Ten-year outcomes of high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer with unfavorable risk: early initiation of salvage therapy may replace long-term adjuvant androgen deprivation

Long-term outcomes of whole-pelvis radiation therapy using volumetric modulated arc therapy for high-risk prostate cancer†

This study investigated the outcomes of whole-pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for high-risk prostate cancer. We retrospectively analysed 112 patients with high-risk prostate cancer who started WPRT at our hospital between August 2011 and August 2015. The prescribed dose was 78 Gy in 39 fractions to the prostate and 46.8 Gy in 26 fractions to the pelvic lymph node (LN) area. All patients received long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We evaluated late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The median follow-up period for censored cases was 97 (interquartile range [IQR] = 85-108) months. The median age was 72 (IQR = 67-75) years. The high-risk and very-high-risk groups included 41 (36.6%) and 71 patients (63.4%), respectively. The median risk of LN invasion calculated by the Roach formula was 36.9 (IQR = 26.6-56.3) %. The 8-year overall survival, biochemical failure-free survival, disease-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 88.4, 91.9, 83.8 and 98.0%, respectively. Only one patient experienced common iliac LN recurrence, which was outside the pelvic irradiation area. All patients with recurrent disease were categorized into the very-high-risk group. The 8-year cumulative rates of ≥Grade 2 late GI and GU toxicities were 12.8 and 11.8%, respectively. No patients experienced Grade 4 or higher toxicities. WPRT using VMAT for high-risk prostate cancer was well tolerated and effective.

Evaluation of internal margins for prostate for step and shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy using different margin formulas

PURPOSE

This feasibility study evaluated the intra-fractional prostate motion using an ultrasound image-guided system during step and shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SS-IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Moreover, the internal margins (IMs) using different margin formulas were calculated.

METHODS

Fourteen consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent SS-IMRT (n = 5) or VMAT (n = 9) between March 2019 and April 2020 were considered. The intra-fractional prostate motion was observed in the superior-inferior (SI), anterior-posterior (AP), and left-right (LR) directions. The displacement of the prostate was defined as the displacement from the initial position at the scanning start time, which was evaluated using the mean ± standard deviation (SD). IMs were calculated using the van Herk and restricted maximum likelihood (REML) formulas for SS-IMRT and VMAT.

RESULTS

For SS-IMRT, the maximum displacements of the prostate motion were 0.17 ± 0.18, 0.56 ± 0.86, and 0.18 ± 0.59 mm in the SI, AP, and LR directions, respectively. For VMAT, the maximum displacements of the prostate motion were 0.19 ± 0.64, 0.22 ± 0.35, and 0.14 ± 0.37 mm in the SI, AP, and LR directions, respectively. The IMs obtained for SS-IMRT and VMAT were within 2.3 mm and 1.2 mm using the van Herk formula and within 1.2 mm and 0.8 mm using the REML formula.

CONCLUSIONS

This feasibility study confirmed that intra-fractional prostate motion was observed with SS-IMRT and VMAT using different margin formulas. The IMs should be determined according to each irradiation technique using the REML margin.

Clinical significance of IDC-P as predictive factor after intensity-modulated radiation therapy

The clinical significance of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC‐P) in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) treated with high‐dose external‐beam radiation therapy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of IDC‐P in men who received intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nonmetastatic PCa. All patients with high‐risk (H‐R) and very high–risk (VH‐R) PCa who received IMRT between September 2000 and December 2013 at our institution were analyzed retrospectively. We re‐reviewed biopsy cores for the presence of IDC‐P. Treatment consisted of IMRT (median: 78 Gy at 2 Gy per fraction) plus 6‐month neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (HT). In total, 154 consecutive patients with H‐R and VH‐R PCa were analyzed. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate was present in 27.9% (n = 43). The median follow‐up period was 8.4 years. The 10‐year PCa‐specific survival, biochemical failure (BF), clinical failure, and castration‐resistant PCa rates were 90.0%, 47.8%, 27.5%, and 24.5% in patients with IDC‐P, and 96.6%, 32.6%, 10.8%, and 7.0% in those without IDC‐P, respectively (p = 0.12, 0.04, 0.0031, and 0.012, respectively). In multivariable analysis, IDC‐P was not identified as an independent predictive factor for BF (p = 0.26). The presence of IDC‐P was correlated with a significantly higher incidence of disease progression in men with H‐R and VH‐R PCa who received IMRT, although it was not identified as an independent predictive factor for BF. Further investigations are needed to determine the significance of IDC‐P as an independent predictive factor for survival outcomes.

Outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer: a single-institutional study

BACKGROUND

There are few reports from Japan about the outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. This study was aimed at assessing the efficacy and toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy in patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the data, retrieved from our institutional database, of patients who had received intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer at a radiation dose of 78 Gy in 39 fractions. Data of 201 patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and 311 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period after the completion of intensity-modulated radiation therapy was 100 months (range, 24-154). The rates of cause-specific survival, overall survival, metastasis-free survival and biochemical recurrence-free survival in the intermediate-risk patients were 99, 95, 95 and 94% at 5 years and 99, 91, 90 and 86% at 8 years, respectively; the corresponding rates in the high-risk patients were 100, 97, 91 and 84% at 5 years and 96, 92, 84 and 76% at 8 years, respectively. The crude incidence of late grade 2-3 genitourinary toxicity was 28.1%, and that of late grade 3 genitourinary toxicity was 2.0%. The crude incidence of late grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was 5.1%, and there were no cases of late grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrated that intensity-modulated radiation therapy is effective for patients with localized intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer while having minimal toxicity.

Efficacy and Prognostic Factors of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Combined with Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Objective

To analyze the efficacy of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with radiation therapy (also known as radiotherapy) for prostate cancer.

Methods

The clinical data of 94 prostate cancer patients treated in the Oncology Department of Xiangzhou People's Hospital from January 2017 to January 2018 were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients were divided into the combined group and the reference group according to their admission order, with 47 cases each. The patients in the reference group only received the radiotherapy, and on this basis, those in the combined group accepted ADT, so as to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment methods by comparing the patients' serum total prostate-specific antigen (T-PSA), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and other indicators and analyze the relevant factors affecting patients' prognosis by Cox single-factor and multi-factor regression models.

Results

Compared with the reference group after treatment, the patients in the combined group obtained significantly lower T-PSA and VEGF levels (P < 0.001), significantly higher objective remission rate and disease control rate (P < 0.05), and remarkably longer modified progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (OS) (P < 0.001), and after the multi-factor research, it was found that the Gleason score of 8–10, positive lymphatic metastasis, and single radiotherapy were the factors affecting the clinical prognosis of prostate cancer.

Conclusion

Combining ADT with radiotherapy ensures a better survival benefit for prostate cancer patients and has a fairly well efficacy. Further study will be conducive to establishing a better solution for such patients.

Highly hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer with a simultaneous integrated boost to intraprostatic lesions: a planning study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this planning study was to develop an acceptable technique for highly hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy using simultaneous integrated boost technique (SIB-hHF-RT) for nonmetastatic National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We created SIB-hHF-RT plans for 14 nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients with MRI-detectable intraprostatic lesions (IPLs) and without intestines locating close to the seminal vesicle and prostate. We prescribed 57 Gy for IPLs and 54 Gy for the remainder of planning target volume (PTV) in 15 fractions. The IPLs were contoured based on magnetic resonance imaging, and PTV was generated by adding 6-8-mm margins to the clinical target volume. For the dose-volume constraints of organs at risk (OARs), the same constraints as 54 Gy plans were used so as not to increase the toxicity.

RESULTS

All created plans fulfilled the dose-volume constraints of all targets and OARs. The median estimated beam-on time was 108.5 s. For patient-specific quality assurance, the global gamma passing rates (3%/2 mm) with 10% dose threshold criteria were greater than 93% in all cases and greater than 95% in 11 cases.

CONCLUSION

SIB-hHF-RT plans were developed that fulfill the acceptable dose-volume constraints and pass patient-specific quality assurance. We believe these plans can be applied to selected patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer.

Long-term safety of high-dose whole pelvic IMRT for high-risk localized prostate cancer through 10-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of whole pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a simultaneous-integrated boost (WP-SIB-IMRT) for locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPCa).

METHODS

All patients with cT3-4N0M0 prostate cancer treated with WP-SIB-IMRT between February 2006 and September 2009 at our institution were analyzed retrospectively. The prescribed dose was 78 Gy to the prostate and 58.5 Gy to the prophylactic pelvic lymph nodal area in 39 fractions delivered using the simultaneous-integrated boost technique. All patients received short-term neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy alone (median 8.3 months). Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to evaluate the additional benefit of prophylactic whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT), using the cohort of 203 LAPCa patients treated with prostate-only IMRT (PO-IMRT).

RESULTS

In total, 47 consecutive patients were analyzed. The median estimated risk of pelvic lymph node involvement was 57.5%. The median follow-up period was 10.5 years. The 10 year prostate cancer-specific survival and biochemical failure (BF) rates were 92.2 and 54.8%, respectively. The 10 year cumulative incidence rates of ≥ grade 2 late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 21.6 and 17.2%, respectively. From a total of 250 patients, PSM analysis identified 76 patients with similar characteristics, and no significant difference in BF rates was observed between WP-SIB-IMRT and PO-IMRT cohorts (p = 0.261).

CONCLUSIONS

WP-SIB-IMRT for LAPCa was safe over long-term observation, although no clear benefit of WPRT was observed among our small and highly selected cohort. Regarding the additional efficacy of WPRT, further investigations are needed.

Proton Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Results From a Single-Center Experience

PURPOSE

Although proton therapy is controversial, it has been used to treat localized prostate cancer over the past 2 decades. The purpose of this study is to examine the long-term efficacy and toxicity of proton therapy for localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This was a retrospective observational study of 2021 patients from 2003 to 2014 at a single institution. Patients were classified using the risk groups defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, version 4.2019. Ninety-eight percent of the patients received 74 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 37 fractions. Fifty-one and 6% of the patients received neoadjuvant and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy, respectively. The outcomes were the time of freedom from biochemical relapse and the time to late toxicity by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. The outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 84 months (interquartile range, 60-110). The 5- and 10-year freedom from biochemical relapse rates were 100% and 100%, 99% and 88%, 93% and 86%, 90% and 79%, 88% and 68%, and 76% and 63% for the very low, low, favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, high, and very high-risk groups, respectively. Patients with higher risk experienced biochemical relapse after shorter periods. The 5-year rates of grade 2 or higher late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were 2.2% and 4.0%, respectively. The results of multivariable analyses indicate that younger patients more often experienced biochemical relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the favorable biochemical controls of proton therapy even in advanced localized prostate cancer patients with a low incidence of late toxicities, supporting the feasibility of conducting prospective clinical trials. The risk groups defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, version 4.2019, are useful to classify patients with localized prostate cancer. Our findings might suggest the necessity to develop a treatment strategy that accounts for the patient's age.

Increased risk of disease progression in younger men: Analysis of factors predicting biochemical failure and castration-resistant prostate cancer after high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical significance of the effect of age on disease control in men who received high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nonmetastatic prostate cancer (NMPCa).

METHODS

NMPCa patients with favorable intermediate to very high-risk features (National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk classification) treated with IMRT at our institution between September 2000 and May 2011 were analyzed retrospectively. Treatment consisted of high-dose IMRT (74-78 Gy/37-39 fractions) combined with 6 months of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Multivariable analysis using Fine and Gray's regression model was performed to evaluate whether age at initiation of IMRT was associated with biochemical failure (BF) and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) progression.

RESULTS

A total of 367 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 8.8 years after IMRT. The 5- and 10-year BF rates were 22.1 and 31.7%, and those of CRPC rates were 4.5 and 12.6%, respectively. Multivariable analysis revealed that a younger age (cut-off: 70 years old) at the initiation of IMRT was significantly correlated with both a higher BF rate (hazard ratio: 1.691, P= 0.0064) and higher CRPC rate (hazard ratio: 2.579, P = 0.0079).

CONCLUSIONS

Younger men with NMPCa had increased risks of BF and CRPC after high-dose IMRT, and may benefit from more intensive treatments. Our findings should be further tested in prospective studies.

Long-term clinical outcomes of salvage pelvic radiation therapy for oligo-recurrent pelvic lymph nodes after definitive external-beam radiation therapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer

Although salvage external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is an attractive treatment option for pelvic lymph nodal recurrence (PeNR) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa), limited data are available regarding its long-term efficacy. This study examined the long-term clinical outcomes of patients who underwent salvage pelvic radiation therapy (sPRT) for oligo-recurrent pelvic lymph nodes after definitive EBRT for non-metastatic PCa. Patients who developed PeNR after definitive EBRT and were subsequently treated with sPRT at our institution between November 2007 and December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. The prescribed dose was 45-50.4 Gy (1.8-2 Gy per fraction) to the upper pelvis, with up to 54-66 Gy (1.8-2 Gy per fraction) for recurrent nodes. Long-term hormonal therapy was used as neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy. The study population consisted of 12 consecutive patients with PeNR after definitive EBRT (median age: 73 years). The median follow-up period was 58.9 months. The 5-year overall survival, PCa-specific survival, biochemical failure-free, clinical failure-free, and castration-resistant PCa-free rates were 82.5, 100.0, 62.3, 81.8, and 81.8%, respectively. No grade 2 or higher sPRT-related late toxicities occurred. In conclusion, more than half of the study patients treated with sPRT had a long-term disease-free status with acceptable morbidities. Moreover, most of the patients maintained hormonal sensitivity. Therefore, this approach may be a promising treatment method for oligo-recurrent pelvic lymph nodes.

Low incidence of late recurrence in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated by intensity-modulated radiation therapy plus short-term androgen deprivation therapy

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the long-term outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with IR PCa treated with IMRT at our institution between September 2000 and November 2010 were analyzed retrospectively. The treatment consisted of IMRT (70-78 Gy in 35-39 fractions) combined with 6 months of neoadjuvant ADT. Salvage ADT was initiated when the prostate-specific antigen level was > 4.0 ng/mL RESULTS: In total, 106 consecutive patients with IR PCa (median age: 70 years old) were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 8.0 years. The overall survival, PCa-specific survival, biochemical failure, and clinical failure rates were 99.0%, 100.0%, 6.8%, and 1.9% at 5 years and 89.1%, 100.0%, 11.3%, and 2.9% at 10 years, respectively. Late recurrence (> 5 years) was observed in three cases (2.8%). The cumulative incidence rates of genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities (grade 2/3) were 10.5% and 5.8% at 5 years, and 14.7% and 5.8% at 10 years, respectively. No patient developed grade 4/5 GU toxicities or grade 3-5 GI toxicities.

CONCLUSION

IMRT at a dose up to 78 Gy combined with short-term neoadjuvant ADT resulted in excellent long-term disease-free outcomes with acceptable morbidities among patients with IR PCa. In addition, the incidence of late recurrence was very low. Further investigation is warranted to confirm our findings.