Quel rapport alpha/bêta pour le cancer prostatique en 2019 ?

Retrospective study on the toxicity induced by stereotactic body radiotherapy: overview of the reunion experience on prostate cancer in elderly patients

Introduction

Prostate cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer among men worldwide. Various tools are used to manage disease such as conventional radiotherapy. However, it has been demonstrated that large prostate volumes were often associated with higher rates of genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities. Currently, the improvements in radiotherapy technology have led to the development of stereotactic body radiotherapy, which delivers higher and much more accurate radiation doses. In order to complete literature data about short-term outcome and short-term toxic effects of stereotactic body radiotherapy, we aimed to share our experience about gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities associated with stereotactic body radiotherapy in prostate cancer in patients over 70 years old.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of elderly patients with prostate cancer treated between 2021 and 2022. The elderly patients were treated with a non-coplanar robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy platform using real-time tracking of implanted fiducials. The prostate, with or without part of the seminal vesicles, was treated with a total dose of 36.25 Gy delivered in five fractions, each fraction being administered every other day.

Results

We analyzed a total of 80 elderly patients, comprising 38 low-, 37 intermediate- and 5 high-risk patients. The median follow-up duration was 12 months. We did not observe biochemical/clinical recurrence, distant metastasis, or death. Grade 2 acute genitourinary toxicity was observed in 9 patients (11.25%) and Grade 2 acute gastrointestinal toxicity in 4 patients (5.0%). We did not observe any grade 3 or more acute or late toxicities.

Conclusion

Over the follow-up period, we noted a low frequency of gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities induced by stereotactic body radiotherapy in the context of prostate cancer in elderly patients. Therefore, stereotactic body radiotherapy seems to represent a promising treatment option for elderly patients, with acceptable acute toxicity.

High-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy versus as boost in unfavorable intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer: A matched-pair analysis

PURPOSE

High-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy (HDR-M), or as a boost combined with external beam radiotherapy (HDR-B), are both suitable treatments for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. However, data directly comparing these two approaches for men with unfavorable intermediate-risk (UIR) patients are lacking.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with NCCN-defined UIR prostate cancer treated from 1997 to 2020 were identified in a prospectively maintained, single institution database. HDR-M and HDR-B patients were matched using three factors: age ±3 years; Gleason score (major and minor); and clinical T stage. Biochemical failure was defined as PSA nadir (nPSA) + 2. Available acute and chronic toxicities are additionally reported.

RESULTS

A total of 247 patients were identified (170 receiving HDR-B, 77 receiving HDR-M), ultimately yielding 70 matched pairs (140 patients) for inclusion. The median followup time was 5.2 years for HDR-M compared with 9.3 years for HDR-B (p < 0.001). The two cohorts had similar calculated prostate EQD2 (HDR-B 118 Gy vs. HDR-M 115 Gy, p = 0.977). No significant differences in OS, CSS, DM, LRR, or FFBF were identified. HDR-B had an increased rate of any acute grade 2+ gastrointestinal toxicity and worse acute dysuria and diarrhea. Chronic gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy is an effective treatment option for selected patients with unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer and provides a more favorable gastrointestinal toxicity profile than HDR-B. Prospective trials should be conducted to refine the selection process for this heterogeneous cohort of patients.

Tolerability of concurrent external beam radiotherapy and [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 for node-positive prostate cancer in treatment naïve patients, phase I study (PROQURE-I trial)

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer patients with locoregional lymph node disease at diagnosis (N1M0) still have a limited prognosis despite the improvements provided by aggressive curative intent multimodal locoregional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with systemic androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Although some patients can be cured and the majority of patients have a long survival, the 5-year biochemical failure rate is currently 29-47%. [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 has shown impressive clinical and biochemical responses with low toxicity in salvage setting in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. This study aims to explore the combination of standard EBRT and ADT complemented with a single administration of [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in curative intent treatment for N1M0 prostate cancer. Hypothetically, this combined approach will enhance EBRT to better control macroscopic tumour localizations, and treat undetected microscopic disease locations inside and outside EBRT fields.

METHODS

The PROQURE-I study is a multicenter prospective phase I study investigating standard of care treatment (7 weeks EBRT and 3 years ADT) complemented with one concurrent cycle (three, six, or nine GBq) of systemic [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 administered in week two of EBRT. A maximum of 18 patients with PSMA-positive N1M0 prostate cancer will be included. The tolerability of adding [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 will be evaluated using a Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) dose-escalation design. The primary objective is to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a single cycle [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 when given concurrent with EBRT + ADT, defined as the occurrence of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 5.0 grade three or higher acute toxicity. Secondary objectives include: late toxicity at 6 months, dosimetric assessment, preliminary biochemical efficacy at 6 months, quality of life questionnaires, and pharmacokinetic modelling of [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617.

DISCUSSION

This is the first prospective study to combine EBRT and ADT with [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in treatment naïve men with N1M0 prostate cancer, and thereby explores the novel application of [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in curative intent treatment. It is considered likely that this study will confirm tolerability as the combined toxicity of these treatments is expected to be limited. Increased efficacy is considered likely since both individual treatments have proven high anti-tumour effect as mono-treatments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials, NCT05162573 . Registered 7 October 2021.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy versus Brachytherapy: Relative Strengths of Two Highly Efficient Options for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a valid option for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In randomized trials, it was found not inferior to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). It also compares favorably to brachytherapy (BT) even if level 1 evidence is lacking. However, BT remains a strong competitor, especially for young patients, as series with 10-15 years of median follow-up have proven its efficacy over time. SBRT will thus have to confirm its effectiveness over the long-term as well. SBRT has the advantage over BT of less acute urinary toxicity and, more hypothetically, less sexual impairment. Data are limited regarding SBRT for high-risk disease while BT, as a boost after EBRT, has demonstrated superiority against EBRT alone in randomized trials. However, patients should be informed of significant urinary toxicity. SBRT is under investigation in strategies of treatment intensification such as combination of EBRT plus SBRT boost or focal dose escalation to the tumor site within the prostate. Our goal was to examine respective levels of evidence of SBRT and BT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicity and quality of life, and to discuss strategies of treatment intensification.

Heuristic estimation of the α/β ratio for a cohort of Mexican patients with prostate cancer treated with external radiotherapy techniques

Background

The aim of the study was to Estimate and compare the radiobiological ratio α/β with the heuristic method for a cohort of Mexican patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who were treated with external radiotherapy (RT) techniques at three Hospital Institutions in Mexico City. With the Kaplan-Meier technique and the Cox proportional hazards model, the biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) is determined and characterized for cohorts of Mexican patients with PCa who received treatment with external RT. Using these clinical outcomes, the radiobiological parameter α/β is determined using the heuristic methodology of Pedicini et. al.

Materials and methods

The α/β is calculated from the survival curves for different treatment schemes implemented at three distinct hospitals. The Pedicini's techniques allow to determine the parameters α/β, k and N ₀ when treatments are not radiobiologically equivalent, therefore, are built up of a set of curved pairs for the biologically effective dose (BED) versus the ratio α/β, where the ratio is given by the intersection for each pair of curves.

Results

Six different values of α/β were found: the first α/β = 2.46 Gy, the second α/β = 3.30 Gy, the third for α/β = 3.25 Gy, the fourth α/β = 3.24 Gy, the fifth α/β = 3.38 Gy and the last α/β = 4.08 Gy. These values can be explained as follows: a) The bRFS of the schemes presents a statistical variation; b) The absorbed doses given to the patient present uncertainties on the physical dosimetry that are not on the modeling; c) Finally, in the model for the bRFS of Eq. (3), there are parameters that have to be considered, such as: the number of clonogenic tumor cells N ₀ , the overall treatment time (OTT), the kick-off time for tumor repopulation T _k and the repopulation doubling time. Therefore, the mean value to α/β for all schemes has an average value of 3.29 (± 0.52) Gy.

Conclusions

The value of α / β ¯ = 3.29   ( ± 0.52 )   Gy is determined from cohorts of Mexican patients with PC a treated with external radiotherapy using the time-dependent LQ model, which is a higher value with respect to the "dogma" value of α/β 1.5 Gy obtained with the LQ model without temporal dependence. Therefore, there is a possibility of optimizing treatments radiobiologically and improving the results of bRFS in Mexican patients with PCa treated with external radiotherapy.

Retrospective comparison of rectal toxicity between carbon-ion radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy based on treatment plan, normal tissue complication probability model, and clinical outcomes in prostate cancer

This retrospective study assessed the treatment planning data and clinical outcomes for 152 prostate cancer patients: 76 consecutive patients treated by carbon-ion radiation therapy and 76 consequtive patients treated by moderate hypo-fractionated intensity-modulated photon radiation therapy. These two modalities were compared using linear quadratic model equivalent doses in 2 Gy per fraction for rectal or rectal wall dose-volume histogram, 3.6 Gy per fraction-converted rectal dose-volume histogram, normal tissue complication probability model, and actual clinical outcomes. Carbon-ion radiation therapy was predicted to have a lower probability of rectal adverse events than intensity-modulated photon radiation therapy based on dose-volume histograms and normal tissue complication probability model. There was no difference in the clinical outcome of rectal adverse events between the two modalities compared in this study.

[Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: Results, limits and prospects]

Still an emerging approach a few years ago, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has ranked as a valid option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Inherent properties of prostatic adenocarcinoma (low α/β) make it the perfect candidate. We propose a critical review of the literature trying to put results into perspective to identify their strengths, limits and axes of development. Technically sophisticated, the stereotactic irradiation of the prostate is well tolerated. Despite the fact that median follow-up of published data is still limited, ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy seems very efficient for the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancers. Data seem satisfying for high-risk cancers as well. New developments are being studied with a main interest in treatment intensification for unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk cancers. Advantage is taken of the sharp dose gradient of stereotactic radiotherapy to offer safe reirradiation to patients with local recurrence in a previously irradiated area.

[Low-dose irradiation of non-malignant diseases: Did we throw the baby out with the bathwater?]

The irradiation of non-malignant diseases, essentially for anti-inflammatory purpose, have been largely proposed and performed worldwide until the 1970-80s. At that time, the better assessment of the radio-induced malignancies, essentially in children and young patients, as well as the efficacy of the new anti-inflammatory drugs (steroids and non-steroids), led to the almost disappearance of those techniques, at least in France. In contrast, our German colleagues are still going on treating about 50,000 patients per year for non-malignant (more or less severe) diseases. After a short historical overview, the present article suggests that we were possibly going too far in the rejection of those low-dose irradiations for benign lesions. The recent emergence of new preclinical data, the better understanding of the risk of radio-induced secondary tumours (almost nil in the elderly), and the severity of some situations, such as the cytokine storm of the COVID-19, should probably lead us to reconsider those low - and sometimes very low (less than 1Gy) - irradiations for well-selected indications in the elderly.

Optimal timing of radiotherapy in high risk prostate cancer: Do missed days matter?

Introduction

High-risk prostate cancer is associated with poorer overall survival (OS) and biochemical control compared to more favorable risk groups. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is widely used; however, outcomes data are limited with respect to time elapsed between diagnosis and initiation of EBRT.

Methods

The National Cancer Database was queried from 2004 to 2015 for patients diagnosed with high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate who received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and definitive EBRT. Logistic regression was utilized to determine covariates associated with missing EBRT treatments. OS was analyzed using multivariate cox proportional hazards models and propensity score matching.

Results

9,610 patients met inclusion criteria with median follow-up of 40.6 months and median age of 72 years. Median PSA was 8.7 and median EBRT dose was 78 Gy. ADT was initiated at a median of 36 days and EBRT at a median of 63 days post-diagnosis. Median number of prolonged treatment days was 2.2. Black race (OR: 1.40; p < 0.01), treatment at a community clinic (OR: 1.32; p < 0.01), and living in an urban/densely populated area were associated with prolonged treatment. Time elapsed between ADT and EBRT > 74 days (HR: 1.20; p = 0.01) and prolonged treatment>3 days of EBRT (HR: 1.26; p = 0.005) were associated with an increased hazard of death. The 5-year OS was 79.6% and 82.9% for patients with prolonged treatment of 3 days or more of EBRT and those missing 3 days or less, respectively (p = 0.0006).

Conclusion

In this hypothesis-generating study, prolonged treatment delays and missing three or more EBRT treatments was associated with poorer OS in patients with high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

[Treatment of primary disease for synchronous metastatic prostate cancer]

The management of early metastatic prostate cancer is based on systemic treatment by androgen deprivation therapy with or without chemotherapy or next-generation anti-androgen therapies. Local treatment of the prostate was initially used only to alleviate local symptoms. However, local radiotherapy of the prostate has been the subject of retrospective and prospective studies in patients with better prognostic factors, particularly in oligometastatic status. The results of these studies support that prostate radiotherapy can prolong the survival of patients with a low metastatic burden. This article states the biological bases, the main published and future published studies aimed to embed this strategy to optimize therapeutic management.

[Moderate or extreme hypofractionation and localized prostate cancer: The times are changing]

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.