1
|
Fredman E, Traughber B, Kharouta M, Podder T, Lo S, Ponsky L, MacLennan G, Paspulati R, Ellis B, Machtay M, Ellis R. Focal Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With Correlative Pathological and Radiographic-Based Treatment Planning. Front Oncol 2021; 11:744130. [PMID: 34604088 PMCID: PMC8480263 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.744130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 08/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Advances in multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) combining anatomic and functional imaging can accurately identify foci of adenocarcinoma within the prostate, offering the possibility of partial gland therapy. We performed tandem prospective pilot trials to investigate the feasibility of focal prostate SBRT (f-SBRT) based on correlating diagnostic mpMRI and biopsies with confirmatory pathology in treatment planning. Materials and Methods Patients with pathologic focal Gleason 6–7 disease and a corresponding PIRADS 4–5 lesion on mpMRI underwent targeted and comprehensive biopsies using MRI/ultrasound fusion under electromagnetic sensor navigation. After rigorous analysis for imaging biopsy concordance, five of 18 patients were eligible to proceed to f-SBRT. Chi-squared test was used for differences from expected outcomes, and concordance was estimated with binomial distribution theory and Wilson’s method. Results Six patients had Gleason 6 and 12 had Gleason 3 + 4 disease (mean PSA: 5.8 ng/ml, range: 2.2–8.4). Absolute concordance was 43.8% (95% CI: 0.20, 0.64). Patterns of discordance included additional sites of ipsilateral disease, bilateral disease, and negative target. Five were upstaged to a new NCCN risk category necessitating treatment escalation. The five patients with concordant pathology completed three-fraction f-SBRT with sparing of the surrounding normal structures (including contralateral neurovascular bundle), with no reported grade 2+ toxicities and favorable PSA responses (mean: 41% decrease). Conclusions On our pilot trials of f-SBRT planning using rigorous imaging and pathology concordance, image-guided confirmatory biopsies frequently revealed additional disease, suggesting the need for caution in partial-gland therapy. For truly focal disease, f-SBRT provided excellent dosimetry, minimal toxicity, and encouraging biochemical response. Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02681614; NCT02163317.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisha Fredman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Bryan Traughber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Milton Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States
| | - Michael Kharouta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Tarun Podder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Simon Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Lee Ponsky
- Department of Urology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Gregory MacLennan
- Department of Pathology, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Raj Paspulati
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Bradley Ellis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Mitchell Machtay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Milton Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States
| | - Rodney Ellis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Milton Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ragheb SR, Bassiouny RH. Can mean ADC value and ADC ratio of benign prostate tissue to prostate cancer assist in the prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer within the PI-RADSv2 scoring system? THE EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE 2020. [DOI: 10.1186/s43055-020-00347-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The aim of this study is to investigate whether quantitative DW metrics can provide additive value to the reliable categorization of lesions within existing PI-RADSv2 guidelines. Fifty-eight patients with clinically suspicious prostate cancer who underwent PR examination, PSA serum levels, sextant TRUS-guided biopsies, and bi-parametric MR imaging were included in the study.
Results
Sixty-six lesions were detected by histopathological analysis of surgical specimens. The mean ADC values were significantly lower in tumor than non-tumor tissue. The mean ADC value inversely correlated with Gleason score of tumors with a significant p value < 0.001.Conversely, a positive relationship was found between the ADC ratio (ADC of benign prostatic tissue to prostate cancer) and the pathologic Gleason score with a significant elevation of the ADC ratio along with an increase of the pathologic Gleason score (p < 0.001). ROC curves constructed for the tumor ADC and ADC ratio helped to distinguish pathologically aggressive (Gleason score ≥ 7) from non-aggressive (Gleason score ≤ 6) tumors and to correlate it with PIRADSv2 scoring to predict the presence of clinically significant PCA (PIRADSv2 DW ≥ 4). The ability of the tumor ADC and ADC ratio to predict highly aggressive tumors (GS> 7) was high (AUC for ADC and ADC ratio, 0.946 and 0.897; p = 0.014 and 0.039, respectively). The ADC cut-off value for GS ≥ 7 was < 0.7725 and for GS ≤ 6 was > 0.8620 with sensitivity and specificity 97 and 94%. The cutoff ADC ratio for predicting (GS > 7) was 1.42 and for GS ≤ 6 was > 1.320 with sensitivity and specificity 97 and 92%. By applying this ADC ratio cut-off value the sensitivity and specificity of reader 1 for correct categorization of PIRADSv2 DW > 4 increased from 90 and 68% to 95 and 90% and that of reader 2 increased from 94 and 88% to 97 and 92%, respectively.
Conclusion
Estimation of DW metrics (ADC and ADC ratio between benign prostatic tissue and prostate cancer) allow the non-invasive assessment of biological aggressiveness of prostate cancer and allow reliable application of the PIRADSv2 scoring to determine clinically significant cancer (DW score > 4) which may contribute in planning initial treatment strategies.
Collapse
|