1
|
Ratnakumaran R, Zilli T. Toxicity After Prostate Radiation Therapy: Addressing the Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) Challenge. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 120:1021-1023. [PMID: 39217541 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.07.2142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2024] [Accepted: 07/03/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Ragu Ratnakumaran
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Radiotherapy and Imaging Division, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom.
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Singh M, Maitre P, Krishnan A, Adsul K, Mini Sreekumar S, Chauhan H, Bishnu PN, Phurailatpam R, Singh P, Kamble D, Bakshi G, Pal M, Arora A, Misra A, Prakash G, Murthy V. Late Urinary Toxicity After Extreme or Moderate Hypofractionated Prostate Radiation Therapy in Patients With Prior Transurethral Resection of Prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 120:1011-1020. [PMID: 38908410 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.06.003] [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: 02/07/2024] [Revised: 06/04/2024] [Accepted: 06/10/2024] [Indexed: 06/24/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To study the late urinary toxicity in patients with prostate cancer with prior transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and treated with hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, with a prior TURP, and treated with moderate or extreme hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (moderate hypofractionated radiation therapy [MHRT], stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]), were included in this study. Severity and duration of urinary symptoms observed during serial follow-up after at least 3 months from radiation therapy were graded per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 using information from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Impact of hypofractionation and other potential contributory factors on cumulative grade 2+ late urinary toxicity was analyzed with univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression. RESULTS A total of 203 eligible patients were included (MHRT = 114, 64-68 Gy/25#; SBRT = 89, 35-37.5 Gy/5#). Median time from TURP to radiation therapy was 10 months (IQR, 7-16 months), similar for MHRT and SBRT. Overall, mean cavity volume was 1.17 cc (IQR, 0.5-1.35 cc), whereas in MHRT and SBRT groups it was 1.03 cc (IQR, 0.4-1.15 cc) and 1.27 cc (IQR, 0.5-1.4 cc), respectively. At a median follow-up of 37 months, cumulative grade 3 and grade 2 late urinary toxicity was 8.4% (n = 17) and 23.2% (n = 47), respectively. Grade 3 symptoms were observed at median 29 months (IQR, 19-62 months) after radiation therapy completion, lasting for a median duration of 8 months (IQR, 2-14 months). Hematuria (6.4%) and urinary obstruction (3.4%) were the chief grade 3 symptoms. Multivariable analysis for age, diabetes, pelvic radiation therapy, fraction size, prostate volume, TURP to radiation therapy duration, and TURP cavity volume showed no significant association with late grade 2+ urinary toxicity. CONCLUSIONS In this large cohort of patients with prior TURP and treated with hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy, incidence of severe late urinary adverse effects was <10%, mainly hematuria or urinary obstruction. Most of these were temporary, and no significant contributory factors were identified for late urinary morbidity after TURP and radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Ganesh Bakshi
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | - Mahendra Pal
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | - Amandeep Arora
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | - Ankit Misra
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | - Gagan Prakash
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Neerhut T, Grills R, Lynch R, Preece PD, McLeod K. Genitourinary toxicity in patients receiving TURP prior to hypofractionated radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: A scoping review. Urol Oncol 2024; 42:165-174. [PMID: 38503591 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.02.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2023] [Revised: 02/06/2024] [Accepted: 02/27/2024] [Indexed: 03/21/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND When compared with conventional external beam radiotherapy, hypofractionated radiotherapy has led to less treatment sessions and improved quality of life without compromising oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Evidence has shown transurethral prostatic resection prior to brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy is associated with worsening genitourinary toxicity. However, there is no review of genitourinary toxicity when TURP occurs prior to definitive hypofractionated radiotherapy. In this review, we seek to illustrate the genitourinary outcomes for men with localized prostate cancer who underwent transurethral resection of the prostate prior to receiving definitive hypofractionated radiotherapy. Genitourinary outcomes are explored, and any predictive risk factors for increased genitourinary toxicity are described. METHODS PubMed, Medline (Ovid), EMBASE and Cochrane Library were all searched for relevant articles published in English within the last 25 years. This scoping review identified a total of 579 articles. Following screening by authors, 11 articles were included for analysis. RESULTS Five studies reported on acute and late toxicity. One article reported only acute toxicity while 5 documented late toxicity only. While most articles found no increased risk of acute toxicity, the risk of late toxicity, particularly hematuria was noted to be significant. Risk factors including poor baseline urinary function, prostate volume, number of prior transurethral prostatic resections, timing of radiotherapy following transurethral prostatic resection, volume of the intraprostatic resection cavity and mean dose delivered to the cavity were all found to influence genitourinary outcomes. CONCLUSION For those who have undergone prior TURP hypofractionated radiotherapy may increase the risk of late urinary toxicity, particularly hematuria. Those with persisting bladder dysfunction following TURP are at greatest risk and careful management of these men is required. Close collaboration between urologists and radiation oncologists is recommended to discuss the management of patients with residual baseline bladder dysfunction prior to commencing hypofractionated radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Neerhut
- Department of Urological Surgery, Barwon Health, University Hospital Geelong, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Richard Grills
- Department of Urological Surgery, Barwon Health, University Hospital Geelong, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rod Lynch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Andrew Love Cancer Centre, Barwon Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
| | - Patrick Daniel Preece
- Department of Urological Surgery, Barwon Health, University Hospital Geelong, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
| | - Kathryn McLeod
- Department of Urological Surgery, Barwon Health, University Hospital Geelong, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Corrao G, Marvaso G, Mastroleo F, Biffi A, Pellegrini G, Minari S, Vincini MG, Zaffaroni M, Zerini D, Volpe S, Gaito S, Mazzola GC, Bergamaschi L, Cattani F, Petralia G, Musi G, Ceci F, De Cobelli O, Orecchia R, Alterio D, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol 2024; 195:110264. [PMID: 38561122 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2023] [Revised: 03/21/2024] [Accepted: 03/24/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa. METHODS PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies). RESULTS A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes. CONCLUSION The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Corrao
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Federico Mastroleo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Annalisa Biffi
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Pellegrini
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Samuele Minari
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Giulia Vincini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Mattia Zaffaroni
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Dario Zerini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester, UK; Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Luca Bergamaschi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Cattani
- Unit of Medical Physics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Petralia
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gennaro Musi
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Ceci
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Nuclear Medicine and Theranostics, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Ottavio De Cobelli
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
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
|
6
|
Moll M, Goldner G. Assessing the toxicity after moderately hypofractionated prostate and whole pelvis radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:188-194. [PMID: 37341774 PMCID: PMC10876811 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02104-7] [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: 01/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/19/2023] [Indexed: 06/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities after moderately hypofractionated (HF) or conventionally fractionated (CF) primary whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT). METHODS Primary prostate-cancer patients treated between 2009 and 2021 with either 60 Gy at 3 Gy/fraction to the prostate and 46 Gy at 2.3 Gy/fraction to the whole pelvis (HF), or 78 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction to the prostate and 50/50.4 Gy at 1.8-2 Gy/fraction to the whole pelvis (CF). Acute and late GI and GU toxicities were retrospectively assessed. RESULTS 106 patients received HF and 157 received CF, with a median follow-up of 12 and 57 months. Acute GI toxicity rates in the HF and CF groups were, respectively, grade 2: 46.7% vs. 37.6%, and grade 3: 0% vs. 1.3%, with no significant difference (p = 0.71). Acute GU toxicity rates were, respectively, grade 2: 20.0% vs. 31.8%, and grade 3: 2.9% vs. 0%, (p = 0.04). We compared prevalence of late GI and GU toxicities between groups after 3, 12, and 24 months and did not find any significant differences (respectively, p = 0.59, 0.22, and 0.71 for GI toxicity; p = 0.39, 0.58, and 0.90 for GU toxicity). CONCLUSION Moderate HF WPRT was well tolerated during the first 2 years. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Moll
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Gregor Goldner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Masson I, Larriviere L, Mahé MA, Azria D, Pommier P, Mesgouez-Nebout N, Giraud P, Peiffert D, Chauvet B, Dudouet P, Salem N, Noël G, Khalifa J, Latorzeff I, Guérin-Charbonnel C, Supiot S. Prospective results for 5-year survival and toxicity of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in (very) high-risk prostate cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 44:100702. [PMID: 38111609 PMCID: PMC10726239 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2023] [Revised: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose High-risk (HR) prostate cancer patients usually receive high-dose radiotherapy (RT) using a two-phase sequential technique, but data on a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique are lacking. We prospectively evaluated the long-term results of urinary (GU) and digestive (GI) toxicity and survival data for high-dose RT using a SIB technique in HR and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer. Methods Patients were treated using an SIB technique in 34 fractions, at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and seminal vesicles and 74.8 Gy to the prostate, combined with 36 months of androgen-depriving therapy in a prospective multicenter study. Acute and late GU and GI toxicity data were collected. Overall survival (OS), biochemical-relapse-free survival (bRFS), loco-regional-relapse-free survival (LRRFS), metastasis-free-survival (MFS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were assessed. Results We recruited 114 patients. After a median follow-up of 62 months, very few patients experienced acute (M0-M3) (G3-4 GU = 3.7 %; G3-4 GI = 0.9 %) or late (M6-M60) severe toxicity (G3-4 GU = 5.6 %; G3-4 GI = 2.8 %). The occurrence of acute G2 + GU or GI toxicity was significantly related to the consequential late G2 + toxicity (p < 0.01 for both GU and GI). Medians of OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were not reached. At 60 months, OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were 88.2 % [82.1; 94.7], 86.0 % [79.4 %;93.2 %], 95.8 % [91.8 %;99.9 %], 87.2 % [80.9 %;94.0 %] and 84.1 % [77.2 %;91.6 %] respectively. Conclusion SIB RT at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and 74.8 Gy to the prostate is feasible, leading to satisfying tumor control and reasonable toxicity in HR and VHR prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingrid Masson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Department of Radiataion oncology, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France
| | - Laurène Larriviere
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Marc-André Mahé
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Department of Radiation Oncology, François Baclesse Cancer Center, Caen, France
| | - David Azria
- Fédération Universitaire d’Oncologie Radiothérapie FOROM, ICM, Institut régional du Cancer Montpellier, Université de Montpellier, IRCM, Montpellier, France
| | - Pascal Pommier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Léon Bérard Center, Lyon, France
| | - Nathalie Mesgouez-Nebout
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest Paul Papin, Angers, France
| | - Philippe Giraud
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Didier Peiffert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lorraine Cancer Institute, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Bruno Chauvet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sainte Catherine Institute, Avignon, France
| | - Philippe Dudouet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pont de chaume Clinic, Montauban, France
| | - Naji Salem
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France
| | - Georges Noël
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ICANS (Cancerology Institute of Strasbourg-Europe), Strasbourg, France
| | - Jonathan Khalifa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IUCT Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Igor Latorzeff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pasteur Clinic, Toulouse, France
| | - Catherine Guérin-Charbonnel
- Clinical Trial Sponsor Unit/Biometry, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Nantes Université, CNRS US2B, Nantes, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Tang T, Rodrigues G, Warner A, Bauman G. Long-Term Outcomes Following Fairly Brief Androgen Suppression and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Update From the FASTR/FASTR-2 Trials. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:e48-e56. [PMID: 37791942 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.08.006] [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: 05/03/2023] [Revised: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 10/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE There is limited data on the long-term outcomes of ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy in high-risk prostate cancer. The FASTR and FASTR-2 trials were designed to assess the tolerability of stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) in this context. Herein, the long-term results are reported. METHODS AND MATERIALS Eligible patients had localized high-risk prostate cancer and were either ≥70 years old, had a score of ≥3 on the Vulnerable Elderly Scale, or declined standard therapy. Nineteen patients from a single institution were enrolled on FASTR between 2011 and 2015. They received 40 Gy to the prostate and 25 Gy to the pelvic lymph nodes in 5 weekly fractions, with 12 months of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Thirty patients from the same institution were enrolled on FASTR-2 between 2015 and 2017. They received 35 Gy to the prostate alone in 5 weekly fractions, with 18 months of ADT. Updated toxicity and outcomes were assessed retrospectively. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for biochemical failure-free survival, freedom from distant metastases, prostate cancer-specific survival, and overall survival. RESULTS Forty-four patients were eligible for analysis, 16 from FASTR and 28 from FASTR-2. Thirty-four patients (77%) were >70 years old. High-risk features included Gleason score ≥8 (n = 20, 46%), T3-T4 disease (n = 12, 27%), and baseline prostate-specific antigen > 20 (n = 22, 50%). Median follow-up was 6.4 years. The 5-year cumulative incidence of late grade ≥3 genitourinary/gastrointestinal toxicity was 32% in FASTR and 11% in FASTR-2. At 5 years, the combined rates of biochemical failure-free survival, freedom from distant metastases, prostate cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were 72%, 90%, 92%, and 83%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS SABR can be safely delivered in high-risk prostate cancer by optimizing technical delivery, particularly with adherence to strict dose constraints for organs at risk. The clinical outcomes in FASTR and FASTR-2 were largely comparable to more standard fractionation schemes plus ADT, but further modifications may improve disease control. Larger randomized trials are necessary to better understand the efficacy and tolerability of this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Terence Tang
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - George Rodrigues
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrew Warner
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Glenn Bauman
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Western University and London Regional Cancer Program, London, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chilukuri S, Mallick I, Agrawal A, Maitre P, Arunsingh M, James FV, Kataria T, Narang K, Gurram BC, Anand AK, Utreja N, Dutta D, Pavamani S, Mitra S, Mallik S, Mahale N, Chandra M, Chinnachamy AN, Shahid T, Raghunathan MS, Kannan V, Mohanty SK, Basu T, Hotwani C, Panigrahi G, Murthy V. Multi-Institutional Clinical Outcomes of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 Prostate Cancers Treated With Contemporary High-Dose Radiation and Long-Term Androgen Deprivation Therapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:454-462. [PMID: 37061457 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2023.03.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Revised: 03/14/2023] [Accepted: 03/31/2023] [Indexed: 04/08/2023]
Abstract
AIMS This multicentric retrospective study reports long-term clinical outcomes of non-metastatic grade group 5 prostate cancers treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) alone with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients treated across 19 institutions were studied. The key endpoints that were evaluated were 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), metastases-free survival (MFS), overall survival, together with EBRT-related acute and late toxicities. The impact of various prognostic factors on the studied endpoints was analysed using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS Among the 462 patients, 88% (405) had Gleason 9 disease and 31% (142) had primary Gleason pattern 5. A prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan was used for staging in 33% (153), 80% (371) were staged as T3/T4 and 30% (142) with pelvic nodal disease. The median ADT duration was 24 months; 66% received hypofractionated EBRT and 71.4% (330) received pelvic nodal irradiation. With a median follow-up of 56 months, the 5-year bRFS, MFS and overall survival were 73.1%, 77.4% and 90.5%, respectively. Primary Gleason pattern 5 was associated with worse bRFS, MFS and overall survival with hazard ratios of 0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.73, P < 0.001), 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.96, P = 0.031) and 0.52 (95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.97, P = 0.040), respectively, whereas pelvic nodal disease was associated with worse bRFS (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.98, P = 0.039) and MFS (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.85, P = 0.006). The acute and late radiation-related toxicities were low overall and pelvic nodal irradiation was associated with higher toxicities. CONCLUSION Contemporary EBRT and long-term ADT led to excellent 5-year clinical outcomes and low rates of toxicity in this cohort of non-metastatic grade group 5 prostate cancers. Primary Gleason pattern 5 and pelvic node disease portends inferior clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Chilukuri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - I Mallick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
| | - A Agrawal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and ACTREC, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - P Maitre
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and ACTREC, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - M Arunsingh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
| | - F V James
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India
| | - T Kataria
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Institute, Medanta, Sector-38, Gurugram, India
| | - K Narang
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Institute, Medanta, Sector-38, Gurugram, India
| | - B C Gurram
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yashoda Cancer Institute, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, India
| | - A K Anand
- Max Super Speciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi, India
| | - N Utreja
- Max Super Speciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi, India
| | - D Dutta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, India
| | - S Pavamani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India
| | - S Mitra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India
| | - S Mallik
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Narayana Superspeciality Hospital, Howrah, India
| | - N Mahale
- Nirali Memorial Radiation Centre and Bharat Cancer Hospital, Surat, India
| | - M Chandra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jupiter Hospital, Thane, India
| | - A N Chinnachamy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, VN Cancer Centre, G. Kuppuswamy Naidu Memorial Hospital, Coimbatore, India
| | - T Shahid
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Multispeciality Hospitals, Kolkata, India
| | - M S Raghunathan
- Department of Radiotherapy, Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, India
| | - V Kannan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, P.D Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - S K Mohanty
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sterling Cancer Hospital, Rajkot, Gujrat, India
| | - T Basu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HCG Cancer Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - C Hotwani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Alexis Multi-Speciality Hospital, Nagpur, India
| | - G Panigrahi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and ACTREC, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - V Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and ACTREC, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Choo R, Hillman DW, Mitchell C, Daniels T, Vargas C, Rwigema JC, Corbin K, Keole S, Vora S, Merrell K, Stish B, Pisansky T, Davis BJ, Amundson A, Wong W. Late Toxicity of Moderately Hypofractionated Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Treating the Prostate and Pelvic Lymph Nodes for High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:1085-1094. [PMID: 36427645 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.11.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 11/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity of moderately hypofractionated intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) targeting the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. METHODS AND MATERIALS A target accrual of 56 patients with high-risk or unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer were enrolled into a prospective study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02874014) of moderately hypofractionated IMPT. IMPT with pencil beam scanning was used to deliver 6750 and 4500 cGy relative biological effectiveness in 25 daily fractions simultaneously to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes, respectively. All received androgen deprivation therapy. Late GI and GU toxicity was prospectively assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0, at baseline, weekly during radiation therapy, 3-month postradiation therapy, and then every 6 months. Actuarial rates of late GI and GU toxicity were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Median age was 75.5 years. Fifty-four patients were available for late toxicity evaluation. Median follow-up was 43.9 months (range, 16-66). The actuarial rate of late grade ≥2 GI toxicity at both 2 and 3 years was 7.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2%-14.2%). The actuarial rate of late grade 3 GI toxicity at both 2 and 3 years was 1.9% (95% CI, 0%-5.4%). One patient experienced grade 3 GI toxicity with proctitis. The actuarial rate of late grade ≥2 GU toxicity was 20.5% (95% CI, 8.9%-30.6%) at 2 years, and 29.2 % (95% CI, 15.5%-40.7%) at 3 years. None had grade 3 GU toxicity. The presence of baseline GU symptoms was associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing late grade 2 GU toxicity. CONCLUSIONS A moderately hypofractionated IMPT targeting the prostate and regional pelvic lymph nodes was generally well tolerated. Patients with pre-existing GU symptoms had a higher rate of late grade 2 GU toxicity. A phase 3 study is needed to assess any therapeutic gain of IMPT, in comparison with photon-based radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard Choo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - David W Hillman
- Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Cecilia Mitchell
- Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Thomas Daniels
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Carlos Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Jean Claude Rwigema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Kimberly Corbin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sameer Keole
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Sujay Vora
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Kenneth Merrell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Bradley Stish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Thomas Pisansky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Brian J Davis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Adam Amundson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - William Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Viani GA, Gouveia AG, Moraes FY, Cury FL. "Meta-analysis of elective pelvic nodal irradiation using moderate hypofractionation for high-risk prostate cancer" (MENHYP-ENI). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:1044-1053. [PMID: 35430317 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2021] [Revised: 02/19/2022] [Accepted: 04/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Despite several advances in planning and delivery of radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer, the role of elective pelvic nodal irradiation (EPNI) remains controversial for high-risk disease. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of patients treated with moderate hypofractionated RT (MHF-RT) with EPNI using modern radiotherapy techniques. METHODS Eligible studies were identified on Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and proceedings of annual meetings through October 2021. We followed the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A meta-regression analysis was performed to assess a possible correlation between selected variables and outcomes. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS Eighteen studies with a total of 1745 patients, median follow-up 61 months, treated with EPNI employing MHF-RT were included. The biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) at 5-, 7- and 10-year was 90% (95% CI 88-94%), 83% (95%CI 78-91%) and 78% (95%CI 68-88%). The 5-year prostate cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, distant metastases-free survival and overall survival were 98% (95%CI 97-99%), 88.7% (95%CI 85-93%), 91.2% (95%CI 88-92%), and 93% (95%CI 90-96%), respectively. The rates of local, pelvic, and distant recurrence were 0.38% (95%CI 0-2%), 0.13% (95%CI 0-1.5%), and 7.35% (95%CI 2-12%), respectively. The rate of late GI and GU toxicity grade ≥ 2 were 6.7% (95%CI 4-9%), and 11.3% (95%CI 7.6-15%), with heterogeneity, but with rare cases of toxicity grade 3-5. CONCLUSION EPNI with concomitant MHF-RT provides satisfactory bRFS in the long-term follow-up, with low rates of GU and GI severe toxicities and minimal pelvic and local failure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gustavo A Viani
- Ribeirao Preto Medical School, Department of Medical Imagings, Hematology and Oncology of University of São Paulo (FMRP-USP), Ribeirao Preto, Brazil.
| | - Andre G Gouveia
- Radiation Oncology Department, Americas Centro de Oncologia Integrado, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Fabio Y Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| | - Fabio L Cury
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|