than after RT and must be taken into account. Less is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of different radiation fractionation schedules and more modern RT techniques.

Conclusions

Prophylactic RT as well as daily TMX can significantly reduce the incidence of gynecomastia and/or breast pain. TMX appears to be an effective alternative to RT also as a therapeutic treatment in the presence of gynecomastia but its side effects and off-label use must be considered.

Updated strategies in the treatment of benign diseases-a patterns of care study of the german cooperative group on benign diseases

Purpose

Radiation therapy (RT) is a common treatment for benign diseases in Germany. Because the treatment concepts are inconsistent, we conducted this pattern-of-care study on behalf of the German Cooperative Group on Benign Diseases to evaluate treatment standards in Germany.

Methods and materials

Questionnaires were mailed to all radiation therapy facilities in Germany. We assessed the treatment equipment, annual number of patients, treatment indications, and, in particular, treatment strategies in patients with benign diseases in 2014.

Results

We evaluated questionnaires returned by 116 participating institutions, of which 41 were ambulatory health care centers, 28 were private institutions, 27 were community hospitals, and 20 were university hospitals. On average, 2 linac accelerators and 2 megavoltage units were available in each institution. In 2014, a total of 36,830 patients were treated for benign diseases: 16,989 for degenerative diseases (peritendinitis humeroscapularis n = 2691; epicondylitis humeri n = 3788; heel spur n = 10,510); 14,936 for osteoarthritis (coxarthrosis n = 2230; gonarthrosis n = 2623; omarthrosis n = 2691; rhizarthrosis n = 2440; polyarthrosis n = 2297; others n = 2655); 1563 for hyperproliferative diseases (morbus Dupuytren n = 960; morbus Ledderhose n = 441; keloids n = 139; pterygium of the conjunctiva n = 3; other hyperproliferative diseases n = 20); 2440 for functional disorders (gynecomastia n = 843; Graves' disease n = 205; lymphatic fistula n = 178; heterotopic ossification prophylaxis n = 1214); 859 for stereotactic RT in the central nervous system (arteriovenous malformation n = 53; meningioma n = 425; acoustic neuroma n = 201; pituitary adenoma n = 131; others n = 49), and 43 for rare indications (pigmented villonodular synovitis n = 20 or vertebral hemangioma n = 23). The mean whole dose was <10 Gy in the treatment of degenerative disorders, 25 Gy for hyperproliferative diseases, 15 Gy for functional disorders, and <50 Gy for stereotactic RT.

Conclusions

In 2014, RT had an important role in the treatment of benign diseases. Because treatment concepts are inherent, we recommend treatment based on the guidelines written by the German Cooperative Group on Benign Diseases.

Radiotherapy in the management of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

The choice of treatment options for prostate cancer patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy depends on their risk profile, which is determined by the tumor node metastasis (TNM) status, histopathologic findings, and the pre- and post-radical prostatectomy PSA characteristics. The results of large clinical studies with a 10-year follow-up or more are the backbone of predictive models for risk estimates that incorporate these criteria and also for guideline recommendations. For low-to-intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients and older patients, observation with--in case of biochemical recurrence--early salvage radiotherapy can be advised after R0 resection, thus, avoiding overtreatment. After R1 resection, adjuvant radiotherapy should be considered. Patients with two or more positive lymph nodes and/or with distant metastasis may benefit from adjuvant hormone deprivation therapy. Beyond this rough outline, detailed analysis of subgroups is still required (and ongoing) to enable individually optimized treatment.

Radiotherapy for calcaneodynia. Results of a single center prospective randomized dose optimization trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this work was to compare the efficacy of two different dose fractionation schedules for radiotherapy of patients with calcaneodynia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between February 2006 and April 2010, 457 consecutive evaluable patients were recruited for this prospective randomized trial. All patients received radiotherapy using the orthovoltage technique. One radiotherapy series consisted of 6 single fractions/3 weeks. In case of insufficient remission of pain after 6 weeks a second radiation series was performed. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either single doses of 0.5 or 1.0 Gy. Endpoint was pain reduction. Pain was measured before, immediately after, and 6 weeks after radiotherapy using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a comprehensive pain score (CPS).

RESULTS

The overall response rate for all patients was 87 % directly after and 88 % 6 weeks after radiotherapy. The mean VAS values before, immediately after, and 6 weeks after treatment for the 0.5 and 1.0 Gy groups were 65.5 ± 22.1 and 64.0 ± 20.5 (p = 0.188), 34.8 ± 24.7 and 39.0 ± 26.3 (p = 0.122), and 25.1 ± 26.8 and 28.9 ± 26.8 (p = 0.156), respectively. The mean CPS before, immediately after, and 6 weeks after treatment was 10.1 ± 2.7 and 10.0 ± 3.0 (p = 0.783), 5.6 ± 3.7 and 6.0 ± 3.9 (p = 0.336), 4.0 ± 4.1 and 4.3 ± 3.6 (p = 0.257), respectively. No statistically significant differences between the two single dose trial arms for early (p = 0.216) and delayed response (p = 0.080) were found.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy is an effective treatment option for the management of calcaneodynia. For radiation protection reasons, the dose for a radiotherapy series is recommended not to exceed 3-6 Gy.

Radiotherapy for achillodynia : results of a single-center prospective randomized dose-optimization trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two different dose-fractionation schedules for radiotherapy of patients with achillodynia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between February 2006 and February 2010, 112 consecutive evaluable patients were recruited for this prospective randomized trial. All patients underwent radiotherapy with an orthovoltage technique. One radiotherapy course consisted of 6 single fractions over 3 weeks. In case of insufficient remission of pain after 6 weeks, a second radiation series was performed. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either single doses of 0.5 or 1.0 Gy. The endpoint was pain reduction. Pain was measured before, right after, and 6 weeks after radiotherapy with a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a comprehensive pain score (CPS).

RESULTS

The overall response rate for all patients was 84% directly after and 88% 6 weeks after radiotherapy. The mean VAS values before, directly after, and 6 weeks after treatment for the 0.5 and 1.0 Gy groups were 55.7 ± 21.0 and 58.2 ± 23.5 (p = 0.526), 38.0 ± 23.2 and 30.4 ± 22.6 (p = 0.076), and 35.4 ± 25.9 and 30.9 ± 25.4 (p = 0.521), respectively. The mean CPS before, directly after, and 6 weeks after treatment was 8.2 ± 3.0 and 8.9 ± 3.3 (p = 0.239), 5.6 ± 3.1 and 5.4 ± 3.3 (p = 0.756), 4.4 ± 2.6 and 5.3 ± 3.8 (p = 0.577), respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the two single-dose trial arms for early (p = 0.366) and delayed response (p = 0.287).

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy is an effective treatment option for the management of achillodynia. For radiation protection, the dose of a radiotherapy series is recommended not to exceed 3-6 Gy.