1
|
Pati-Alam A, Fittall M, Withington J, Heavey S. Re: Creta, M., Shariat, S.F., Marra, G. et al. Local salvage therapies in patients with radio-recurrent prostate cancer following external beam radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis (2024). Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2025:10.1038/s41391-024-00935-8. [PMID: 39794512 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00935-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2024] [Revised: 12/04/2024] [Accepted: 12/19/2024] [Indexed: 01/13/2025]
Affiliation(s)
- A Pati-Alam
- University College London, Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences; University College Hospital, Department of Urology, London, UK.
| | - M Fittall
- University College London, Research Department of Oncology; University College Hospital, Department of Oncology, London, UK
| | - J Withington
- University College London, Division of Surgery and Targeted Intervention; University College Hospital, Department of Urology, London, UK
| | - S Heavey
- University College London, Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hassanzadeh C, Mohamad O, Bruno T, Wang L, Kudchakar R, Bathala T, Sanders J, Mok H, McGuire S, Kuban D, Hoffman K, Nguyen Q, Park R, Thames H, Corn P, Chapin B, Choi S, Tang C, Frank S. Early outcomes following local salvage treatment with MRI-assisted low-dose rate brachytherapy (MARS) for MRI-visible postsurgical bed recurrences and focal intraprostatic recurrences. Brachytherapy 2025:S1538-4721(24)00445-8. [PMID: 39755443 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2024.10.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2024] [Revised: 10/23/2024] [Accepted: 10/24/2024] [Indexed: 01/06/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To determine outcomes of MRI-assisted radiosurgery (MARS) for salvage brachytherapy using the radioisotope 103Pd after various upfront treatments including surgery, external beam radiotherapy, and brachytherapy. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed data for patients who underwent salvage MARS for intraprostatic lesions or prostate bed recurrences from 2016 to 2022. Biochemical recurrence, prostate cancer-specific, and overall survival, and the cumulative incidences of toxicities, were determined by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations between clinical and treatment variables and risk of toxicity. RESULTS Study included 31 patients with local recurrence after initial definitive treatment. Four (13%) were initially treated with prostatectomy and salvage radiation, twenty-four (77%) with external beam radiation, and three with brachytherapy. Most had intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer at the time of diagnosis. Twenty-two patients (71%) had focal-gland and nine (29%) had whole-gland MARS LDR salvage brachytherapy. Median follow-up was 35-28 months. By last follow-up, 5 patients (16%) experienced recurrence and started ADT, 3 patients started ADT before experiencing recurrence due to physician discretion, and 23 patients (74%) remained without recurrence. No patients died of prostate cancer. Median PSA nadir for recurrence-free patients was 0.2 ng/mL (range, 0-0.9 ng/mL). Grade 3 toxicities occurred in 4 patients (13%) including 3 patients (13%) with genitourinary events only and 1 patient (3%) with both a grade 3 genitourinary and a grade 3 gastrointestinal event. CONCLUSIONS In this modern series of patients undergoing salvage MARS with 103Pd, we observed acceptable toxicity and early, promising biochemical disease control. These findings highlight the broader applicability of salvage MARS regardless of upfront treatment modality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Comron Hassanzadeh
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| | - Osama Mohamad
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Teresa Bruno
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Lin Wang
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Rajat Kudchakar
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Tharakeswara Bathala
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Jeremiah Sanders
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Henry Mok
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Sean McGuire
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Deborah Kuban
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Karen Hoffman
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Quynh Nguyen
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Ryan Park
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Howard Thames
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Paul Corn
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Brian Chapin
- Department of Urologic Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Seungtaek Choi
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Chad Tang
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Steven Frank
- Department of Genitourinary Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Schubert P, Strnad V, Weißmann T, Schweizer C, Lotter M, Kreppner S, Karius A, Fietkau R, Merten R. Protocol-based CT-guided brachytherapy for patients with prostate cancer and previous rectal extirpation-a curative approach. Strahlenther Onkol 2025; 201:20-26. [PMID: 39095649 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-024-02266-y] [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: 04/14/2024] [Accepted: 06/28/2024] [Indexed: 08/04/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE There are numerous curative treatment possibilities for prostate cancer. In patients who have undergone rectal extirpation for rectal cancer treatment, curative options are limited due to anatomic changes and previous irradiation of the pelvis. In this analysis, we validate the feasibility of CT-guided transperineal interstitial brachytherapy for this specific scenario. PATIENTS AND METHODS We analyzed the treatment procedures and outcomes of 5 patients with metachronic nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Ultrasound-guided brachytherapy was not possible in any of the patients. Of these 5 patients, 3 were treated for prostate cancer using temporary brachytherapy with Ir-192 only, and 2 were treated with external-beam radiation therapy and temporary brachytherapy as a boost. CT-guided brachytherapy was performed in all patients. We analyzed the feasibility, efficacy, treatment-related toxicity, and quality of life (EORTC-30, IEFF, IPSS, and ICIQ questionnaires) of the treatments. RESULTS Median follow-up was 35 months. Two out of five patients received boost irradiation (HDR 2 × 9 Gy, PDR 30 Gy). Three out of five patients were treated with PDR brachytherapy in two sessions up to a total dose of 60 Gy. Dosimetric parameters were documented as median values as follows: V100 94.7% (94.5-98.4%), D2bladder 64.3% (50.9-78.3%), D10urethra 131.05% (123.2%-141.2%), and D30urethra 122.45% (116.2%-129.5%). At the time of analysis, no biochemical recurrence had been documented. Furthermore, neither early nor late side effects exceeding CTCAE grade 2 were documented. CONCLUSION CT-guided transperineal brachytherapy of the prostate in patients with previous rectal surgery and radiation therapy is safe and represents a possible curative treatment option. Brachytherapy can be considered for patients with metachronic prostate cancer in this specific scenario, albeit preferably in experienced high-volume centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philipp Schubert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany.
| | - Vratislav Strnad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Thomas Weißmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Claudia Schweizer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Michael Lotter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Stephan Kreppner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Andre Karius
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Ricarda Merten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitätsstraße 27, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rans K, Goffin K, Joniau S, Daugaard G, den Hartog J, Van Wynsberge L, De Meerleer G. The impact of progression-directed therapy on survival in metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer: MEDCARE phase 3 trial. BJU Int 2025; 135:63-70. [PMID: 39506181 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16574] [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] [Indexed: 11/08/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer (mCRPC) presents a therapeutic challenge despite advancements in treatment. Once mCRPC is attained, patients face limited survival prospects. Next-line systemic treatment (NEST) is the standard of care for progressive mCRPC, encompassing various therapeutic options with associated toxicity and costs. In patients with oligoprogressive mCRPC, data suggest that progression-directed therapy (PDT), such as metastasectomy or stereotactic body radiotherapy, delays the initiation of NEST. METHODS AND DESIGN The MEDCARE phase III trial aims to assess the impact of PDT on overall survival (OS) in oligoprogressive mCRPC. In this multicentric, randomised, prospective trial, we aim to randomise 246 patients in 1:1 allocation ratio between the standard-of-care therapy (surveillance or NEST) or PDT while continuing the current systemic treatment. Patients will be stratified based on number of progressive lesions (one vs ≥one), location of progressive lesions (local recurrence, N or M1a vs M1b or M1c) and previous systemic therapy (palliative androgen-deprivation therapy [pADT] vs pADT + androgen receptor-targeted agent or patients who received docetaxel in the past). The primary endpoint is OS, and the secondary endpoints include quality of life, radiographic progression-free survival (PFS), modified PFS, prostate cancer-specific survival and PDT-induced toxicity. DISCUSSION This is the first randomised phase 3 trial in the setting of PDT in patients with oligoprogressive mCRPC with OS as the primary endpoint.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kato Rans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Karolien Goffin
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Gedske Daugaard
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Julie den Hartog
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Gert De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Anttinen M, Mäkelä P, Nurminen P, Pärssinen H, Malaspina S, Sainio T, Högerman M, Taimen P, Blanco Sequeiros R, Boström PJ. Salvage Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided Transurethral Ultrasound Ablation for Localized Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. EUR UROL SUPPL 2025; 71:69-77. [PMID: 39703741 PMCID: PMC11656090 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/16/2024] [Indexed: 12/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and objective Toxicity from local salvage therapy for radiorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa) remains a concern. This phase 2 study evaluates the outcomes of salvage magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation (sTULSA). Methods Men with biochemically relapsed, biopsy-proven PCa following definitive radiotherapy underwent whole- or partial-gland sTULSA (NCT03350529). Prostate-confined recurrence was confirmed by MRI and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography (CT). The primary endpoints were safety (Clavien-Dindo classification) and efficacy (prostate-specific antigen [PSA], PSMA PET-CT, and MRI-targeted biopsy at 12 mo). The secondary endpoints included functional and survival outcomes. Key findings and limitations Thirty-nine patients underwent sTULSA (64% whole gland), with a median age of 73 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 69-77) and PSA of 3.3 ng/ml (IQR: 2-6.2). Three patients had undergone prior salvage therapy, 16 were receiving hormonal therapy at enrollment, and 12 had a history of transurethral interventions. Eighteen patients had incidental urethral strictures on baseline cystoscopy. Over a median follow-up of 40 mo (IQR: 24-55), 56% experienced adverse events. Severe genitourinary toxicity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3 or hospitalization) occurred in 28%, including three patients with puboprostatic fistulas and two patients requiring cystectomy. Leak-free continence was maintained in 53%. At 12 mo, 89% showed no cancer in the targeted area, with a median PSA reduction of 95% (p < 0.001). Five-year metastasis-free, failure-free, and biochemical recurrence-free survival probabilities (95% confidence interval) were 97% (0.93-1.00), 70% (0.54-0.91), and 54% (0.31-0.93), respectively. Limitations included single-arm design and moderate sample size. Conclusions and clinical implications It has been observed that sTULSA is effective for radiorecurrent PCa, although genitourinary toxicity remains a concern. Further studies should refine patient selection and treatment parameters to improve safety and tolerability. Patient summary In this study, we examined a new treatment called magnetic resonance imaging-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation for prostate cancer that has returned after radiation therapy. We found that the treatment provided effective and lasting cancer control for most patients. However, a notable number of patients experienced significant genitourinary toxicity, including severe adverse effects affecting urinary function. Careful patient selection is crucial to minimize these adverse effects and ensure the best results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mikael Anttinen
- Department of Urology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Pietari Mäkelä
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Pertti Nurminen
- Department of Urology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Heikki Pärssinen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Simona Malaspina
- Turku PET Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Teija Sainio
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Mikael Högerman
- Department of Urology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Pekka Taimen
- Institute of Biomedicine, University of Turku and Department of Pathology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Roberto Blanco Sequeiros
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Peter J. Boström
- Department of Urology, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Yang CH, Barbulescu DV, Marian L, Tung MC, Ou YC, Wu CH. High-Intensity Focus Ultrasound Ablation in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. J Pers Med 2024; 14:1163. [PMID: 39728075 DOI: 10.3390/jpm14121163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2024] [Revised: 11/25/2024] [Accepted: 12/06/2024] [Indexed: 12/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes vary significantly across risk groups. In early-stage localized PCa, the functional outcomes following radical prostatectomy (RP) can be severe, prompting increased interest in focal therapy, particularly High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU). This study is to summarize the current clinical trials of HIFU on PCa. Methods: We reviewed clinical trials from major databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE, to summarize the current research on HIFU in PCa treatment. Results: The literature highlights that HIFU may offer superior functional outcomes, particularly in continence recovery, compared to RP and radiation therapy. However, the oncological efficacy of HIFU remains inadequately supported by high-quality studies. Focal and hemigland ablations carry a risk of residual significant cancer, necessitating comprehensive patient counseling before treatment. For post-HIFU monitoring, we recommend 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with biopsy at 6 to 12 months to reassess the cancer status. Biochemical recurrence should be defined using the Phoenix criteria, and PSMA PET/CT can be considered for identifying recurrence in biopsy-negative patients. Conclusions: Whole-gland ablation is recommended as the general approach, as it provides a lower PSA nadir and avoids the higher positive biopsy rates observed after focal and hemigland ablation in both treated and untreated lobes. Future study designs should address heterogeneity, including variations in recurrence definitions and surveillance strategies, to provide more robust evidence for HIFU's oncological outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Che-Hsueh Yang
- Department of Urology, Changbing Show Chwan Memorial Hospital, Changhua 505, Taiwan
| | | | - Lucian Marian
- Department of Urology, "Pius Brînzeu" County Emergency Clinical Hospital, 300723 Timisoara, Romania
| | - Min-Che Tung
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Tungs' Taichung MetroHarbor Hospital, Taichung 435, Taiwan
| | - Yen-Chuan Ou
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Tungs' Taichung MetroHarbor Hospital, Taichung 435, Taiwan
| | - Chi-Hsiang Wu
- Department of Urology, Changbing Show Chwan Memorial Hospital, Changhua 505, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Meng Y, Liu J, Shen B, Xu H, Wu D, Ying Y. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy for radio-recurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00927-8. [PMID: 39702471 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00927-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2024] [Revised: 11/27/2024] [Accepted: 12/09/2024] [Indexed: 12/21/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is pivotal in managing radio-recurrent prostate cancer (PCa). This study aims to comprehensively review its efficacy and associated severe toxicities. METHODS A thorough review of PubMed and EMBASE databases up to July 2024 was conducted to assess recurrence-free survival (RFS) with salvage SBRT across various subgroups. Survival curves were reconstructed using WebPlotDigitizer and a newly developed shiny application. RESULTS Thirty-six studies were analyzed, with 15 papers (682 patients) contributing to survival curve reconstruction. Median RFS was 36.2 months, with 2-, 3-, and 5-year rates of 64.8%, 50.7%, and 40.6%, respectively. Factors associated with improved RFS included whole-gland irradiation [focal vs. whole, hazard ratio (HR) 1.83 (95% CI: 1.16-2.87), p = 0.008], and higher biologically effective dose (BED) [120-138.1 Gy vs. 144-167.7 Gy, HR 1.40 (95% CI: 1.07-1.83), p = 0.015]. Severe (grade ≥ 3) acute and late genitourinary (GU) toxicities occurred in 1.4% (95% CI: 0.8-2.3) and 3.7% (95% CI: 2.6-4.9) of patients, respectively. Severe acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were reported in 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2-1.1) and 0.4% (95% CI: 0.1-1.0) of patients, respectively. Combined severe GU and GI toxicities were observed in 5.8% (95% CI: 4.5-7.4) and 1.3% (95% CI: 0.7-2.2) of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This study provides a comprehensive assessment of toxicities and conducts a pooled analysis of RFS for salvage SBRT in radio-recurrent PCa. Factors such as whole-gland irradiation, and higher BED show promise as prognostic indicators for RFS. However, confirmation through randomized controlled trials is essential due to the low levels of evidence and study heterogeneity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yali Meng
- Department of Radiotherapy, Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing, 312000, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jianjiang Liu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing, 312000, Zhejiang, China
| | - Bin Shen
- Department of Urology, Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing, 312000, Zhejiang, China
| | - Huali Xu
- Department of Urology, Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing, 312000, Zhejiang, China
| | - Dongping Wu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing, 312000, Zhejiang, China
| | - Yufei Ying
- School of Medicine, Shaoxing University, No.568 Zhongxing North Road, Yuecheng District, 312000, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kamrava M. Long-Term Follow-Up With Brachytherapy Salvage Reirradiation. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:4234. [PMID: 39288340 DOI: 10.1200/jco.24.00930] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2024] [Accepted: 06/25/2024] [Indexed: 09/19/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Mitchell Kamrava
- Mitchell Kamrava, MD, MHDS, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pérez Fentes D, Willisch P, Martínez Breijoo S, Domínguez M, Anido U, Álvarez C, Gómez Caamaño A. Controversies in prostate cancer management: Consensus recommendations from experts in northern Spain. Actas Urol Esp 2024; 48:739-750. [PMID: 38960063 DOI: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2024.06.005] [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: 04/04/2024] [Accepted: 06/03/2024] [Indexed: 07/05/2024]
Abstract
In recent years, various aspects of prostate cancer (PC) management have undergone significant changes, including the implementation of therapeutic strategies such as the use of new hormonal agents like abiraterone, apalutamide, enzalutamide or darolutamide and the incorporation of next generation imaging techniques (NGI). However, the evidence regarding the role of NGI and the therapeutic decision-making based on their findings is not solid. Following the methodology of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC), a multidisciplinary expert consensus was developed to address controversial questions concerning the use of NGI and clinical management in four priority scenarios: localized PC, PC after radical prostatectomy, PC after radiotherapy with curative intent, and metastatic hormone-sensitive PC. This consensus represents the opinions of medical oncology, radiation oncology and urology physicians and provides useful recommendations for clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Pérez Fentes
- Servicio de Urología, Hospital Clínico Universitario Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain.
| | - P Willisch
- Departamento de Oncología Radioterápica, Hospital Meixoeiro, Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain
| | - S Martínez Breijoo
- Servicio de Urología, Hospital Universitario de A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain
| | - M Domínguez
- Servicio de Urología, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Cantabria, Spain
| | - U Anido
- Departamento de Oncología Médica, Hospital Clínico Universitario Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain
| | - C Álvarez
- Servicio de Oncología Médica, Hospital Universitario de Asturias, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Principado de Asturias, Oviedo, Asturias, Spain
| | - A Gómez Caamaño
- Servicio de Oncología Radioterápica, Hospital Clínico Universitario Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Scilipoti P, Ślusarczyk A, de Angelis M, Soria F, Pradere B, Krajewski W, D'Andrea D, Mari A, Giudice FD, Pichler R, Subiela JD, Afferi L, Albisinni S, Mertens L, Laukhtina E, Mori K, Radziszewski P, Shariat SF, Necchi A, Xylinas E, Gontero P, Rouprêt M, Montorsi F, Briganti A, Moschini M. The Role of Mitomycin C in Intermediate-risk Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 2024; 7:1293-1302. [PMID: 38902138 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.005] [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: 04/29/2024] [Revised: 05/23/2024] [Accepted: 06/05/2024] [Indexed: 06/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Intravesical mitomycin C (MMC) instillations are recommended to prevent recurrence of intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (IR-NMIBC); however, the optimal regimen and dose are uncertain. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of adjuvant MMC and compare different MMC regimens in preventing recurrence. METHODS We performed a comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in November 2023 for studies investigating recurrence-free survival (RFS) among patients with IR-NMIBC who received adjuvant MMC. Prospective trials with different MMC regimens or other intravesical drugs as comparators were considered eligible. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS Overall, 14 studies were eligible for systematic review and 11 for meta-analysis of RFS. Estimates of 1-yr, 2-yr, and 5-yr RFS rates were 84% (95% confidence interval [CI] 79-89%), 75% (95% CI 68-82%), and 51% (95% CI 40-63%) for patients treated with MMC induction plus maintenance, and 88% (95% CI 83-94%), 78% (95% CI 67-89%), and 66% (95% CI 57-75%) for patients treated with bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) maintenance, respectively. Estimates of 2-yr RFS rates for MMC maintenance regimens were 76% (95% CI 69-84%) for 40 mg MMC (2 studies) and 66% (95% CI 60-72%) for 30 mg MMC (4 studies). Among the studies included, BCG maintenance provided comparable 2-yr RFS to 40 mg MMC with maintenance (78% vs 76%). RFS did not differ by MMC maintenance duration (>1 yr vs 1 yr vs <1 yr). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS MMC induction and maintenance regimens seem to provide short-term RFS rates equivalent to those for BCG maintenance in IR-NMIBC. For adjuvant induction and maintenance, 40 mg of MMC appears to be more effective in preventing recurrence than 30 mg. We did not observe an RFS benefit for longer maintenance regimens. PATIENT SUMMARY For patients with intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, bladder treatments with a solution of a drug called mitomycin C (MMC) seem to be as effective as BCG (bacillus Calmette-Guérin) in preventing recurrence after tumor removal. Further trials are needed for stronger evidence on the best MMC dose and treatment time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pietro Scilipoti
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Aleksander Ślusarczyk
- Department of General, Oncological and Functional Urology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Mario de Angelis
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology UROSUD, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France
| | - Wojciech Krajewski
- Department of Urology and Oncologic Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
| | - David D'Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Francesco Del Giudice
- Department of Maternal Infant and Urologic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Renate Pichler
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - José Daniel Subiela
- Department of Urology, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid, Spain
| | - Luca Afferi
- Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | | | - Laura Mertens
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Piotr Radziszewski
- Department of General, Oncological and Functional Urology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Andrea Necchi
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Evanguelos Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, AP-HP, Université de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Paolo Gontero
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Morgan Rouprêt
- Urology, GRC no. 5, Predictive Onco-Urology, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Smeyers L, Borremans J, Van der Aa F, Herteleer M, Joniau S. The Complex Challenge of Urosymphyseal Fistula and Pubic Osteomyelitis in Prostate Cancer Survivors. EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 70:43-51. [PMID: 39493358 PMCID: PMC11528223 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.09.008] [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] [Accepted: 09/14/2024] [Indexed: 11/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and objective Urosymphyseal fistula (UF) and pubic osteomyelitis (PO) are rare and often poorly recognized long-term complications of treatment for localized prostate cancer. Our aim was to describe UF/PO in prostate cancer survivors. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 26 patients treated for UF/PO after localized prostate cancer treatment at University Hospitals Leuven (1996-2021). We analyzed data for demographic characteristics, history, urethral manipulations (UMs), diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, microbiology, and treatment success. Key findings and limitations Before diagnosis, 80.8% of the patients had undergone RP, 88.5% received radiotherapy, and 84.6% had at least one UM. The median time from radiotherapy (RT), the last UM, and the first symptoms to diagnosis were 102 mo, 4 mo, and 43 d, respectively. Treatment included cystectomy (n = 19), bladder-sparing interventions (n = 5), and conservative treatment (n = 2). Pubic debridement was required in 21 patients. All cystectomy patients had a history of RT. Imaging-detected UF led to cystectomy in 94.1% of cases. Full conservative treatment succeeded only in non-irradiated patients. Bone cultures were positive in 95% of cases and discordant with urine cultures in 82.4%. Reinterventions and severe complications affected 56.5% of patients; all were UF/PO-free after up to four treatment attempts. Our study is limited by the small sample size, retrospective nature, and possible information and referral bias. Conclusions and clinical implications UF/PO can occur years after local prostate cancer treatment. Risk factors include RT and UMs. Conservative treatment rarely succeeds, particularly in irradiated patients with persistent UF. Most patients require multidisciplinary treatment involving cystectomy and pubic debridement. A perioperative bone culture to guide postoperative antibiotic treatment is crucial because of discordance with urine cultures. Postoperative complications are common, often requiring reintervention. Caution with UMs is advised after pelvic RT. Patient summary We looked at data for patients with a rare complication that can occur after treatment for localized prostate cancer that involves a small tunnel between the lower urinary tract and the pubic bone, and infection in the pubic bone. Diagnosis occurred years after pelvic radiotherapy and shortly after a procedure performed through the urethra, typically surgery for narrowing of the urethra. Most patients needed removal of their bladder and surgical cleaning of the pubic bone, followed by long-term antibiotics. The bacteria found in bone were often different from those found in the patient's urine, which is important in guiding antibiotic treatment after surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laurien Smeyers
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Jens Borremans
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Frank Van der Aa
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Michiel Herteleer
- Department of Traumatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Javier-DesLoges J, Dall'Era MA, Brisbane W, Chamie K, Washington SL, Chandrasekar T, Marks LS, Nguyen H, Daneshvar M, Gin G, Kane CJ, Bagrodia A, Cooperberg MR. The state of focal therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer: the university of California collaborative (UC-Squared) consensus statement. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27:579-581. [PMID: 37553435 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00702-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 08/10/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marc A Dall'Era
- Department of Urology, University of California-Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Wayne Brisbane
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Karim Chamie
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Samuel L Washington
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Hao Nguyen
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Michael Daneshvar
- Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Gregory Gin
- Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Christopher J Kane
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Aditya Bagrodia
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Matthew R Cooperberg
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ploussard G, Dariane C, Mathieu R, Baboudjian M, Barret E, Brureau L, Fiard G, Fromont G, Olivier J, Rozet F, Peyrottes A, Renard-Penna R, Sargos P, Supiot S, Turpin L, Roubaud G, Rouprêt M. French AFU Cancer Committee Guidelines - Update 2024-2026: Prostate cancer - Management of metastatic disease and castration resistance. THE FRENCH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY 2024; 34:102710. [PMID: 39581665 DOI: 10.1016/j.fjurol.2024.102710] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2024] [Revised: 07/22/2024] [Accepted: 07/23/2024] [Indexed: 11/26/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT The Oncology Committee of the French Urology Association is proposing updated recommendations for the management of recurrent and/or metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS A systematic review of the literature from 2022 to 2024 was conducted by the CCAFU on the therapeutic management of recurrent PCa following local or metastatic treatment, assessing the references based on their level of evidence. RESULTS Molecular imaging is the standard approach for assessing recurrence after local treatment and should not delay early salvage treatment. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the primary treatment option for metastatic PCa. Intensification of ADT, now cononsidered standard care for metastatic PCa, involves incorporating at least one new-generation hormone therapy (ARPI). For patients with high-volume metastatic disease at diagnosis, adding docetaxel to ADT+ARPI may be considered for eligible patients. In castration-resistant PCa (CRPC) patients, poly(ADP) ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and PSMA radioligand therapy are new treatment options. The combination and sequencing of treatmentsare influenced by several factors, including patient and disease characteristics, prior therapies, genomic status, and molecular imaging findings. CONCLUSION This update of French recommendations should help to improve the management recurrent or metastatic PCa patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Charles Dariane
- Department of Urology, Hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, AP-HP, Paris, France; Paris University, U1151 Inserm-INEM, Necker, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Eric Barret
- Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - Laurent Brureau
- Department of Urology, CHU de Pointe-à-Pitre, University of Antilles, University of Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, Institut de Recherche en Santé, Environnement et Travail (Irset), UMR_S 1085, 97110 Pointe-à-Pitre, Guadeloupe
| | - Gaëlle Fiard
- Department of Urology, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC-IMAG, Grenoble, France
| | | | | | - François Rozet
- Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | | | - Raphaële Renard-Penna
- Sorbonne University, AP-HP, Radiology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, 75013 Paris, France
| | - Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, 33000 Bordeaux, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Léa Turpin
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hôpital Foch, Suresnes, France
| | - Guilhem Roubaud
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Bergonié, 33000 Bordeaux, France
| | - Morgan Rouprêt
- Sorbonne University, GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Urology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, 75013 Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Riou O, Prunaretty J, Michalet M. Personalizing radiotherapy with adaptive radiotherapy: Interest and challenges. Cancer Radiother 2024; 28:603-609. [PMID: 39353797 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2024.07.007] [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: 06/20/2024] [Accepted: 07/01/2024] [Indexed: 10/04/2024]
Abstract
Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) is a recent development in radiotherapy technology and treatment personalization that allows treatment to be tailored to the daily anatomical changes of patients. While it was until recently only performed "offline", i.e. between two radiotherapy sessions, it is now possible during ART to perform a daily online adaptive process for a given patient. Therefore, ART allows a daily customization to ensure optimal coverage of the treatment target volumes with minimized margins, taking into account only the uncertainties related to the adaptive process itself. This optimization appears particularly relevant in case of daily variations in the positioning of the target volume or of the organs at risk (OAR) associated with a proximity of these volumes and a tenuous therapeutic index. ART aims to minimize severe acute and late toxicity and allows tumor dose escalation. These new achievements have been possible thanks to technological development, the contribution of new multimodal and onboard imaging modalities and the integration of artificial intelligence tools for the contouring, planning and delivery of radiation therapy. Online ART is currently available on two types of radiotherapy machines: MR-linear accelerators and recently CBCT-linear accelerators. We will first describe the benefits, advantages, constraints and limitations of each of these two modalities, as well as the online adaptive process itself. We will then evaluate the clinical situations for which online adaptive radiotherapy is particularly indicated on MR- and CBCT-linear accelerators. Finally, we will detail some challenges and possible solutions in the development of online ART in the coming years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olivier Riou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut du cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; Fédération universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie de Méditerranée Occitanie, université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; U1194, Inserm, Montpellier, France.
| | - Jessica Prunaretty
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut du cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; Fédération universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie de Méditerranée Occitanie, université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; U1194, Inserm, Montpellier, France
| | - Morgan Michalet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut du cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; Fédération universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie de Méditerranée Occitanie, université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; U1194, Inserm, Montpellier, France
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Andratschke N, Willmann J, Appelt AL, Day M, Kronborg C, Massaccesi M, Ozsahin M, Pasquier D, Petric P, Riesterer O, De Ruysscher D, M Van der Velden J, Guckenberger M. Reirradiation - still navigating uncharted waters? Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 49:100871. [PMID: 39444538 PMCID: PMC11497423 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100871] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2024] [Revised: 09/25/2024] [Accepted: 09/30/2024] [Indexed: 10/25/2024] Open
Abstract
With the emergence of high-precision radiotherapy technologies such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), MR guided brachytherapy, image guided intensity modulated photon and proton radiotherapy and most recently daily adaptive radiotherapy, reirradiation is increasingly recognized as a viable treatment option for many patients. This includes those with recurrent, metastatic or new malignancies post initial radiotherapy. The primary challenge in reirradiation lies in balancing tumor control against the risk of severe toxicity from cumulative radiation doses to previously irradiated normal tissue. Although technology for precise delivery has advanced at a fast pace, clinical practice of reirradiation still mostly relies on individual expertise, as prospective evidence is scarce, the level of reporting in clinical studies is not standardized and of low quality - especially with respect to cumulative doses received by organs at risk. A recent ESTRO/EORTC initiative proposed a standardized definition of reirradiation and formulated general requirements for minimal reporting in clinical studies [1]. As a consequence we found it timely to convene for an international and interdisciplinary meeting with experts in the field to summarize the current evidence, identify knowledge gaps and explore which best practices can be derived for safe reirradiation. The meeting was held on 15.06.2023 in Zurich and was endorsed by the scientific societies SASRO, DEGRO and ESTRO. Here, we report on available evidence and research priorities in the field of reirradiation, as discussed during the meeting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jonas Willmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ane L Appelt
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James’s, University of Leeds, UK
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, UK
| | - Madalyne Day
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Camilla Kronborg
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Mariangela Massaccesi
- Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Hematology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | | | - David Pasquier
- Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre O Lambret, Lille, France
- University of Lille, Centrale Lille, CNRS, CRIStAL UMR 9189, Lille, France
| | - Primoz Petric
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Dirk De Ruysscher
- Maastricht University Medical Center+, Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School and Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joanne M Van der Velden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Loos G, Buteau JP, Oh J, Van Dyk S, Chang D, Murphy DG, Hofman MS, Williams S, Chander S. PSMA PET/CT patterns of recurrence after mono-brachytherapy in men with low and intermediate prostate cancer and subsequent management. Brachytherapy 2024; 23:719-726. [PMID: 39358179 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2024.07.003] [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: 12/27/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2024] [Accepted: 07/03/2024] [Indexed: 10/04/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Brachytherapy as monotherapy is a recommended treatment option for men with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer. Local recurrence is difficult to identify. This study investigated PSMA PET/CT for recurrence after brachytherapy, as well as their subsequent management when recurrence occurred only within the prostate. METHODS We performed a retrospective single-center analysis for patients who were treated with brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer from May 2002 to May 2021 and who underwent a PSMA PET/CT for BCR. We report the findings on PSMA PET/CT, quantitative parameters, as well as the later management of the patients. RESULTS Forty patients were identified, who underwent PSMA PET/CT to investigate a rising PSA at a median (IQR) of 7 years (3.0-10.8) after initial therapy. Median (IQR) PSA at time of PSMA PET/CT was 6.54 ng/mL (3.9-15.5). On PSMA PET/CT, 20/40 (50%) men had prostate-only recurrence. Of the 20 patients with prostate-only recurrence, 8/20 (40%) had recurrence in a high-dose radiation zone, versus 7/20 (35%) in an under-covered zone. On PSMA PET/CT, recurrence within the prostate had median (IQR) SUVmax 10.4 (5.1-15.7) and volume 2.9 mL (2.0-11.2). Subsequent management of these patients with local recurrence included surveillance followed by ADT (9/20, 45%). For those with surveillance followed by ADT, the mean time before introduction of ADT was 4.1 years (range 1-8 years).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Genevieve Loos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Centre Jean Perrin, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
| | - James P Buteau
- Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Justin Oh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Sylvia Van Dyk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - David Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Declan G Murphy
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Michael S Hofman
- Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Scott Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Sarat Chander
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Jacques J, Terlizzi M. Salvage reirradiation for locally recurrent prostate cancer: A narrative review. Cancer Radiother 2024; 28:576-579. [PMID: 39389844 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2024.07.008] [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: 07/06/2024] [Accepted: 07/15/2024] [Indexed: 10/12/2024]
Abstract
In this narrative review, we will explore the different options for salvage re-irradiation for locally recurrent prostate cancer. Brachytherapy (BT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) appear to be successful options. We detailed doses, volumes, oncological outcomes, and toxicity events to identify the best salvage strategy. Salvage reirradiation can only be proposed in certain cases, depending on the patient and the clinical scenario. Specific imaging and tests are needed to safely deliver this treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juliette Jacques
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Brachytherapy, Institut de cancérologie de Lorraine, 54519 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France; Faculté de médecine de Nancy, université de Lorraine, 9, avenue de la Forêt-de-Haye, 54505 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
| | - Mario Terlizzi
- Departement of Radiation Oncology and Brachytherapy, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 94800 Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ren L, Wang Y, Tang Y, Wang F, Du Y, Ou X, Lin L, Zhang Z, Ding Y, Wu M, Zhou Y, Zhang M, Wang Q, Zou J. US/PA/MR multimodal imaging-guided multifunctional genetically engineered bio-targeted synergistic agent for tumor therapy. J Nanobiotechnology 2024; 22:615. [PMID: 39385196 PMCID: PMC11465552 DOI: 10.1186/s12951-024-02868-9] [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: 07/16/2024] [Accepted: 09/22/2024] [Indexed: 10/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Focused ultrasound ablation surgery (FUAS) is a minimally invasive treatment option that has been utilized in various tumors. However, its clinical advancement has been hindered by issues such as low safety and efficiency, single image guidance mode, and postoperative tumor residue. To address these limitations, this study aimed to develop a novel multi-functional gas-producing engineering bacteria biological targeting cooperative system. Pulse-focused ultrasound (PFUS) could adjust the ratio of thermal effect to non-thermal effect by adjusting the duty cycle, and improve the safety and effectiveness of treatment.The genetic modification of Escherichia coli (E.coli) involved the insertion of an acoustic reporter gene to encode gas vesicles (GVs), resulting in gas-producing E.coli (GVs-E.coli) capable of targeting tumor anoxia. GVs-E.coli colonized and proliferated within the tumor while the GVs facilitated ultrasound imaging and cooperative PFUS. Additionally, multifunctional cationic polyethyleneimine (PEI)-poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanoparticles (PEI-PLGA/EPI/PFH@Fe3O4) containing superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO, Fe3O4), perfluorohexane (PFH), and epirubicin (EPI) were developed. These nanoparticles offered synergistic PFUS, supplementary chemotherapy, and multimodal imaging capabilities.GVs-E.coli effectively directed the PEI-PLGA/EPI/PFH@Fe3O4 to accumulate within the tumor target area by means of electrostatic adsorption, resulting in a synergistic therapeutic impact on tumor eradication.In conclusion, GVs-E.coli-mediated multi-functional nanoparticles can synergize with PFUS and chemotherapy to effectively treat tumors, overcoming the limitations of current FUAS therapy and improving safety and efficacy. This approach presents a promising new strategy for tumor therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Li Ren
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
- Department of Ultrasound, Suining Central Hospital, Suining, 629000, China
| | - Yaotai Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Yu Tang
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Fang Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
- Department of Ultrasound, Suining Central Hospital, Suining, 629000, China
| | - Yan Du
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Xia Ou
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Li Lin
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Zhong Zhang
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Yan Ding
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Meixian Wu
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Yijun Zhou
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Mingyang Zhang
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Qi Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China
| | - Jianzhong Zou
- State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering, Chongqing Medical University, 1 Yixueyuan Rd, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gillessen S, Turco F, Davis ID, Efstathiou JA, Fizazi K, James ND, Shore N, Small E, Smith M, Sweeney CJ, Tombal B, Zilli T, Agarwal N, Antonarakis ES, Aparicio A, Armstrong AJ, Bastos DA, Attard G, Axcrona K, Ayadi M, Beltran H, Bjartell A, Blanchard P, Bourlon MT, Briganti A, Bulbul M, Buttigliero C, Caffo O, Castellano D, Castro E, Cheng HH, Chi KN, Clarke CS, Clarke N, de Bono JS, De Santis M, Duran I, Efstathiou E, Ekeke ON, El Nahas TIH, Emmett L, Fanti S, Fatiregun OA, Feng FY, Fong PCC, Fonteyne V, Fossati N, George DJ, Gleave ME, Gravis G, Halabi S, Heinrich D, Herrmann K, Hofman MS, Hope TA, Horvath LG, Hussain MHA, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jones RJ, Joshua AM, Kanesvaran R, Keizman D, Khauli RB, Kramer G, Loeb S, Mahal BA, Maluf FC, Mateo J, Matheson D, Matikainen MP, McDermott R, McKay RR, Mehra N, Merseburger AS, Morgans AK, Morris MJ, Mrabti H, Mukherji D, Murphy DG, Murthy V, Mutambirwa SBA, Nguyen PL, Oh WK, Ost P, O'Sullivan JM, Padhani AR, Parker C, Poon DMC, Pritchard CC, Rabah DM, Rathkopf D, Reiter RE, Renard-Penna R, Ryan CJ, Saad F, Sade JP, Sandhu S, Sartor OA, Schaeffer E, Scher HI, Sharifi N, Skoneczna IA, Soule HR, Spratt DE, Srinivas S, Sternberg CN, Suzuki H, Taplin ME, Thellenberg-Karlsson C, Tilki D, Türkeri LN, Uemura H, Ürün Y, Vale CL, Vapiwala N, Walz J, Yamoah K, Ye D, Yu EY, Zapatero A, Omlin A. Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Report from the 2024 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC). Eur Urol 2024:S0302-2838(24)02610-1. [PMID: 39394013 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.09.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2024] [Revised: 09/03/2024] [Accepted: 09/13/2024] [Indexed: 10/13/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Innovations have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer (PC). Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of topics that greatly impact daily practice. The 2024 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) surveyed experts on key questions in clinical management in order to supplement evidence-based guidelines. Here we present voting results for questions from APCCC 2024. METHODS Before the conference, a panel of 120 international PC experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 183 multiple-choice consensus questions on eight different topics. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the voting panel members ("panellists"). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS Consensus was a priori defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. The voting results show varying degrees of consensus, as discussed in this article and detailed in the Supplementary material. These findings do not include a formal literature review or meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS The voting results can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers in prioritising areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised on the basis of patient and cancer characteristics, and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2024 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biosciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
| | - Fabio Turco
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Ian D Davis
- Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; Eastern Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | - Karim Fizazi
- Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | | | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center and GenesisCare, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Eric Small
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Matthew Smith
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Christopher J Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Bertrand Tombal
- Division of Urology, Clinique Universitaire St. Luc, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biosciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | | | - Ana Aparicio
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Andrew J Armstrong
- Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancer, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | | | - Karol Axcrona
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Urology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway
| | - Mouna Ayadi
- Salah Azaiz Institute, Medical School of Tunis, Tunis, Tunisia
| | - Himisha Beltran
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Anders Bjartell
- Department of Urology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncostat U1018 INSERM, Université Paris-Saclay, Gustave-Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Maria T Bourlon
- Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Muhammad Bulbul
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Consuelo Buttigliero
- Department of Oncology, San Luigi Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Italy
| | - Orazio Caffo
- Medical Oncology Department, Santa Chiara Hospital, APSS, Trento, Italy
| | - Daniel Castellano
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Elena Castro
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Heather H Cheng
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Division of Clinical Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA USA
| | - Kim N Chi
- BC Cancer and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Caroline S Clarke
- Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Noel Clarke
- The Christie and Salford Royal Hospitals, Manchester, UK
| | - Johann S de Bono
- Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Maria De Santis
- Department of Urology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ignacio Duran
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, IDIVAL, Santander, Spain
| | | | - Onyeanunam N Ekeke
- Urology Division, University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Nigeria
| | | | - Louise Emmett
- Department of Theranostics and Nuclear Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Stefano Fanti
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS AOU Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Felix Y Feng
- University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Peter C C Fong
- Auckland City Hospital and University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | - Nicola Fossati
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Università della Svizzera Italiana Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Daniel J George
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Martin E Gleave
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Gwenaelle Gravis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France
| | - Susan Halabi
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Daniel Heinrich
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Innlandet Hospital Trust, Gjøvik, Norway
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Michael S Hofman
- Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Thomas A Hope
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Lisa G Horvath
- Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Maha H A Hussain
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Robert J Jones
- School of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Anthony M Joshua
- Department of Medical Oncology, Kinghorn Cancer Centre, St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Daniel Keizman
- Genitourinary Unit, Division of Oncology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Raja B Khauli
- Naef K. Basile Cancer Institute, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon; Division of Urology, Carle-Illinois College of Medicine, Urbana, IL, USA
| | - Gero Kramer
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Stacy Loeb
- Department of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA; Department of Surgery/Urology, Manhattan Veterans Affairs, New York, NY, USA
| | - Brandon A Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Fernando C Maluf
- Beneficiência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; Departamento de Oncologia, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Joaquin Mateo
- Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - David Matheson
- Faculty of Education Health and Wellbeing, University of Wolverhampton, Walsall, UK
| | - Mika P Matikainen
- Department of Urology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Ray McDermott
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Vincent's University Hospital and Cancer Trials, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Rana R McKay
- University of California-San Diego, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - Niven Mehra
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Axel S Merseburger
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Alicia K Morgans
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Michael J Morris
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hind Mrabti
- Institut National d'Oncologie, Mohamed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - Deborah Mukherji
- Clemenceau Medical Center, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Declan G Murphy
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Vedang Murthy
- Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Shingai B A Mutambirwa
- Department of Urology, Sefako Makgatho Health Science University, Dr. George Mukhari Academic Hospital, Medunsa, South Africa
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - William K Oh
- Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Tisch Cancer Institute at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Piet Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Network, Antwerp, Belgium; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Joe M O'Sullivan
- Patrick G. Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, UK
| | - Anwar R Padhani
- Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - Chris Parker
- Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Darren M C Poon
- Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Colin C Pritchard
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Danny M Rabah
- Cancer Research Chair and Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Department of Urology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Dana Rathkopf
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Raphaele Renard-Penna
- Department of Imagery, GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, AP-HP, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Charles J Ryan
- Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Fred Saad
- Centre Hospitalier de Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | | | - Shahneen Sandhu
- Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Oliver A Sartor
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Edward Schaeffer
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Howard I Scher
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nima Sharifi
- Desai Sethi Urology Institute and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Iwona A Skoneczna
- Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | | | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Sandy Srinivas
- Division of Medical Oncology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Cora N Sternberg
- Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Meyer Cancer Center, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hiroyoshi Suzuki
- Department of Urology, Toho University Sakura Medical Center, Sakura, Japan
| | - Mary-Ellen Taplin
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center and Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Levent N Türkeri
- Department of Urology, M.A. Aydınlar Acıbadem University, Altunizade Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Hiroji Uemura
- Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Yüksel Ürün
- Department of Medical Oncology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Claire L Vale
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jochen Walz
- Institut Paoli-Calmettes Cancer Center, Marseille, France
| | - Kosj Yamoah
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Dingwei Ye
- Department of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Evan Y Yu
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Division of Clinical Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA USA
| | - Almudena Zapatero
- University Hospital La Princesa, Health Research Institute, Madrid, Spain
| | - Aurelius Omlin
- Onkozentrum Zurich, University of Zurich and Tumorzentrum Hirslanden Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Rodler S, Stief C, Westhofen T. Re: letter to the editor for the article "Health-related quality of life following salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy or focal therapy". World J Urol 2024; 42:546. [PMID: 39331150 PMCID: PMC11436410 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05255-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2024] [Accepted: 09/01/2024] [Indexed: 09/28/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Severin Rodler
- Department of Urology, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany.
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
| | - Christian Stief
- Department of Urology, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| | - Thilo Westhofen
- Department of Urology, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Ekanger C, Helle SI, Kvåle R, Reisæter L, Gravdal K, Honoré A, Dahl O. Reply to M. Kamrava and F. Montorsi et al. J Clin Oncol 2024:JCO2401345. [PMID: 39288351 DOI: 10.1200/jco-24-01345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2024] [Accepted: 06/24/2024] [Indexed: 09/19/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Ekanger
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Svein Inge Helle
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Rune Kvåle
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Lars Reisæter
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Karsten Gravdal
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Alfred Honoré
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Olav Dahl
- Christian Ekanger, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Rune Kvåle, MD, PhD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway, Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway; Lars Reisæter, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Karsten Gravdal, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Alfred Honoré, MD, Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; and Olav Dahl, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Science, Medical Faculty, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Saripalli AL, Venkatesulu BP, Nickols NG, Valle LF, Harkenrider MM, Kishan AU, Solanki AA. Systematic review and recommendations for re-irradiation for intraprostatic radiorecurrent prostate cancer after definitive radiation therapy. World J Urol 2024; 42:520. [PMID: 39264453 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05205-9] [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: 10/09/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2024] [Indexed: 09/13/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Intraprostatic recurrence (IRR) of prostate cancer after radiation therapy is increasingly identified. Our objective was to review the literature to determine the optimal workup for identifying IRR, the management options, and practical considerations for the delivery of re-irradiation as salvage local therapy. METHODS We performed a systematic review of available publications and ongoing studies on the topics of IRR, with a focus on salvage re-irradiation. RESULTS Work up of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer includes PSMA PET/CT and multiparametric MRI, followed by biopsy to confirm IRR. Management options include continued surveillance, palliative hormonal therapy, and salvage local therapy. Salvage local therapy can be delivered using re-irradiation with low dose rate brachytherapy, high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy, and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), as well as non-radiation modalities, such as cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, irreversible electroporation and radical prostatectomy. Data demonstrate that HDR brachytherapy and SBRT have similar efficacy compared to the other salvage local therapy modalities, while having more favorable side effect profiles. Recommendations for radiation therapy planning and delivery using HDR and SBRT based on the available literature are discussed. CONCLUSION Salvage re-irradiation is safe and effective and should be considered in patients with IRR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anjali L Saripalli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Bhanu Prasad Venkatesulu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Nicholas G Nickols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Luca F Valle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Matthew M Harkenrider
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Abhishek A Solanki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Rivas JG, Taratkin M, Azilgareeva C, Morozov A, Laso S, Enikeev D, Sierra JM, Schelkunova K, Sanguedolce F, Breda A, Govorov A, Vasilyev A, Cepeda M, Lusuardi L, Pallauf M, Celia A, Silvestri T, Fiori C, Fernández E, Martínez-Salamanca JI, Barret E. Cryotherapy versus radical prostatectomy as a salvage treatment for radio-recurrent prostate cancer. World J Urol 2024; 42:515. [PMID: 39259304 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05199-4] [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: 05/08/2024] [Accepted: 07/30/2024] [Indexed: 09/13/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The aim of this study is to compare outcomes of SRP (salvage radical prostatectomy) with SCAP (salvage cryoablation of the prostate) in local radio-recurrent PCa (prostate cancer) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis of a multicentric European Society of Uro-technology (ESUT) database was performed. Data on patients with local recurrent PCa after radiotherapy who underwent salvage treatment were collected. Patients and their respective disease characteristics, perioperative complications as well as oncological outcomes were then described. The treatment success rate was defined as PSA nadir < 0,4 ng/ml. Any complications were graded according to the modified Clavien system. A descriptive and comparative analysis was performed using SPSS software. RESULTS 25 patients underwent SRP and 71 patients received SCAP. The mean follow-up was 24 months. The median PSA level before initial treatment was 8.3 (range 7-127) ng/ml. The success rates of SRP and SCAP were largely comparable (88% (22 patients) vs. 67.7% (48 patients), respectively, p = 0.216). The mean serum PSA levels at 12 months after salvage treatment were 1.2 ± 0.2 ng/mL vs. 0.25 ± 0.5 ng/mL, p > 0.05). During the follow-up period, only 3 (12%) patients in the SRP group had PSA recurrence compared with 21 patients (29.6%) in the SCAP group. The 5-year BRFS was similar (51,6% and 48,2%, p = 0,08) for SRP and SCAP respectively. The 5-year overall survival rate was 91.7%, and 89,7% (p = 0.669) and the 5-year cancer-specific survival was 91.7%, and 97,1% (p = 0.077), after SRP and SCAP respectively. No difference was found regarding the complications. CONCLUSIONS Both SRP and SCAP should be considered as valid treatment options for patients with local recurrence of PCa after radiotherapy. SCAP has a potentially lower risk of morbidity and acceptable intermediate-term oncological efficacy, but a longer follow up and a higher number of patients is ideally needed to draw any long-term conclusions regarding the oncological data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Gomez Rivas
- Department of Urology, Clinico San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - Mark Taratkin
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Camilla Azilgareeva
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Andrey Morozov
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Silvia Laso
- Department of Urology, Clinico San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - Dmitry Enikeev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
- Department of Urology and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria
- Division of Urology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel
| | - Jesús Moreno Sierra
- Department of Urology, Clinico San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | - Alberto Breda
- Department of Urology, Fundació Pugivert, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | - Marcos Cepeda
- Department of Urology, Hospital Rio Ortega, Valladolid, Spain
| | - Lukas Lusuardi
- Department of Urology and Andrology, Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität, Salzburg, Austria
| | - Maximilian Pallauf
- Department of Urology and Andrology, Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität, Salzburg, Austria
| | - Antonio Celia
- Department of Urology, San Bassiano Hospital, Bassiano del Grappa, Italy
| | - Tommaso Silvestri
- Department of Urology, San Bassiano Hospital, Bassiano del Grappa, Italy
| | - Cristian Fiori
- Department of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | | | | | - Eric Barret
- Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, 42 boulevard Jourdan, Paris, 75014, France.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Creta M, Shariat SF, Marra G, Gontero P, Rossanese M, Morra S, Teoh J, Kishan AU, Karnes RJ, Longo N. Local salvage therapies in patients with radio-recurrent prostate cancer following external beam radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00883-3. [PMID: 39223232 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00883-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2024] [Revised: 07/28/2024] [Accepted: 08/15/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION To date, radio-recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) ranks as the fourth most common urological malignancy when considering the number of men with localized PCa who undergo radiation treatment and subsequently experience a biochemical recurrence. This systematic review aimed to summarize available evidence about the outcomes of local salvage strategies in patients with local PCa recurrence following primary external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). METHODS We conducted a comprehensive bibliographic search on MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases in October 2023 to identify studies published in the last 20 years evaluating outcomes of local salvage procedures in patients with locally radio-recurrent PCa following EBRT. The meta-analysis was performed using ProMeta 3 software when two or more studies reported the same outcome. The effect size (ES) was estimated using rates reported with its 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS Overall, 28 studies (6 prospective and 22 retrospective) including 1544 patients were included in the review. Two-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 84.0% (95% CI: 67.0-93.0%), 69.0% (95% CI: 42.0-87.0%), 58.0% (95% CI: 43.0-71.0%), and 45% (95% CI: 38.0-52.0%), for patients undergoing brachytherapy (BT), EBRT, Cryotherapy and High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU), respectively. After salvage prostatectomy, RFS ranged from 75% to 78.5% at a median follow-up ranging from 18 to 35 months. Estimates for severe gastrointestinal toxicity were 2%, 3%, 3%, 4%, and 11% following cryotherapy, BT, HIFU, EBRT, and salvage radical prostatectomy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In patients who underwent EBRT as primary treatment, prostate salvage re-irradiation through BT or EBRT represents the modality providing the best balance between efficacy and safety. Unfortunately, due to the low level of evidence, strong recommendations regarding the choice of any of these techniques cannot be made.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Massimiliano Creta
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy
| | | | - Giancarlo Marra
- Department of Urology, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Paolo Gontero
- Department of Urology, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Torino School of Medicine, Torino, Italy
| | - Marta Rossanese
- Gaetano Barresi Department of Human and Paediatric Pathology, Urology Section, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Simone Morra
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
| | - Jeremy Teoh
- S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Nicola Longo
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Schröder C, Tang H, Lenffer B, Buchali A, Zwahlen DR, Förster R, Windisch P. Re-irradiation to the prostate using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) after initial definitive radiotherapy - A systematic review and meta-analysis of recent trials. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 48:100806. [PMID: 39044780 PMCID: PMC11263509 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100806] [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: 11/24/2023] [Revised: 06/08/2024] [Accepted: 06/11/2024] [Indexed: 07/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Background There is increasing data on re-irradiation to the prostate using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) after definitive radiotherapy for prostate cancer, with increasing evidence on prostate re-irradiation using a C-arm LINAC or an MR LINAC in recent years. We therefore conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis on prostate re-irradiation including studies published from 2020 to 2023, to serve as an update on existing meta-analysis. Methods We searched the PubMed and Embase databases in October 2023 with queries including combinations of "repeat", "radiotherapy", "prostate", "re-irradiation", "reirradiation", "re treatment", "SBRT", "retreatment". Publication date was set to be from 2020 to 2023. There was no limitation regarding language. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. After data extraction, heterogeneity testing was done by calculating the I2. A random effects model with a restricted maximum likelihood estimator was used to estimate the combined effect. Funnel plot asymmetry was assessed visually and using Egger's test to estimate the presence of publication and/or small study bias. Results 14 publications were included in the systematic review. The rates of acute ≥ grade 2 (G2) genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities reported in the included studies ranged from 0.0-30.0 % and 0.0-25.0 % respectively. For late ≥ G2 GU and GI toxicity, the ranges are 4.0-51.8 % and 0.0-25.0 %. The pooled rate of acute GU and GI toxicity ≥ G2 were 13 % (95 % CI: 7-18 %) and 2 % (95 % CI: 0-4 %). For late GU and GI toxicity ≥ G2 the pooled rates were 25 % (95 % CI: 14-35 %) and 5 % (95 % CI: 1-9 %). The pooled 2-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was 72 % (95 % CI: 64-92 %). Conclusions SBRT in the re-irradiation of radiorecurrent prostate cancer is safe and effective. Further prospective data are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Schröder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Brauerstrasse 15, 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Hongjian Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Brauerstrasse 15, 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Bianca Lenffer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Brauerstrasse 15, 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - André Buchali
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ruppin-Brandenburg, Fehrbelliner Strasse 38, 16816 Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Daniel Rudolf Zwahlen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Brauerstrasse 15, 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Robert Förster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Brauerstrasse 15, 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital (Bern University Hospital), University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland
| | - Paul Windisch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Brauerstrasse 15, 8401 Winterthur, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Meraouna Y, Blanchard P, Losa S, Labib A, Krhili S, Pommier P, Crehange G, Flam T, Cosset JM, Kissel M. Salvage low-dose-rate brachytherapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive irradiation. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 48:100809. [PMID: 39027689 PMCID: PMC11254530 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100809] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2023] [Revised: 06/14/2024] [Accepted: 06/15/2024] [Indexed: 07/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose The optimal management of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive irradiation is still unclear but local salvage treatments are gaining interest. A retrospective, single-institution analysis of clinical outcomes and treatment-related toxicity after salvage I-125 low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy (BT) for locally-recurrent prostate cancer was conducted in a Comprehensive Cancer Center. Patients and methods A total of 94 patients treated with salvage LDR-BT between 2006 and 2021 were included. The target volume was either the whole-gland +/- a boost on the GTV, the hemigland, or only the GTV. The prescribed dose ranged from 90 to 145 Gy. Toxicity was graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0. Results Median follow-up was 34 months. Initial radiotherapy was external beam radiotherapy in 73 patients (78 %) with a median dose of 76 Gy and I-125 BT in 21 patients (22 %) with a prescribed dose of 145 Gy. Median PSA at salvage was 3.75 ng/ml with a median interval between first and salvage irradiation of 9.4 years. Salvage brachytherapy was associated with androgen deprivation therapy for 32 % of the patients. Only 4 % of the patients were castrate-resistant. Failure free survival was 82 % at 2 years and 66 % at 3 years. The only factors associated with failure-free survival on multivariate analysis were hormonosensitivity at relapse and European Association of Urology (EAU) prognostic group. Late grade 3 urinary and rectal toxicities occurred in 12 % and 1 % of the patients respectively.No significant difference in toxicity or efficacy was observed between the three implant volume groups. Conclusion The efficacy and toxicity results are consistent with those in the LDR group of the MASTER meta-analysis. Salvage BT confirms to be an effective and safe option for locally recurrent prostate cancer. A focal approach could be interesting to reduce late severe toxicities, especially urinary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Y. Meraouna
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
- Faculté de médecine Sorbonne Université, 91-105 Boulevard de l’Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France
| | - P. Blanchard
- Radiotherapy Department, Gustave Roussy, 114 Boulevard Edouard Vaillant, 94220 Villejuif, France
| | - S. Losa
- Physics Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - A. Labib
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - S. Krhili
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - P. Pommier
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - G. Crehange
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - T. Flam
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
- Urology Department, Clinique Saint Jean de Dieu, 2 rue Rousselet, 75007 Paris, France
| | - J-M. Cosset
- Radiotherapy Department, Centre Charlebourg – La Défense – Amethyst Radiothérapie, 65 Avenue Foch, 92250 La Garenne-Colombes, France
| | - M. Kissel
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Shen B, Liu J, Wu D, Guo J. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of high-dose rate brachytherapy for radiorecurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:655-670. [PMID: 38386054 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-024-02205-x] [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: 10/16/2023] [Accepted: 01/14/2024] [Indexed: 02/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) plays an important role in the treatment of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive treatment. The objective of this study is to summarize the efficacy and toxicity of HDR-BT in these patients. METHODS We performed a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE from inception to July 2023. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS) in different subgroups, and the secondary endpoint was gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity. A semi-automated tool (WebPlotDigitizer) and a new Shiny application combined with R software (R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; https://www.R-project.org/ ) helped to reconstruct survival curves. RESULTS Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis, including 1447 patients. A total of 761 patients from 13 studies were included in survival reconstruction, and the median RFS time was 61.2 months (57.6-72.0 months). The estimated 2‑, 3‑, and 5‑year rates were 75.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 72.8 ~ 79.2%), 66.7% (95% CI 63.0 ~ 70.5%), and 52.3% (95% CI 47.5 ~ 57.4%), respectively. Whole-gland irradiation with multiple fractions (≥ 2 F) resulted in better RFS compared with focal gland irradiation with fewer fractions (1 F mostly; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.60, 95% CI 0.47-0.77, p < 0.0001). According to the different median time from primary treatment to salvage therapy (TRS) and median age at recurrence, short median TRS (56-67.2 months vs. 70-120 months; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.68-0.40; p < 0.0001) and younger median age (60-70 years vs. 71-75 years; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.74; p < 0.0001) were positive factors for RFS. The cumulative incidences estimated for grade ≥ 3 acute and late GU toxicities were 1% (95% CI 0 ~ 1%) and 5% (95% CI 4 ~ 7%), respectively. Three patients (3/992) experienced grade ≥ 3 late GI toxicity, and no cases of grade ≥ 3 acute GI toxicity were reported. CONCLUSION HDR-BT has a high safety profile and good RFS benefit for salvage treatment of radiorecurrent prostate cancer. In terms of RFS, whole-gland irradiation with multiple fractions seems to be better than focal gland irradiation with fewer fractions, while short TRS and younger age are good prognostic factors. In view of the low level of evidence in the included studies and the large heterogeneity of each study, these conclusions still need to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bin Shen
- Urology Department, Shaoxing People's Hospital, 312000, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jianjiang Liu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Shaoxing People's Hospital, 312000, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, China
| | - Dongping Wu
- Department of Radiotherapy, Shaoxing People's Hospital, 312000, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, China.
| | - Jiayi Guo
- School of Medicine, Shaoxing University, No.568 Zhongxing North Road, Yuecheng District, 312000, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, China.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Swensen S, Liao JJ, Chen JJ, Kim K, Ma TM, Weg ES. The expanding role of radiation oncology across the prostate cancer continuum. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024; 49:2693-2705. [PMID: 38900319 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04408-3] [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: 03/31/2024] [Revised: 05/23/2024] [Accepted: 05/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024]
Abstract
Radiotherapy is used in the treatment of prostate cancer in a variety of disease states with significant reliance on imaging to guide clinical decision-making and radiation delivery. In the definitive setting, the choice of radiotherapy treatment modality, dose, and fractionation for localized prostate cancer is determined by the patient's initial risk stratification and other clinical considerations. Radiation is also an option as salvage therapy in patients with locoregionally recurrent disease after prior definitive radiation or surgery. In recent years, the role of radiation has expanded for patients with metastatic disease, including prostate-directed radiotherapy in de novo low volume metastatic disease, metastasis-directed therapy for oligorecurrent disease, and palliative management of symptomatic metastases in the advanced setting. Here we review the expanding role of radiation in the treatment of prostate cancer in the definitive, locoregionally recurrent, and metastatic settings, as well as highlight the role of imaging in clinical reasoning, radiation planning, and treatment delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sasha Swensen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Jay J Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Jonathan J Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Katherine Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Ting Martin Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Emily S Weg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Tilki D, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Brunckhorst O, Darraugh J, Eberli D, De Meerleer G, De Santis M, Farolfi A, Gandaglia G, Gillessen S, Grivas N, Henry AM, Lardas M, J L H van Leenders G, Liew M, Linares Espinos E, Oldenburg J, van Oort IM, Oprea-Lager DE, Ploussard G, Roberts MJ, Rouvière O, Schoots IG, Schouten N, Smith EJ, Stranne J, Wiegel T, Willemse PPM, Cornford P. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II-2024 Update: Treatment of Relapsing and Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2024; 86:164-182. [PMID: 38688773 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.010] [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: 03/02/2024] [Revised: 03/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/03/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) have been updated. Here we provide a summary of the 2024 guidelines. METHODS The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS Risk stratification for relapsing PCa after primary therapy may guide salvage therapy decisions. New treatment options, such as androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs), ARTA + chemotherapy combinations, PARP inhibitors and their combinations, and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based therapy have become available for men with metastatic PCa. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Evidence for relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant PCa is evolving rapidly. These guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. The full version is available online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/ prostate-cancer/). PATIENT SUMMARY This article summarises the 2024 guidelines for the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. These guidelines are based on evidence and guide doctors in discussing treatment decisions with their patients. The guidelines are updated every year.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
| | | | | | | | | | - Julie Darraugh
- European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Daniel Eberli
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Gert De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Maria De Santis
- Department of Urology, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Andrea Farolfi
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Soldera Prostate Cancer Laboratory, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Nikolaos Grivas
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ann M Henry
- Leeds Cancer Centre, St. James's University Hospital and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Michael Lardas
- Department of Urology, Metropolitan General Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | | | - Matthew Liew
- Department of Urology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Jan Oldenburg
- Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Inge M van Oort
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Daniela E Oprea-Lager
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Matthew J Roberts
- Department of Urology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Australia
| | - Olivier Rouvière
- Department of Imaging, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France; Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, UFR Lyon-Est, Lyon, France
| | - Ivo G Schoots
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Emma J Smith
- European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Johan Stranne
- Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Department of Urology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital-Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Peter-Paul M Willemse
- Department of Urology, Cancer Center University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Philip Cornford
- Department of Urology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Patel KR, Rydzewski NR, Schott E, Cooley-Zgela T, Ning H, Cheng J, Salerno K, Huang EP, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke P, Turkbey B, Citrin DE. A Phase 1 Trial of Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer After Brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:1471-1480. [PMID: 38428681 PMCID: PMC11262986 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.02.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2023] [Revised: 01/16/2024] [Accepted: 02/08/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE NCT03253744 is a phase 1 trial with the primary objective to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with local prostate cancer recurrence after brachytherapy. Additional objectives included biochemical control and imaging response. METHODS AND MATERIALS This trial was initially designed to test 3 therapeutic dose levels (DLs): 40 Gy (DL1), 42.5 Gy (DL2), and 45 Gy (DL3) in 5 fractions. Intensity modulation was used to deliver the prescription dose to the magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based positron emission tomography imaging-defined gross tumor volume while simultaneously delivering 30 Gy to an elective volume defined by the prostate gland. This phase 1 trial followed a 3+3 design with a 3-patient expansion at the MTD. Toxicities were scored until trial completion at 2 years post-SBRT using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Escalation was halted if 2 dose limiting toxicities occurred, defined as any persistent (>4 days) grade 3 toxicity occurring within the first 3 weeks after SBRT or any grade ≥3 genitourinary (GU) or grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity thereafter. RESULTS Between August 2018 and January 2023, 9 patients underwent salvage SBRT and were observed for a median of 22 months (Q1-Q3, 20-43 months). No grade 3 to 5 adverse events related to study treatment were observed; thus, no dose limiting toxicities occurred during the observation period. Escalation was halted by amendment given excellent biochemical control in DL1 and DL2 in the setting of a high incidence of clinically significant late grade 2 GU toxicity. Therefore, the MTD was considered 42.5 Gy in 5 fractions (DL2). One- and 2-year biochemical progression-free survival were 100% and 86%, representing a single patient in the trial cohort with biochemical failure (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] nadir + 2.0) at 20 months posttreatment. CONCLUSIONS The MTD of salvage SBRT for the treatment of intraprostatic radiorecurrence after brachytherapy was 42.5 Gy in 5 fractions producing an 86% 2-year biochemical progression-free survival rate, with 1 poststudy failure at 20 months. The most frequent clinically significant toxicity was late grade 2 GU toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krishnan R Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
| | - Nicholas R Rydzewski
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Jason Cheng
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kilian Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erich P Huang
- Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Teramoto A, Sakamaki K, Shoji S, Uemura K. Win ratio analysis of short-term clinical outcomes of focal therapy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for the patients with localized prostate cancer. Sci Rep 2024; 14:17019. [PMID: 39043819 PMCID: PMC11266550 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-67592-8] [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: 02/18/2024] [Accepted: 07/12/2024] [Indexed: 07/25/2024] Open
Abstract
We compared the comprehensive clinical outcomes of focal therapy (FT) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PC) using a win ratio analysis. After propensity score matching, a win ratio analysis, in which the composite endpoints of failure-free survival (FFS) and the urinary domain of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) were analyzed, was used for the comparison of the clinical outcomes of FT and RARP for the patients with localized PC. Seventy-two patients were included in each group after propensity score matching. FFS was not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.5044) after 36 months of follow-up. In contrast, the score of the urinary domain of the EPIC in the FT group was significantly better than that in the RARP group (p < 0.0001). The win ratio of FT per RARP was 3.39 (p < 0.0001; 95% confidence interval 2.21-5.20), suggesting a higher comprehensive outcome in the FT group than in the RARP group during short-term follow-up in single institution. Although further randomized trial with long-term follow-up would be needed for the evaluation, the win ratio would be useful to analyze the efficacy of FT according to patient preferences comprehensively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Asuka Teramoto
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kentaro Sakamaki
- Faculty of Health Data Science, Juntendo University, Chiba, Japan
| | - Sunao Shoji
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan.
| | - Kohei Uemura
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Long Depaquit T, Campagna J, Bastide C, Baboudjian M, Corral R, Uleri A, Toledano H. Salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (S-HIFU) for recurrence after primary radiotherapy of prostate cancer. THE FRENCH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY 2024; 34:102633. [PMID: 38547931 DOI: 10.1016/j.fjurol.2024.102633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2023] [Revised: 03/04/2024] [Accepted: 03/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/13/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate functional and oncological outcomes of salvage high-intensity focal ultrasound (S-HIFU) after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) failure in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS This single-center study included patients who underwent S-HIFU for local recurrence after EBRT between 2006 and 2023. Cancer-specific survival, metastasis-free survival and progression-free survival were illustrated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Disease progression was defined by one of the following criteria: increase of 2ng/mL or more above the PSA nadir, positive post-S-HIFU biopsy or initiation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of disease progression after S-HIFU. RESULTS A total of 52 S-HIFU sessions for 48 patients were performed. Median time between EBRT and S-HIFU was 6.5 years. Median PSA before S-HIFU was 3.2ng/mL and median PSA nadir after S-HIFU was 0.58ng/mL. A total of 39 (81.3%) complications was recorded, including 3 (6.3%) high grade complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. After a median follow-up period of 6 years, 14 (29.2%) patients developed metastatic disease. Eighteen (37.5%) patients had no recurrence, whereas 30 (62.5%) patients received ADT for disease progression. The estimated 5-yr cancer-specific survival (CSS), metastasis-free survival (MFS) and progression-free survival rates (PFSR) were 100%, 79.9% (95% CI 67-92) and 41.2% (95% CI 74-96), respectively. The estimated 10-yr CSS, MFS and PFSR were 80% (95% CI 45-100), 50.7% (95% CI 19.4-82.1) and 14% (95% CI 10.8-45), respectively. The hazard of progression increased with the intermediate (HR 3.8; 95% CI 0.99 to 15; p=0.049) and high pre-EBRT d'Amico-s risk group (HR 4.1; 95% CI 0.98 to 16.2; p=0.050). Also, the time between EBRT and S-HIFU was significantly associated with risk of progression (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.86; p=0.004). No significant difference linked to the disease progression (DP) risk was found between focal vs whole-gland treatment (p=0.70). CONCLUSION Physicians should consider HIFU as a local salvage treatment after failed EBRT, thus avoiding or delaying palliative androgen deprivation therapy. Further studies are needed to improve patient selection for this therapy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thibaut Long Depaquit
- Department of Urology, HIA Sainte-Anne, Toulon, France; Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France.
| | | | - Cyrille Bastide
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France
| | | | - Renaud Corral
- Department of Urology, HIA Sainte-Anne, Toulon, France; Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France; Department of Urology, Martigues Hospital, Martigues, France
| | | | - Harry Toledano
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, AP-HM, Marseille, France; Department of Urology, Martigues Hospital, Martigues, France
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Ekanger C, Helle SI, Reisæter L, Hysing LB, Kvåle R, Honoré A, Gravdal K, Pilskog S, Dahl O. Salvage Reirradiation for Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Results From a Prospective Study With 7.2 Years of Follow-Up. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:1934-1942. [PMID: 38652872 PMCID: PMC11191049 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.01391] [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: 06/30/2023] [Revised: 01/24/2024] [Accepted: 02/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/25/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE There are no well-established re-treatment options for local recurrence after primary curative radiation therapy for prostate cancer (PCa), as prospective studies with long-term follow-up are lacking. Here, we present results from a prospective study on focal salvage reirradiation with external-beam radiation therapy with a median follow-up of 7.2 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS From 2013 to 2017, 38 patients with biopsy-proven locally recurrent PCa >2 years after previous treatment and absence of grade 2-3 toxicity from the first course of radiation were included. The treatment was 35 Gy in five fractions to the MRI-based target volume and 6 months of androgen-deprivation therapy starting 3 months before radiation. The Phoenix criteria defined biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), and toxicity was scored according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. RESULTS Median age was 70 years, and median time from primary radiation to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence was 83 months. The actuarial 2-year and 5-year bRFS were 81% (95% CI, 69 to 94) and 58% (95% CI, 49 to 74), respectively. The actuarial 5-year local recurrence-free survival was 93% (95% CI, 82 to 100), metastasis-free survival was 82% (95% CI, 69 to 95), and overall survival was 87% (95% CI, 76 to 98). Two patients (5%) had durable grade 3 genitourinary toxicity, one combined with GI grade 3 toxicity. A PSA doubling time ≤6 months at salvage, a Gleason score >7, and a PSA nadir ≥0.1 ng/mL predicted a worse outcome. CONCLUSION Reirradiation with EBRT for locally recurrent PCa after primary curative radiation therapy is clinically feasible and demonstrated a favorable outcome with acceptable toxicity in this prospective study with long-term follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Ekanger
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Svein Inge Helle
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Lars Reisæter
- Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Liv Bolstad Hysing
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Technology and Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Rune Kvåle
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
| | - Alfred Honoré
- Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Karsten Gravdal
- Department of Patohology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Sara Pilskog
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Technology and Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Olav Dahl
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Shore ND, Moul JW, Pienta KJ, Czernin J, King MT, Freedland SJ. Biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after primary definitive therapy: treatment based on risk stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27:192-201. [PMID: 37679602 PMCID: PMC11096125 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00712-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Revised: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nearly one-third of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) experience biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment. BCR increases the risk of distant metastasis and mortality in patients with prognostically unfavorable features. These patients are best managed with a tailored treatment strategy incorporating risk stratification using clinicopathological factors, next-generation imaging, and genomic testing. OBJECTIVE This narrative review examines the utility of risk stratification for the management of patients with BCR in the context of clinical trial data, referencing the latest recommendations by European and US medical societies. METHODS PubMed was searched for relevant studies published through May 21 2023 on treatment of patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). RESULTS European and US guidelines support the risk-stratified management of BCR. Post-RP, salvage EBRT (with or without androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) is an accepted treatment option for patients with BCR. Post-EBRT, local salvage therapies (RP, cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, stereotactic body radiotherapy, and low-dose-rate and high-dose-rate brachytherapy) have demonstrated comparable relapse-free survival rates but differing adverse event profiles, short and long term. Local salvage therapies should be used for local-only relapses while ADT should be considered for regional or distant relapses. In practice, patients often receive ADT, with varying guidance for intermittent ADT vs. continuous ADT, due to consideration of quality-of-life effects. CONCLUSIONS Despite a lack of consensus for BCR treatment among guideline associations and medical societies, risk stratification of patients is essential for personalized treatment approaches, as it allows for an informed selection of therapeutic strategies and estimation of adverse events. In lower-risk disease, observation is recommended while in higher-risk disease, after failed repeat local therapy, ADT and/or clinical trial enrollment may be appropriate. Results from ongoing clinical studies of patients with BCR should provide consensus for management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neal D Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Judd W Moul
- Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Johannes Czernin
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Martin T King
- Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Stephen J Freedland
- Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Gupta P, Heffter T, Zubair M, Hsu IC, Burdette EC, Diederich CJ. Treatment Planning Strategies for Interstitial Ultrasound Ablation of Prostate Cancer. IEEE OPEN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY 2024; 5:362-375. [PMID: 38899026 PMCID: PMC11186654 DOI: 10.1109/ojemb.2024.3397965] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2024] [Revised: 03/28/2024] [Accepted: 05/03/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To develop patient-specific 3D models using Finite-Difference Time-Domain (FDTD) simulations and pre-treatment planning tools for the selective thermal ablation of prostate cancer with interstitial ultrasound. This involves the integration with a FDA 510(k) cleared catheter-based ultrasound interstitial applicators and delivery system. METHODS A 3D generalized "prostate" model was developed to generate temperature and thermal dose profiles for different applicator operating parameters and anticipated perfusion ranges. A priori planning, based upon these pre-calculated lethal thermal dose and iso-temperature clouds, was devised for iterative device selection and positioning. Full 3D patient-specific anatomic modeling of actual placement of single or multiple applicators to conformally ablate target regions can be applied, with optional integrated pilot-point temperature-based feedback control and urethral/rectum cooling. These numerical models were verified against previously reported ex-vivo experimental results obtained in soft tissues. RESULTS For generic prostate tissue, 360 treatment schemes were simulated based on the number of transducers (1-4), applied power (8-20 W/cm2), heating time (5, 7.5, 10 min), and blood perfusion (0, 2.5, 5 kg/m3/s) using forward treatment modelling. Selectable ablation zones ranged from 0.8-3.0 cm and 0.8-5.3 cm in radial and axial directions, respectively. 3D patient-specific thermal treatment modeling for 12 Cases of T2/T3 prostate disease demonstrate applicability of workflow and technique for focal, quadrant and hemi-gland ablation. A temperature threshold (e.g., Tthres = 52 °C) at the treatment margin, emulating placement of invasive temperature sensing, can be applied for pilot-point feedback control to improve conformality of thermal ablation. Also, binary power control (e.g., Treg = 45 °C) can be applied which will regulate the applied power level to maintain the surrounding temperature to a safe limit or maximum threshold until the set heating time. CONCLUSIONS Prostate-specific simulations of interstitial ultrasound applicators were used to generate a library of thermal-dose distributions to visually optimize and set applicator positioning and directivity during a priori treatment planning pre-procedure. Anatomic 3D forward treatment planning in patient-specific models, along with optional temperature-based feedback control, demonstrated single and multi-applicator implant strategies to effectively ablate focal disease while affording protection of normal tissues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pragya Gupta
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoCA94115USA
| | | | - Muhammad Zubair
- Department of Neurology and Neurological SciencesStanford UniversityStanfordCA94305USA
| | - I-Chow Hsu
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoCA94115USA
| | | | - Chris J. Diederich
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoCA94115USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Yang J, Xiong X, Liao X, Zheng W, Xu H, Wei Q, Yang L. Nonsurgical salvage options for locally recurrent prostate cancer after primary definitive radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2024; 110:3008-3020. [PMID: 38348896 PMCID: PMC11093491 DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000001164] [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: 11/23/2023] [Accepted: 01/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To conduct a meta-analysis to provide the latest evidence of nonsurgical local salvage options in the first-line radiotherapy (RT) failure setting for localized prostate cancer patients. BACKGROUND Recurrence of localized prostate cancer after primary RT remains a clinical challenge. There is no consensus on optimal nonsurgical local salvage therapies, which mainly consist of cryotherapy (CRYO), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), high/low-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR/LDR), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). METHODS Our study was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The authors systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to September 2023 to identify potentially relevant studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the European Association of Urology (EAU) items. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) and genitourinary/gastrointestinal toxicities were the outcomes of interest. Pooled rates with 95% CIs were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 99 studies comprising 8440 patients were included. The pooled rate of 1-year biochemical control (BC) was highest for LDR (0.88, 95% CI: 0.72-0.95) and lowest for SBRT (0.68, 95% CI: 0.49-0.83). The pooled rate of 5-year BC was highest for CRYO (0.52, 95% CI: 0.33-0.69) and lowest for HDR (0.23, 95% CI: 0.08-0.51). HIFU presented the worst outcome of grade ≥3 genitourinary toxicities (GU3), with a rate of 0.22 (95% CI: 0.12-0.3). Conversely, CRYO (0.09, 95% CI: 0.04-0.14), HDR (0.05, 95% CI: 0.02-0.07), LDR (0.10, 95% CI: 0.06-0.14), and SBRT (0.06, 95% CI: 0.03-0.09) presented low rates of GU3. All subgroups induced a quite low incidence of grade ≥3 gastrointestinal toxicities (GI3). CONCLUSIONS Nonsurgical salvage therapies are promising modalities for prostate cancer in the local radiorecurrence setting. Based on the preliminary evidence from this study, CRYO and SBRT might present a relatively steady efficacy of BC with acceptable treatment-related toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Qiang Wei
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Center of Biomedical Big Data and National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, People’s Republic of China
| | - Lu Yang
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Center of Biomedical Big Data and National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Kedves A, Akay M, Akay Y, Kisiván K, Glavák C, Miovecz Á, Schiffer Á, Kisander Z, Lőrincz A, Szőke A, Sánta B, Freihat O, Sipos D, Kovács Á, Lakosi F. Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging diffusion parameters using artificial intelligence in low-and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy: A pilot study. Radiography (Lond) 2024; 30:986-994. [PMID: 38678978 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.03.015] [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: 09/12/2023] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 05/01/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION To investigate the predictive value of the pre-treatment diffusion parameters of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) using artificial intelligence (AI) for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response in patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). METHODS Retrospective evaluation was performed for 30 patients using pre-treatment multi-parametric MR image datasets between 2017 and 2021. MR-based mean- and minimum apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCmean, ADCmin) were calculated for the intraprostatic dominant lesion. Therapeutic response was assessed using PSA levels. Predictive performance was assessed by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Statistics performed with a significance level of p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS No biochemical relapse was detected after a median follow-up of twenty-three months (range: 3-50), with a median PSA of 0.01 ng/ml (range: 0.006-2.8) at the last examination. Significant differences were observed between the pre-treatment ADCmean, ADCmin parameters, and the group averages of patients with low and high 1-year-PSA measurements (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001). In prediction, the random forest (RF) model outperformed the decision tree (DT) and support vector machine (SVM) models by yielding area under the curves (AUC), with 0.722, 0.685, and 0.5, respectively. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that pre-treatment MR diffusion data may predict therapeutic response using the novel approach of machine learning in PCa patients treated with SABR. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Clinicians shall measure and implement the evaluation of the suggested parameters (ADCmin, ADCmean) to provide the most accurate therapy for the patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Kedves
- "Moritz Kaposi" Teaching Hospital, Dr. József Baka Diagnostic, Radiation Oncology, Research and Teaching Center, Kaposvár, Hungary; Institute of Information and Electrical Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary; Doctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - M Akay
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Y Akay
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
| | - K Kisiván
- "Moritz Kaposi" Teaching Hospital, Dr. József Baka Diagnostic, Radiation Oncology, Research and Teaching Center, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - C Glavák
- "Moritz Kaposi" Teaching Hospital, Dr. József Baka Diagnostic, Radiation Oncology, Research and Teaching Center, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Á Miovecz
- "Moritz Kaposi" Teaching Hospital, Dr. József Baka Diagnostic, Radiation Oncology, Research and Teaching Center, Kaposvár, Hungary; Doctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - Á Schiffer
- Institute of Information and Electrical Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - Z Kisander
- Department of Electrical Networks, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - A Lőrincz
- Institute of Information and Electrical Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary; Institute for Translational Medicine, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - A Szőke
- 3D Printing and Visualization Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - B Sánta
- Röntgenpraxis Dr. Thomas Trieb, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - O Freihat
- College of Health Sciences, Abu Dhabi University, Abu Dhabi, UAE
| | - D Sipos
- "Moritz Kaposi" Teaching Hospital, Dr. József Baka Diagnostic, Radiation Oncology, Research and Teaching Center, Kaposvár, Hungary; Institute of Diagnostics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
| | - Á Kovács
- Doctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary; Institute of Diagnostics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary; Department of Oncoradiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
| | - F Lakosi
- "Moritz Kaposi" Teaching Hospital, Dr. József Baka Diagnostic, Radiation Oncology, Research and Teaching Center, Kaposvár, Hungary; Doctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary; Institute of Diagnostics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Mohamad O, Nicosia L, Mathier E, Riggenbach E, Zamboglou C, Aebersold DM, Alongi F, Shelan M. Focal brachytherapy as definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Brachytherapy 2024; 23:309-320. [PMID: 38431441 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2024.01.011] [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: 05/19/2023] [Revised: 12/06/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we describe the oncologic and toxicity outcomes of definitive focal brachytherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS A PROSPERO registered study (CRD42023410170) was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies between 2000 and 2022. Two authors independently performed the initial search. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) was defined as the primary endpoint for the meta-analysis. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were conducted to calculate effect size and quantify heterogeneity. We also describe the side effects and local recurrence patterns of focal brachytherapy. RESULTS Ten studies were identified and included 315 patients treated using focal brachytherapy as a definitive treatment. Mean (SD) age was 67.65 (7.9) years and mean (SD) PSA was 7.15 (2.7) ng/mL. Most patients (n = 236, 75%) underwent LDR Brachytherapy and 25% received HDR brachytherapy. Among the participants, 147 (46.5%) had a Gleason score ≤6, and 169 (53.5%) had a Gleason score ≥7. Only 11 (3.5%) patients received ADT. Overall, bRFS rate at median follow-up 4 years (Range: 1-6.42 years) was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82-95%). Acute Grade ≤ 2 GU and GI toxicities were reported in 22 (7%) and 11 (3.5%) patients, respectively. Late Grade ≤ 2 GU and GI toxicity were reported in 6 (2%) and 14 (4.4%) patients, respectively. One case of prostate hemorrhage due to improper foley removal was noted but otherwise no acute or late Grade 3 or higher GI or GU toxicity related to radiotherapy was reported. CONCLUSION Overall, definitive focal brachytherapy has a favorable toxicity profile. Oncologic outcomes are yet to mature. The evidence is limited by the small number of studies with low patients' number, across study heterogeneity, and possibility of publication bias.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Luca Nicosia
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Italy
| | - Etienne Mathier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Elena Riggenbach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany; German Oncology Center, University Hospital of the European University, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Fillipo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Cancer Care Center, Italy
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Gonsalves D, Ocanto A, Meilan E, Gomez A, Dominguez J, Torres L, Pascual CF, Teja M, Linde MM, Guijarro M, Rivas D, Begara J, González JA, Andreescu J, Holgado E, Alcaraz D, López E, Dzhugashvli M, Lopez-Campos F, Alongi F, Couñago F. Feasibility and Acute Toxicity of Hypo-Fractionated Radiotherapy on 0.35T MR-LINAC: The First Prospective Study in Spain. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1685. [PMID: 38730637 PMCID: PMC11083553 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16091685] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2024] [Revised: 04/10/2024] [Accepted: 04/24/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024] Open
Abstract
This observational, descriptive, longitudinal, and prospective basket-type study (Registry #5289) prospectively evaluated the feasibility and acute toxicity of hypo-fractionated radiotherapy on the first 0.35T MR-LINAC in Spain. A total of 37 patients were included between August and December 2023, primarily with prostate tumors (59.46%), followed by pancreatic tumors (32.44%). Treatment regimens typically involved extreme hypo-fractionated radiotherapy, with precise dose delivery verified through quality assurance measures. Acute toxicity assessment at treatment completion revealed manageable cystitis, with one case persisting at the three-month follow-up. Gastrointestinal toxicity was minimal. For pancreatic tumors, daily adaptation of organ-at-risk (OAR) and gross tumor volume (GTV) was practiced, with median doses to OAR within acceptable limits. Three patients experienced gastrointestinal toxicity, mainly nausea. Overall, the study demonstrates the feasibility and safety of extreme hypo-fractionated radiotherapy on a 0.35T MR-LINAC, especially for challenging anatomical sites like prostate and pancreatic tumors. These findings support the feasibility of MR-LINAC-based radiotherapy in delivering precise treatments with minimal toxicity, highlighting its potential for optimizing cancer treatment strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Gonsalves
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
- Facultad de Medicina Salud y Deporte, Universidad Europea de Madrid, 28670 Madrid, Spain
| | - Abrahams Ocanto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Eduardo Meilan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Alberto Gomez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Jesus Dominguez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Lisselott Torres
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Castalia Fernández Pascual
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Macarena Teja
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Miguel Montijano Linde
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Marcos Guijarro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Daniel Rivas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Málaga, 29018 Madrid, Spain; (D.R.); (J.B.); (E.L.)
| | - Jose Begara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Málaga, 29018 Madrid, Spain; (D.R.); (J.B.); (E.L.)
| | | | - Jon Andreescu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Cordoba, 14012 Madrid, Spain;
| | - Esther Holgado
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (E.H.); (D.A.)
| | - Diego Alcaraz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (E.H.); (D.A.)
| | - Escarlata López
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Málaga, 29018 Madrid, Spain; (D.R.); (J.B.); (E.L.)
| | - Maia Dzhugashvli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Fernando Lopez-Campos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Care Center, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, 37024 Verona, Italy;
- Radiation Oncology School, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy
| | - Felipe Couñago
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Francisco de Asís, GenesisCare, 28002 Madrid, Spain; (A.O.); (L.T.); (C.F.P.); (M.T.); (M.M.L.); (M.G.); (F.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vithas La Milagrosa, GenesisCare, 28010 Madrid, Spain; (E.M.); (A.G.); (M.D.); (F.L.-C.)
- Facultad de Medicina Salud y Deporte, Universidad Europea de Madrid, 28670 Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Fang B, McGeachy P, Husain S, Meyer T, Thind K, Martell K. Acute toxicity outcomes from salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after prior radiotherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2024; 16:111-120. [PMID: 38808210 PMCID: PMC11129646 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2024.139278] [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: 11/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/30/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose Isolated intra-prostatic recurrence of prostate adenocarcinoma after definitive radiotherapy presents a challenging clinical scenario. Salvage options require specialized expertise and pose risks of harm. This study aimed to present the acute toxicity results from using salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy (sHDR-BT) as treatment in locally recurrent prostate cancer cases. Material and methods Seventeen consecutive patients treated with sHDR-BT between 2019 and 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Eligible patients had to have received curative intent prostate radiotherapy previously, and showed evidence of new biochemical failure. Evaluation with American Urological Association (AUA) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) symptom assessments were performed for each case. Results The median (inter-quartile range) age prior to salvage treatment was 68 (66-74) years. The median post-sHDR-BT follow-up time was 20 (13-24) months. At baseline prior to sHDR-BT, 8 (47%) patients had significant lower urinary tract symptoms. The median AUA score prior to sHDR-BT was 7 (3-18). Three (18%) patients reported irregular bowel function and 2 (12%) reported hematochezia prior to sHDR-BT. One-month post-treatment, the median AUA score was 13 (8-21, p = 0.21). Using CTCAE scoring, there were no cases of grade 2+ bowel or rectal toxicity, and no cases of grade 3+ urinary toxicity. Reported grade 2 urinary toxicities included 10 (59%) cases of bladder spasms, 2 (12%) cases of incontinence, 1 (6%) urinary obstruction, and 4 (24%) reports of urinary urgency. All these adverse events were temporary. Conclusions This study adds to the existing literature by demonstrating that the acute toxicity profile of sHDR-BT is acceptable even without intra-operative magnetic resonance (MR) guidance or image registration. Further study is ongoing to determine long-term efficacy and toxicity of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Breanna Fang
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Philip McGeachy
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Siraj Husain
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Tyler Meyer
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Kundan Thind
- Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, United States
| | - Kevin Martell
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Muñoz Muñoz Ó, Gomis Sellés E, Delgado León BD, Mateos Perez JC, Baeza Trujillo M, Perucha Ortega M, López Guerra JL, Cabrera Roldán P. Reirradiation salvage radiotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer after primary low-dose brachytherapy. Clin Transl Oncol 2024; 26:872-879. [PMID: 37672205 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-023-03315-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 09/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Local recurrence of prostate cancer after low-dose rate brachytherapy is a clinical problem with limited salvage treatment options. This prospective study evaluated the tolerability and outcome of salvage external beam radiation therapy (S-EBRT) for locally recurrent prostate cancer after primary low-dose rate prostate brachytherapy (LDR-BT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Between October 2012 and 2022, 18 patients with biopsy-proven locally recurrent prostate cancer after primary LDR-BT and received S-EBRT. We evaluated biochemical failure (BF), overall survival (OS) and acute/late gastrointestinal and urinary toxicities (CTCAE v5.0 or CTCAE v4, only before 2017). RESULTS Median follow-up was 32 months (range, 5-124). The median age was at S-EBRT 68 years (range 59-79). 34% (6/18) were low risk, 44% (8/18) intermediate risk, 5% (1/18) high risk, and 17% (3/18) not specified. All patients were treated with IMRT/VMAT and received 60 Gy (2.5 Gy/fraction) to the prostate and 40% (7/18) 55.2 Gy (2,3 Gy/fx) to the seminal vesicles. 56% received ADT The 3-year OS and biochemical relapse-free survival after S-EBRT were 100% and 89%, respectively, with a median PSA nadir 0,035 ng/mL (0,01-0,34). Acute cystitis was present in 72% (13/18) of patients (27% of Grade > 2). Urethritis was present in 78% (14/18) patients (16% of cases Grade > 3), and acute rectitis occurred in 22% (4/18) of patients (no cases Grade > 3). CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest that the treatment of locally recurrent prostate cancer with S-EBRT could provide adequate disease control safely and be used as an additional treatment in the natural history of prostate cancer patients. However, the results are still early and the sample is small; larger studies with longer follow-up would be mandatory.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Óscar Muñoz Muñoz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Manuel Siurot Avenue, S/N., 41013, Seville, Spain
| | - Elías Gomis Sellés
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Manuel Siurot Avenue, S/N., 41013, Seville, Spain
| | - Blas David Delgado León
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Manuel Siurot Avenue, S/N., 41013, Seville, Spain
| | - Juan Carlos Mateos Perez
- Department of Medical Physiology and Biophysics, Medical Radiation Physics, University of Seville, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain
| | | | - Maria Perucha Ortega
- Department of Medical Radiation Physics, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain
| | - José Luis López Guerra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Manuel Siurot Avenue, S/N., 41013, Seville, Spain.
| | - Patricia Cabrera Roldán
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Manuel Siurot Avenue, S/N., 41013, Seville, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Ishikawa Y, Suzuki M, Seto I, Takagawa Y, Murakami M. Long-Term Control With Proton Beam Therapy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer in the Right Perineum Following Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy: A Case Report. Cureus 2024; 16:e58386. [PMID: 38633140 PMCID: PMC11022003 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.58386] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/16/2024] [Indexed: 04/19/2024] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) is commonly used for the treatment of prostate cancer, with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) being the utilized modalities. This case report outlines the treatment course of a recurrent prostate cancer lesion in the right perineal musculature managed with proton therapy following IMRT. A 64-year-old Japanese man, diagnosed with prostate cancer and categorized as high risk according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, underwent six months of androgen deprivation therapy, which included bicalutamide and degarelix acetate. Six months after completing 78 Gy in 39 fractions of IMRT, the patient reported perineal to anal pain. Laboratory tests showed an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and pelvic MRI showed a mass lesion in the right perineal musculature. Consequently, the patient was diagnosed with recurrent prostate cancer. Thereafter, the patient underwent eight cycles of systemic chemotherapy with docetaxel; however, his pain progressively worsened. Subsequently, the treatment was switched to 12 cycles of cabazitaxel, which led to gradual pain relief. The patient received PBT at 60 Gy relative biological effectiveness in 30 fractions for the recurrent lesion. Five years after PBT, pelvic MRI showed no mass lesions in the prostate or surrounding tissues. The PSA levels remained low, less than 0.008 ng/ml, and there were no apparent late complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yojiro Ishikawa
- Department of Radiology, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, JPN
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, JPN
| | - Motohisa Suzuki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, JPN
| | - Ichiro Seto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, JPN
| | - Yoshiaki Takagawa
- Department of Minimally Invasive Surgical and Medical Oncology, Fukushima Medical University, Koriyama, JPN
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, JPN
| | - Masao Murakami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, JPN
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Carbonell E, Mercader C, Sureda J, Gutiérrez A, Muñoz J, Gallardo E, Feltes N, Mases J, Valduvieco I, Vilaseca A, Franco A, Alcaraz A, Musquera M, Ribal MJ. Nadir prostate-specific antigen after salvage cryotherapy as a potential prognostic factor for oncologic outcomes. World J Urol 2024; 42:133. [PMID: 38478102 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04806-8] [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: 05/04/2023] [Accepted: 01/19/2024] [Indexed: 01/04/2025] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To report oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing salvage cryotherapy (SCT) for local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) and to establish a nadir PSA (nPSA) value that best defines long-term oncologic success. METHODS Retrospective study of men who underwent SCT for local recurrence of PCa between 2008 and 2020. SCT was performed in men with biochemical recurrence (BCR), after primary treatment and with biopsy-proven PCa local recurrence. Survival analysis with Kaplan-Meier and Cox models was performed. We determined the optimal cutoff nPSA value after SCT that best classifies patients depending on prognosis. RESULTS Seventy-seven men who underwent SCT were included. Survival analysis showed a 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), androgen deprivation therapy-free survival (AFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS) after SCT of 48.4%, 62% and 81.3% respectively. On multivariable analysis for perioperative variables associated with BCR, initial ISUP, pre-SCT PSA, pre-SCT prostate volume and post-SCT nPSA emerged as variables associated with BCR. The cutoff analysis revealed an nPSA < 0.5 ng/ml to be the optimal threshold that best defines success after SCT. 5-year BRFS for patients achieving an nPSA < 0.5 vs nPSA ≥ 0.5 was 64% and 9.5% respectively (p < 0.001). 5-year AFS for men with nPSA < 0.5 vs ≥ 0.5 was 81.2% and 12.2% (p < 0.001). Improved 5-year MFS for patients who achieved nPSA < 0.5 was also obtained (89.6% vs 60%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION SCT is a feasible rescue alternative for the local recurrence of PCa. Achieving an nPSA < 0.5 ng/ml after SCT is associated with higher long-term BRFS, AFS and MFS rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Carbonell
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - C Mercader
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - J Sureda
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Gutiérrez
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - J Muñoz
- Department of Urology, Parc Taulí Hospital Universitari, Sabadell, Spain
| | - E Gallardo
- Department of Medical Oncology, Parc Taulí Hospital Universitari, Sabadell, Spain
| | - N Feltes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Hospital de Terrassa, Terrassa, Spain
| | - J Mases
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - I Valduvieco
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Vilaseca
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Franco
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Alcaraz
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - M Musquera
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - M J Ribal
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Majewski W, Miszczyk M, Graupner D, Goc B, Goldner G, Napieralska A. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) re-irradiation for local failures following radical prostatectomy and post-operative radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:230-238. [PMID: 38157016 PMCID: PMC10876733 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02187-2] [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: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 11/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Local recurrences after radical prostatectomy (RP) and postoperative radiotherapy (RT) are challenging for salvage treatment. Retrospective analysis of own experiences with salvage re-irradiation was performed. METHODS The study included all consecutive patients treated with salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (sSBRT) for prostate bed recurrence following RP and postoperative RT at a single tertiary center between 2014 and 2021. Treatment toxicity defined as the occurrence of CTCAE grade ≥ 2 genito-urinary (GU) or gastro-intestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) was assessed. A PSA response, biochemical control (BC) and overall survival (OS) were also evaluated. RESULTS The study group included 32 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median follow-up of 41 months, treated with CyberKnife (53%) or Linac (47%) sSBRT. Total dose of 33.75-36.25 Gy in five fractions (72%) was applied in the majority of them. Approximately 19% patients reported grade ≥ 2 GU AEs both at baseline and at three months, and grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity increased from 0% at baseline to 6% at three months after sSBRT. There was some clinically relevant increase in late toxicity with 31% patients reporting late ≥ 2 GU, and 12.5% late ≥ 2 GI AEs. Two grade 3 AEs were recorded: recto-urinary fistulas. The majority of patients showed a PSA response (91% at one year post-sSBRT). The 3‑year BC was 40% and 3‑year OS was 87%. CONCLUSIONS Manageable toxicity profile and satisfactory biochemical response suggest that SBRT in patients with local recurrence following RP and postoperative RT might be a salvage option for selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wojciech Majewski
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland.
| | - Marcin Miszczyk
- III Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Donata Graupner
- III Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Bartłomiej Goc
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Gregor Goldner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Aleksandra Napieralska
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Light A, Lazic S, Houghton K, Bayne M, Connor MJ, Tam H, Ahmed HU, Shah TT, Barwick TD. Diagnostic Performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT Versus Multiparametric MRI for Detection of Intraprostatic Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med 2024; 65:379-385. [PMID: 38212074 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.266527] [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: 08/10/2023] [Revised: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 10/04/2023] [Indexed: 01/13/2024] Open
Abstract
For men with prostate cancer who develop biochemical failure after radiotherapy, European guidelines recommend reimaging with 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). However, the accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for detecting intraprostatic recurrences is unclear, both with and without mpMRI. Methods: A single-center retrospective study of a series of patients investigated for radiorecurrence between 2016 and 2022 is described. All patients underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT, mpMRI, and prostate biopsy. PET/CT images were interpreted independently by 2 expert readers masked to other imaging and clinical data. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of PET/CT versus mpMRI and of PET/CT with mpMRI together versus mpMRI alone. The secondary outcome was the proportion of cancers missed by mpMRI but detected by PET/CT. Diagnostic accuracy analysis was performed at the prostate hemigland level using cluster bootstrapping. Results: Thirty-five men (70 hemiglands) were included. Cancer was confirmed by biopsy in 43 of 70 hemiglands (61%). PET/CT sensitivity and negative predictive values (NPVs) were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-0.98) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.62-0.95), respectively, which were not significantly different from results by MRI (sensitivity of 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83; P = 0.1) (NPV of 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.75; P = 0.07). Specificity and positive predictive values were not significantly different. When PET/CT and MRI were used together, the sensitivity was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.92-1.00) and NPV was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.75-1.00), both significantly higher than MRI alone (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). Specificity and positive predictive values remained not significantly different. MRI missed 12 of 43 cancers (28%; 95% CI, 17%-43%), of which 11 of 12 (92%; 95% CI, 62%-100%) were detected by PET/CT. Conclusion: For detecting intraprostatic radiorecurrence, 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT has high sensitivity that is not significantly different from mpMRI. When 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and mpMRI were used together, the results conferred a significantly greater sensitivity and NPV than with mpMRI alone. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT may therefore be a useful tool in the diagnosis of localized radiorecurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Light
- Imperial Prostate, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Stefan Lazic
- Department of Imaging, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
| | - Kate Houghton
- Department of Imaging, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
| | - Max Bayne
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Martin J Connor
- Imperial Prostate, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Henry Tam
- Department of Imaging, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
| | - Hashim U Ahmed
- Imperial Prostate, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Taimur T Shah
- Imperial Prostate, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Tara D Barwick
- Department of Imaging, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Giesen A, Van den Broeck T, Develtere D, Raskin Y, Wymer K, Eden C, Claessens M, Hente R, Rans K, Berghen C, De Meerleer G, Langley S, Karnes RJ, Heidenreich A, Pfister D, Joniau S. Salvage vesiculectomy for local prostate cancer recurrence: surgical technique and early post-operative outcomes. World J Urol 2024; 42:81. [PMID: 38358521 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04771-2] [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: 08/11/2023] [Accepted: 10/17/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Isolated recurrence in remnants of the seminal vesicles (SV) after treatment of primary prostate cancer (PCa) has become a more frequent entity with the widespread use of more sensitive next-generation imaging modalities. Salvage vesiculectomy is hypothesized to be a worthwhile management option in these patients. The primary goal of this study is to describe the surgical technique of this new treatment option. Secondary outcomes are peri- and post-operative complications and early oncological outcomes. METHODS Retrospective multicenter study, including 108 patients with solitary recurrence in the SV treated between January 2009 and June 2022, was performed. Patients with local recurrences outside the SVs or with metastatic disease were excluded. Both SVs were resected using a robot-assisted or an open approach. In selected cases, a concomitant lymphadenectomy was performed. RESULTS Overall, 31 patients (29%) reported complications, all but one grade 1 to 3 on the Clavien-Dindo Scale. A median PSA decrease of 2.07 ng/ml (IQR: 0.80-4.33, p < 0.001), translating into a median PSA reduction of 92% (IQR: 59-98%) was observed. At a median follow-up of 14 months, freedom from secondary treatment was 54%. Lymphadenectomy had a significant influence on PSA reduction (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION Salvage vesiculectomy for PCa recurrence limited to the SV is a safe procedure with excellent PSA response and is a potential curative treatment in a subset of patients. A concomitant lymphadenectomy can best be performed in all patients that did not underwent one at primary treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Giesen
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Thomas Van den Broeck
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Dries Develtere
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Yannic Raskin
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Urology, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
| | - Kevin Wymer
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Christopher Eden
- Department of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | | | - Robert Hente
- Department of Urology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat, Belgium
| | - Kato Rans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Charlien Berghen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Gert De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Stephen Langley
- Department of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | | | - Axel Heidenreich
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - David Pfister
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
- Department of Urology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Sciarra A, Santarelli V, Salciccia S, Moriconi M, Basile G, Santodirocco L, Carino D, Frisenda M, Di Pierro G, Del Giudice F, Gentilucci A, Bevilacqua G. How the Management of Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Will Be Modified by the Concept of Anticipation and Incrementation of Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:764. [PMID: 38398155 PMCID: PMC10886975 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16040764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2024] [Revised: 02/06/2024] [Accepted: 02/10/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary treatments for prostate cancer (PC) is an extremely heterogeneous phase and at least a stratification into low- and high-risk cases for early progression in metastatic disease is necessary. At present, PSA-DT represents the best parameter to define low- and high-risk BCR PC, but real precision medicine is strongly suggested to define tailored management for patients with BCR. Before defining management, it is necessary to exclude the presence of low-volume metastasis associated with PSA progression using new-generation imaging, preferably with PSMA PET/CT. Low-risk BCR cases should be actively observed without early systemic therapies. Early treatment of low-risk BCR with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can produce disadvantages such as the development of castration resistance before the appearance of metastases (non-metastatic castration-resistant PC). Patients with high-risk BCR benefit from early systemic therapy. Even with overall survival (OS) as the primary treatment endpoint, metastasis-free survival (MFS) should be used as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials, especially in long survival stages of the disease. The EMBARK study has greatly influenced the management of high-risk BCR, by introducing the concept of anticipation and intensification through the use of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) and ADT combination therapy. In high-risk (PSA-DT ≤ 9 months) BCR cases, the combination of enzalutamide with leuprolide significantly improves MFS when compared to leuprolide alone, maintaining an unchanged quality of life in the asymptomatic phase of the disease. The possibility of using ARSIs alone in this early disease setting is suggested by the EMBARK study (arm with enzalutamide alone) with less evidence than with the intensification of the combination therapy. Continued use versus discontinuation of enzalutamide plus leuprolide intensified therapy upon reaching undetectable PSA levels needs to be better defined with further analysis. Real-world analysis must verify the significant results obtained in the context of a phase 3 study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Sciarra
- Department Materno Infantile e Scienze Urologiche, Sapienza University, Viale Policlinico 155, 00161 Rome, Italy; (V.S.); (S.S.); (M.M.); (G.B.); (L.S.); (D.C.); (M.F.); (G.D.P.); (F.D.G.); (A.G.); (G.B.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Albers P, Kinnaird A. Can salvage radical prostatectomy and salvage ablation achieve similar outcomes in radio-recurrent localized prostate cancer? Can Urol Assoc J 2024; 18:47. [PMID: 38315549 PMCID: PMC10841559 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.8700] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick Albers
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Adam Kinnaird
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Solanki AA, Yoo RK, Adams W, Davicioni E, Mysz ML, Shea S, Gupta GN, Showalter T, Garant A, Hentz C, Farooq A, Baldea K, Small W, Harkenrider MM. F-SHARP: a Phase I/II trial of focal salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy for Radiorecurrent prostate cancer. BJU Int 2024; 133:188-196. [PMID: 37562825 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intraprostatic local radiorecurrence (LRR) after definitive radiation is being increasingly identified due to the implementation of molecular positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) imaging for the evaluation of biochemical recurrence. Salvage high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy offers a promising local therapy option, with encouraging toxicity and efficacy based on early series. Furthermore, the incorporation of advanced imaging allows for focal HDR to further reduce toxicity to maximise the therapeutic ratio. The objectives of the 'focal salvage HDR brachytherapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer in patients treated with prior radiotherapy' (F-SHARP) trial are to determine the acute and late toxicity and efficacy outcomes of focal salvage HDR brachytherapy for LRR prostate cancer. STUDY DESIGN The F-SHARP is a multi-institutional two-stage Phase I/II clinical trial of salvage focal HDR brachytherapy for LRR prostate cancer enrolling patients at three centres. ENDPOINTS The primary endpoint is the acute radiation-related Grade ≥3 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, version 4.03) genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity rate, defined as within 3 months of brachytherapy. Secondary endpoints include acute and late CTCAE toxicity, biochemical failure, patterns of clinical progression, disease-specific and overall survival, and health-related quality of life, as measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score and 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite instruments. PATIENTS AND METHODS Key eligibility criteria include: biopsy confirmed LRR prostate adenocarcinoma after prior definitive radiation therapy using any radiotherapeutic modality, no evidence of regional or distant metastasis, and cT1-3a Nx or N0 prostate cancer at initial treatment. All patients will have multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and molecular PET/CT imaging if possible. In Stage 1, seven patients will be accrued. If there are two or more GI or GU Grade ≥3 toxicities, the study will be stopped. Otherwise, 17 additional patients will be accrued (total of 24 patients). For Stage 2, the cohort will expand to 62 subjects to study the efficacy outcomes, long-term toxicity profile, quality of life, and compare single- vs multi-fraction HDR. Transcriptomic analysis of recurrence biopsies will be performed to identify potential prognostic and predictive biomarkers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhishek A Solanki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Ryan K Yoo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - William Adams
- Department of Medicine, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | | | - Michael L Mysz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Steven Shea
- Department of Radiology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Gopal N Gupta
- Department of Urology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Timothy Showalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Aurelie Garant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
| | | | - Ahmer Farooq
- Department of Urology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Kristin Baldea
- Department of Urology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - William Small
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| | - Matthew M Harkenrider
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Lama DJ, Thomas K, Ferenczi B, Okunowo O, Lau CS, Yuh BE. Long-term Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Salvage Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Modern Perspective. EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 60:1-7. [PMID: 38375345 PMCID: PMC10874866 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.11.011] [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] [Accepted: 11/29/2023] [Indexed: 02/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and objective Approximately two-thirds of men who undergo primary treatment for prostate cancer (PC) will experience biochemical recurrence (BCR). Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP) offers curative treatment in this disease setting and men who choose this option may avoid palliative androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The purpose of this study was to describe long-term outcomes and patient feedback following sRARP. Methods We reviewed data for consecutive men with biopsy-proven localized BCR who underwent sRARP and pelvic lymph node dissection at a single tertiary referral center between 2004 and 2021. Perioperative data, Clavien-Dindo complications, and functional outcomes were recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate prostate-specific antigen-free (≥0.2 ng/ml) survival (PSAFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS). Three Likert-type items (score 1-5) from the validated Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 were distributed to patients postoperatively. Key findings and limitations We included 78 men, of whom 72 (92%) had undergone primary radiotherapy and six (8%) had received primary prostate ablation. Median follow-up was 10.1 yr (interquartile range 5.8-12.4). Final pathology identified ≥pT3N0M0 in 35 patients (45%) and positive margins in 23 (29%). The overall complication rate was 50%. Of the 26 (33%) major (grade ≥III) complications, anastomotic stricture (32%) was most common. The estimated 3-, 5-, and 10-yr survival rates were 85.6% and 80.2%, 83.5% for PSAFS (n = 11), and 74.1%, 83.5%, and 70.5% for MFS (n = 23), respectively. At last follow-up, postoperative ADT had been administered to 17 patients (22%), and 39 men (50%) remained alive a decade after sRARP. Continence and potency were maintained in 33/62 (53%) and 1/16 (6%) patients, respectively. Thirty-five respondents (45%) reported median questionnaire scores (≥4) in favor of sRARP. Limitations include the small single-center series and a single query point for patient feedback. Conclusions and clinical implications Long-term outcomes of sRARP suggest that the technical challenges and morbidity of the procedure are qualified by patient feedback and the opportunity to evade the morbidity and mortality of biochemically recurrent PC. Patient summary We reviewed the cancer outcomes and side effects of robot-assisted surgical removal of the prostate after treatment failure with radiation or ablation for prostate cancer. We found that this type of treatment has substantial risks and long-term side effects, but the surgery provides an opportunity to cure prostate cancer and/or avoid the consequences of indefinite hormonal treatment. Overall, most men who underwent this surgery were not disappointed with their decision despite the higher risks and consequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel J. Lama
- Division of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Kyle Thomas
- Division of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Basil Ferenczi
- Division of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Oluwatimilehin Okunowo
- Department of Computational and Quantitative Medicine, Division of Biostatistics, Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Clayton S. Lau
- Division of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Bertram E. Yuh
- Division of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|