1
|
Mohamad O, Zamboglou C, Zilli T, Murthy V, Aebersold DM, Loblaw A, Guckenberger M, Shelan M. Safety of Ultrahypofractionated Pelvic Nodal Irradiation in the Definitive Management of Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:998-1010. [PMID: 37863241 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.09.053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 10/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the evidence for ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation in patients with prostate cancer, with a focus on reported acute and late toxicities. METHODS AND MATERIALS A comprehensive search was conducted in 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception until March 23, 2023. Eligible publications included patients with intermediate- and high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer who underwent elective or therapeutic ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation. Primary outcomes included the presence of grade ≥2 rates of acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scales. Quality assessment was performed using National Institutes of Health tools for noncontrolled beforeand after (single arm) clinical trials, as well as single-arm observational studies. Because all outcomes were categorical variables, proportion was calculated to estimate the effect size and compare the outcomes after the intervention. RESULTS We identified 16 publications that reported the use of ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy to treat the pelvis in prostate cancer. Seven publications met our criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, including 417 patients. The median total dose to the pelvic lymph nodes was 25 Gy (range, 25-28.5 Gy), with a median of 5 fractions. The prostate received a median dose of 40 Gy (range, 35-47.5 Gy). All studies used androgen deprivation therapy for a median duration of 18 months. The median follow-up period was 3 years (range, 0.5-5.6 years). The rates of acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were 8% (95% CI, 1%-15%) and 29% (95% CI, 18%-41%), respectively. For late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity, the rates were 13% (95% CI, 5%-21%) and 29% (95% CI, 17%-42%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation appears to be a safe approach in terms of acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - Uwniversity of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ACTREC, Tata Memorial Centre and Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gao L, Wei R, Qin S, Tian Y, Xia W, Song Y, Wang S, Fang H, Tang Y, Jing H, Liu Y, Tang Y, Qi S, Chen B, Li Y, Xing N, Lu N. Adaptive ultra-hypofractionated whole-pelvic radiotherapy in high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer on 1.5-Tesla MR-Linac: Estimated delivered dose and early toxicity results. Chronic Dis Transl Med 2024; 10:51-61. [PMID: 38450305 PMCID: PMC10914013 DOI: 10.1002/cdt3.114] [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: 10/09/2023] [Revised: 12/17/2023] [Accepted: 12/25/2023] [Indexed: 03/08/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Magnetic resonance (MR)-guided ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy with whole-pelvic irradiation (UHF-WPRT) is a novel approach to radiotherapy for patients with high-risk (HR) and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (PCa). However, the inherent complexity of adaptive UHF-WPRT might inevitably result in longer on-couch time. We aimed to estimate the delivered dose, study the feasibility and safety of adaptive UHF-WPRT on a 1.5-Tesla MR-Linac. Methods Ten patients with clinical stage T3a-4N0-1M0-1c PCa, who consecutively received UHF-WPRT, were enrolled prospectively. The contours of the target and organ-at-risks on the position verification-MR (PV-MR), beam-on 3D-MR(Bn-MR), and post-MR (after radiotherapy delivery) were derived from the pre-MR data by deformable image registration. The physician then manually adjusted them, and dose recalculation was performed accordingly. GraphPad Prism 9 (GraphPad Prism Software Inc.) was utilized for conducting statistical analyses. Results In total, we collected 188 MR scans (50 pre-MR, 50 PV-MR, 44 Bn-MR, and 44 post-MR scans). With median 59 min, the mean prostate clinical target volume (CTV)-V100% was 98.59% ± 2.74%, and the mean pelvic CTVp-V100% relative percentages of all scans was 99.60% ± 1.18%. The median V29 Gy change in the rectal wall was -2% (-18% to 20%). With a median follow-up of 9 months, no patient had acute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade 2 or more severe genitourinary (GU) or gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities (0%). Conclusion UHF-RT to the prostate and the whole pelvis with concomitant boost to positive nodes using an Adapt-To-Shape (ATS) workflow was technically feasible for patients with HR and VHR PCa, presenting only mild GU and GI toxicities. The estimated target dose during the beam-on phase was clinically acceptable based on the 3D-MR-based dosimetry analysis. Clinical trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2000033382.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linrui Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Ran Wei
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Shirui Qin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Yuan Tian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Wenlong Xia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Yongwen Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Shulian Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Hui Fang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Yu Tang
- GCP Center/Clinical Research Center, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Hao Jing
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Yueping Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Yuan Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Shunan Qi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Bo Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Yexiong Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Nianzeng Xing
- Department of Urology, State Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| | - Ningning Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Fink CA, Wegener D, Sauer LD, Jäkel C, Zips D, Debus J, Herfarth K, Koerber SA. Whole-pelvic irradiation with boost to involved nodes and prostate in node-positive prostate cancer-long-term data from the prospective PLATIN-2 trial. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:202-207. [PMID: 37640867 PMCID: PMC10876493 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02129-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2023] [Accepted: 07/23/2023] [Indexed: 08/31/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Node-positive prostate cancer is a potentially curable disease. Definitive radiotherapy to the prostate and lymphatic drainage is an effective treatment option but prospective long-term outcome data are scarce. Thus, the current study aimed to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of definitive radiation therapy for men with prostate cancer and nodal metastases using modern irradiation techniques. METHODS A total of 40 treatment-naïve men with node-positive prostate cancer were allocated to the trial. All patients received definitive radiation therapy at two German university hospitals between 2009 and 2018. Radiation was delivered as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with 51 Gy to the lymphatic drainage with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) up to 61.2 Gy to involved nodes and 76.5 Gy to the prostate in 34 fractions. Feasibility and safety, overall and progression-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life measurements were analyzed. RESULTS During a median follow-up of 79 months, median overall survival was 107 months and progression-free survival was 78 months. Based on imaging follow-up, no infield relapse was reported during the first 24 months of follow-up. There were 3 (8%) potentially treatment-related grade 3 toxicities. Common iliac node involvement was associated with a higher risk of progression (HR 15.8; 95% CI 2.1-119.8; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION Definitive radiation to the lymphatic drainage with SIB to the involved nodes and prostate is a safe and effective treatment approach for patients with treatment-naïve, node-positive prostate cancer with excellent infield tumor control rates and tolerable toxicity. Location rather than number of involved nodes is a major risk factor for progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C A Fink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, INF 400, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiooncology (HIRO), INF 400, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- INF 460, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - D Wegener
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - L D Sauer
- University of Heidelberg, INF 130.3, Institute of Medical Biometry (IMBI), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - C Jäkel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, INF 400, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiooncology (HIRO), INF 400, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - D Zips
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - J Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, INF 400, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiooncology (HIRO), INF 400, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- INF 460, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit, INF 280, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- INF 450, Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - K Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, INF 400, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiooncology (HIRO), INF 400, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- INF 460, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit, INF 280, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - S A Koerber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, INF 400, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiooncology (HIRO), INF 400, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- INF 460, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Barmherzige Brueder Hospital Regensburg, Pruefeninger Straße 86, 93049, Regensburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Poon DMC, Yuan J, Yang B, Wong OL, Chiu ST, Chiu G, Cheung KY, Yu SK, Yung RWH. A Prospective Study of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) with Concomitant Whole-Pelvic Radiotherapy (WPRT) for High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Patients Using 1.5 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Guidance: The Preliminary Clinical Outcome. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14143484. [PMID: 35884553 PMCID: PMC9321843 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14143484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2022] [Revised: 07/15/2022] [Accepted: 07/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Conventionally fractionated whole-pelvic nodal radiotherapy (WPRT) improves clinical outcome compared to prostate-only RT in high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PC). MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (MRgSBRT) with concomitant WPRT represents a novel radiotherapy (RT) paradigm for HR-PC, potentially improving online image guidance and clinical outcomes. This study aims to report the preliminary clinical experiences and treatment outcome of 1.5 Tesla adaptive MRgSBRT with concomitant WPRT in HR-PC patients. Materials and methods: Forty-two consecutive HR-PC patients (72.5 ± 6.8 years) were prospectively enrolled, treated by online adaptive MRgSBRT (8 Gy(prostate)/5 Gy(WPRT) × 5 fractions) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and followed up (median: 251 days, range: 20−609 days). Clinical outcomes were measured by gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Scale v. 5.0, patient-reported quality of life (QoL) with EPIC (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) questionnaire, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses. Results: All MRgSBRT fractions achieved planning objectives and dose specifications of the targets and organs at risk, and they were successfully delivered. The maximum cumulative acute GI/GU grade 1 and 2 toxicity rates were 19.0%/81.0% and 2.4%/7.1%, respectively. The subacute (>30 days) GI/GU grade 1 and 2 toxicity rates were 21.4%/64.3% and 2.4%/2.4%, respectively. No grade 3 toxicities were reported. QoL showed insignificant changes in urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal domain scores during the follow-up period. All patients had early post-MRgSBRT biochemical responses, while biochemical recurrence (PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL) occurred in one patient at month 18. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study that showed the clinical outcomes of MRgSBRT with concomitant WPRT in HR-PC patients. The early results suggested favorable treatment-related toxicities and encouraging patient-reported QoLs, but long-term follow-up is needed to confirm our early results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Darren M C Poon
- Comprehensive Oncology Centre, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Jing Yuan
- Research Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Bin Yang
- Medical Physics Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Oi-Lei Wong
- Research Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Sin-Ting Chiu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - George Chiu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Kin-Yin Cheung
- Medical Physics Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Siu-Ki Yu
- Medical Physics Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Raymond W H Yung
- Research Department, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Happy Valley, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pancreatic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With or Without Hypofractionated Elective Nodal Irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 112:131-142. [PMID: 34348171 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.07.1698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2021] [Revised: 07/14/2021] [Accepted: 07/20/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Pancreatic stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is limited to gross tumor without elective coverage for subclinical disease. Given a better understanding of recurrence patterns, we hypothesized that the addition of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) to pancreatic SBRT would be tolerable and would decrease locoregional progression. METHODS AND MATERIALS We conducted a retrospective 1:2 propensity-matched cohort study to compare toxicity and locoregional progression among patients treated with pancreatic SBRT with or without ENI. In the SBRT + ENI cohort, an elective target volume was delineated per Radiation Therapy Oncology Group guidelines and treated to 25 Gy in 5 fractions alongside 40 Gy in 5 fractions to gross disease. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of locoregional progression, with death as a competing risk. RESULTS Among 135 candidate controls treated with SBRT alone, 100 were propensity-matched to 50 patients treated with SBRT + ENI. All patients completed SBRT. Median potential radiographic follow-up was 28 months. The incidence of late and serious acute toxicity was similar between matched cohorts. However, SBRT + ENI was associated with a statistically significant increase in acute grade 1 to 2 nausea (60% vs 20%, P < .001). The 24-month cumulative incidences of locoregional progression with and without ENI were 22.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0%-35.1%) versus 44.6% (95% CI, 34.8%-54.4%; multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.18-0.87; P = .021). This was stable in sensitivity analyses of uniform prescription dose, multiagent chemotherapy, and resectability. There were fewer peripancreatic (0% vs 7%), porta hepatis (2% vs 7%), and peri-aortic/aortocaval (5% vs 12%) recurrences after SBRT + ENI, but no difference in survival. CONCLUSIONS Pancreatic SBRT + ENI was tolerable and did not increase late or serious acute toxicity relative to a matched cohort undergoing SBRT alone, but did increase acute grade 1 to 2 nausea. The addition of ENI to SBRT was associated with decreased locoregional progression but not improved survival. Further studies are warranted to determine whether ENI offers meaningful benefit.
Collapse
|
6
|
Hannan R, Salamekh S, Desai NB, Garant A, Folkert MR, Costa DN, Mannala S, Ahn C, Mohamad O, Laine A, Kim DWN, Dickinson T, Raj GV, Shah RB, Wang J, Jia X, Choy H, Roehrborn CG, Lotan Y, Timmerman RD. SAbR for High-Risk Prostate Cancer-A Prospective Multilevel MRI-Based Dose Escalation Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 113:290-301. [PMID: 34774676 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.10.137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2021] [Revised: 09/15/2021] [Accepted: 10/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Radiation dose intensification improves outcome in men with high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa). A prospective trial was conducted to determine safety, feasibility, and maximal tolerated dose of multilevel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based 5-fraction SAbR in patients with HR-PCa. METHODS AND MATERIALS This phase I clinical trial enrolled patients with HR-PCa with grade group ≥4, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥20 ng/mL, or radiographic ≥T3, and well-defined prostatic lesions on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) into 4 dose-escalation cohorts. The initial cohort received 47.5 Gy to the prostate, 50 Gy to mpMRI-defined intraprostatic lesion(s), and 22.5 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes in 5 fractions. Radiation doses were escalated for pelvic nodes to 25 Gy and mpMRI lesion(s) to 52.5 Gy and then 55 Gy. Escalation was performed sequentially according to rule-based trial design with 7 to 15 patients per cohort and a 90-day observation period. All men received peri-rectal hydrogel spacer, intraprostatic fiducial placement, and 2 years of androgen deprivation. The primary endpoint was maximal tolerated dose according to a 90-day acute dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate <33%. DLT was defined as National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events ≥grade 3 treatment-related toxicity. Secondary outcomes included acute and delayed gastrointestinal (GI)/genitourinary (GU) toxicity graded with Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS Fifty-five of the 62 enrolled patients were included in the analysis. Dose was escalated through all 4 cohorts without observing any DLTs. Median overall follow-up was 18 months, with a median follow-up of 42, 24, 12, and 7.5 months for cohorts 1 to 4 respectively. Acute and late grade 2 GU toxicities were 25% and 20%, while GI were 13% and 7%, respectively. Late grade 3 GU and GI toxicities were 2% and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS SAbR dose for HR-PCa was safely escalated with multilevel dose painting of 47.5 Gy to prostate, 55 Gy to mpMRI-defined intraprostatic lesions, and 25 Gy to pelvic nodal region in 5 fractions. Longer and ongoing follow-up will be required to assess late toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Chul Ahn
- Population and Data Science, Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas at Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Aaron Laine
- The Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders, Fort Worth, Texas
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Xun Jia
- Departments of Radiation Oncology
| | - Hak Choy
- Departments of Radiation Oncology
| | | | | | - Robert D Timmerman
- Departments of Radiation Oncology; Neurosurgery, Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas at Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Slevin F, Thompson CM, Speight R, Murray LJ, Lilley J, Henry AM. Ultra hypofractionated extended nodal irradiation using volumetric modulated arc therapy for oligorecurrent pelvic nodal prostate cancer. Med Dosim 2021; 46:411-418. [PMID: 34148727 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2021.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2021] [Revised: 04/22/2021] [Accepted: 05/12/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) may recur after primary treatment but no standard of care exists for patients with pelvic nodal relapse. Based on obervational data, Extended Nodal Irradiation (ENI) might be associated with fewer treatment failures than Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) to the involved node(s) alone. Ultra hypofractionated ENI is yet to be evaluated in this setting, but it could provide a therapeutic advantage if PCa has a low α/β ratio in addition to patient convenience/resource benefits. This volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning study developed a class solution for 5-fraction Extended Nodal Irradiation (ENI) plus a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to involved node(s). Ten patients with oligorecurrent nodal disease after radical prostatectomy/post-operative prostate bed radiotherapy were selected. Three plans were produced for each dataset to deliver 25 Gy in 5 fractions ENI plus SIBs of 40, 35 and 30 Gy. The biologically effective dose (BED) formula was used to determine the remaining dose in 5 fractions that could be delivered to re-irradiated segments of organs at risk (OARs). Tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were calculated using the LQ-Poisson Marsden and Lyman-Kutcher-Burman models respectively. Six patients had an OAR positioned within planning target volume node (PTVn), which resulted in reduced target coverage to PTV node in six, five and four instances for 40, 35 and 30 Gy SIB plans respectively. In these instances, only 30 Gy SIB plans had a median PTV coverage >90% (inter-quartile range 90-95). No OAR constraint was exceeded for 30 Gy SIB plans, including where segments of OARs were re-irradiated. Gross tumour volume node (GTVn) median TCP was 95.7% (94.4-96), 90.7% (87.1-91.2) and 78.6% (75.8-81.1) for 40, 35 and 30 Gy SIB plans respectively, where an α/β ratio of 1.5 was assumed. SacralPlex median NTCP was 43.2% (0.7-61.2), 12.1% (0.6-29.7) and 2.5% (0.5-5.1) for 40, 35 and 30 Gy SIB plans respectively. NTCP for Bowel_Small was <0.3% and zero for other OARs for all three plan types. Ultra hypofractionated ENI planning for pelvic nodal relapsed PCa appears feasible with encouraging estimates of nodal TCP and low estimates of NTCP, especially where a low α/β ratio is assumed and a 30 Gy SIB is delivered. This solution should be further evaluated within a clinical trial and compared against SABR to involved node(s) alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Finbar Slevin
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK; University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
| | | | - Richard Speight
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Louise J Murray
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK; University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
| | - John Lilley
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Ann M Henry
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK; University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Safety and Efficacy of Ultra-hypofractionation in Node-positive Prostate Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 33:172-180. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.10.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2020] [Revised: 09/06/2020] [Accepted: 10/23/2020] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
9
|
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
|
10
|
Zelefsky MJ, Pinitpatcharalert A, Kollmeier M, Goldman DA, McBride S, Gorovets D, Zhang Z, Varghese M, Happersett L, Tyagi N, Hunt M. Early Tolerance and Tumor Control Outcomes with High-dose Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 3:748-755. [PMID: 31668713 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.09.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2019] [Revised: 08/26/2019] [Accepted: 09/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Studies using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) dose escalation in in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients have indicated favorable outcomes. OBJECTIVE To evaluate tolerance and tumor control outcomes in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with high-dose SBRT following our phase 1 trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 551 patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with SBRT. INTERVENTION Treatment with 37.5-40Gy SBRT in five fractions directed to the prostate and seminal vesicles. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Outcome measurements included acute toxicities (<3 mo after radiotherapy [RT]) and late toxicities (>3 mo after RT) and tumor control evaluation (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels at 3-6-mo intervals and post-treatment prostate biopsy at 2yr). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities occurred in 1.8% of patients, and late grade 2 and 3 GI toxicities were observed in 3.4% and 0.4% of patients, respectively. Acute grade 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicities occurred in 10% of patients, and grade 3 acute GU toxicities were observed in 0.7% of patients. Late grade 2 and 3 GU toxicities were observed in 21.1% and 2.5% of patients, respectively. The use of a hydrogel rectal spacer was significantly associated with reduced late GI toxicity and lower odds of developing late GU toxicity. The median follow-up was 17 mo, and 53% of those with at least 2yr of follow-up (103/193) had a biopsy performed. The 5-yr cumulative incidence of PSA failure was 2.1%, and the incidence of a positive 2-yr treatment biopsy was 12%. Limitations to this report include its retrospective nature and short follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS Favorable short-term outcomes were achieved with high-dose SBRT for low- and intermediate-risk disease. Severe late toxicities were observed and favorable tumor control was found. PATIENT SUMMARY We utilized stereotactic body radiotherapy, a form of external beam radiotherapy that delivers highly targeted high-dose treatment to the prostate, to treat over 500 localized prostate cancer patients in five sessions over 1.5 wk. Treatments were well tolerated without significant urinary or rectal side effects. Nearly 90% of those who underwent biopsies after treatment did not demonstrate residual active disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | - Marisa Kollmeier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Debra A Goldman
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sean McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel Gorovets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Zhigang Zhang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| | - Melissa Varghese
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Laura Happersett
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| | - Neelam Tyagi
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| | - Margie Hunt
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
[Moderate or extreme hypofractionation and localized prostate cancer: The times are changing]. Cancer Radiother 2019; 23:503-509. [PMID: 31471253 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2019.07.139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2019] [Revised: 07/08/2019] [Accepted: 07/09/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
There are many treatment options for localized prostate cancers, including active surveillance, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, and radical prostatectomy. Quality of life remains a primary objective in the absence of superiority of one strategy over another in terms of specific survival with similar long-term biochemical control rates. Despite a significant decrease in digestive and urinary toxicities thanks to IMRT and IGRT, external radiotherapy remains a treatment that lasts approximately 2 months or 1.5 months, when combined with a brachytherapy boost. Given the specific radiosensitivity of this tumor, several randomized studies have shown that a hypofractionated scheme is not inferior in terms of biochemical control and toxicities, allowing to divide the number of fractions by a factor 2 to 8. Given that SBRT becomes a validated therapeutic option for a selected population of patients with localized prostate cancer, extreme hypofractionation is becoming a strong challenger of conventional external radiotherapy or brachytherapy.
Collapse
|
12
|
Bourdais R, Achkar S, Chauffert-Yvart L, Pasquier D, Sargos P, Blanchard P, Latorzeff I. [Prophylactic nodal radiotherapy in prostate cancer]. Cancer Radiother 2019; 23:688-695. [PMID: 31451356 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2019.07.149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2019] [Revised: 07/17/2019] [Accepted: 07/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
The risk of lymph node invasion, in case of prostate cancer, increases with the clinical stage of the disease, the Gleason score of prostate biopsies and the value of PSA at diagnosis. Historically, beyond 15% risk of lymph node involvement, irradiation of the pelvic areas was performed with prostate radiotherapy (RT) to take into account the risk of occult lymph node metastasis in patients at risk, but the benefit of this therapeutic approach remains to be demonstrated. The data from surgical lymph node dissection seem to question the risk levels, the escalation of the dose on the prostate increases the survival without relapse, the contribution of image-guided radiotherapy, (IGRT) and modulation of intensity (IMRT), decreases the toxicity of pelvic RT. This article reviews the principles of prophylactic ganglion irradiation for prostate cancer and discusses its relevance, current uncertainties, and prospective trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Bourdais
- Département de radiothérapie, Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94800 Villejuif, France.
| | - S Achkar
- Département de radiothérapie, Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94800 Villejuif, France.
| | - L Chauffert-Yvart
- Service d'oncologie radiothérapie, GHU La Pitié-Salpêtrière-Charles-Foix, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France.
| | - D Pasquier
- Département de radiothérapie, Centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, rue Combemale, 59020 Lille cedex; Université de Lille et Centre de Recherche en Informatique Signal et Automatique de Lille CRISTAL UMR CNRS 9189, 59000 Lille, France.
| | - P Sargos
- Département de radiothérapie, Institut Bergonié, 229, cours de l'Argonne, 33076 Bordeaux cedex, France.
| | - P Blanchard
- Département de radiothérapie, Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94800 Villejuif, France.
| | - I Latorzeff
- Département de radiothérapie-oncologie, Bât Atrium, Clinique Pasteur, 1, rue de la petite vitesse, 31300 Toulouse, France.
| |
Collapse
|