Hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (70 gy at 2.5 Gy per fraction) for localized prostate cancer: long-term outcomes

The 'stealth-bomber' paradigm for deciphering the tumour response to carbon-ion irradiation

Numerous studies have demonstrated the higher biological efficacy of carbon-ion irradiation (C-ions) and their ballistic precision compared with photons. At the nanometre scale, the reactive oxygen species (ROS) produced by radiation and responsible for the indirect effects are differentially distributed according to the type of radiation. Photon irradiation induces a homogeneous ROS distribution, whereas ROS remain condensed in clusters in the C-ions tracks. Based on this linear energy transfer-dependent differential nanometric ROS distribution, we propose that the higher biological efficacy and specificities of the molecular response to C-ions rely on a 'stealth-bomber' effect. When biological targets are on the trajectories of the particles, the clustered radicals in the tracks are responsible for a 'bomber' effect. Furthermore, the low proportion of ROS outside the tracks is not able to trigger the cellular mechanisms of defence and proliferation. The ability of C-ions to deceive the cellular defence of the cancer cells is then categorised as a 'stealth' effect. This review aims to classify the biological arguments supporting the paradigm of the 'stealth-bomber' as responsible for the biological superiority of C-ions compared with photons. It also explains how and why C-ions will always be more efficient for treating patients with radioresistant cancers than conventional radiotherapy.

Comparative evaluation of hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer

Background

The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate an efficacy and toxicity profile of hypofractionated radiotherapy (67.5 Gy in 25 fractions) to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (78 Gy in 39 fractions) in prostate cancer patients with intermediate and high-risk disease.

Materials and methods

From January 2015 to December 2018, 168 patients were randomized to hypofractionated radiation treatment and conventional fractionated radiation treatment schedules of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the prostate and seminal vesicles. All the patients also received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiation therapy started after ADT.

Results

The median (range) follow-up was 51 (31-63) and 53 (33-64) months in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated regimes, respectively. The 3-year biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED) rates were 86.9% and 73.8% in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated groups, respectively (p = 0.032, significant). The 3-year bNED rates in patients at a high risk [i.e., pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 20 ng/mL, Gleason score ≥ 8, or T ≥ 2 c], were 87.9% and 73.5% (p = 0.007, significant) in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy groups, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found for late toxicity between the two groups, with 3-year grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity rates of 19% and 16.7% and 3-year grade 2 genitourinary toxicity rates of 15.5% and 11.9% in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Hypofractionated schedule is superior to the conventional fractionation schedule of radiation treatment in terms of bNED in intermediate and high grade prostate cancer patients. Also, the late toxicity is found to be equivalent between the two treatment groups.

Evaluation of the dosimetric influence of interfractional 6D setup error in hypofractionated prostate cancer treated with IMRT and VMAT using daily kV-CBCT

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in men and is usually treated with advanced intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Significant uncorrected interfractional 6-Dimensional setup errors could impact the delivered dose. The aim of this study was to assess the dosimetric impact of 6D interfractional setup errors in hypofractionated prostate cancer using daily kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT).

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised twenty prostate cancer patients treated with hypofractionated IMRT (8) and VMAT (12) with daily kV-CBCT image guidance. Interfraction 6D setup errors along lateral, longitudinal, vertical, pitch, roll, and yaw axes were evaluated for 400 CBCTs. For targets and organs at risk (OARs), the dosimetric impact of rotational error (R_Error), translational error (T_Error), and translational plus rotational error (T+R_Error) were evaluated on kV-CBCT images.

RESULTS

The single fraction maximum T_Error ranged from 12-20 mm, and the R_Error ranged from 2.8⁰-3.0⁰. The maximum mean absolute dose variation ΔD in D_98% (dose to 98% volume) of CTV-55 and PTV-55 was -0.66±0.82 and -5.94±3.8 Gy, respectively, in the T+R_Error. The maximum ΔD (%) for D_98% and D_0.035cc in CTV-55 was -4.29% and 2.49%, respectively, while in PTV-55 it was -24.9% and 2.36%. The mean dose reduction for D_98% in CTV-55 and D_98% and D_95% in PTV-55 was statistically significant (p<0.05) for T_Error and T+R_Error. The mean dose variation for D_mean and D_50% in the rectum was statistically significant (p<0.05) for T_Error and T+R_Error.

CONCLUSION

The uncorrected interfractional 6D setup error results in significant target underdosing and OAR overdosing in prostate cancer. This emphasizes the need to correct interfractional 6D setup errors daily in IMRT and VMAT.

QUANTIFICATION OF 6D INTER-FRACTION TUMOUR LOCALISATION ERRORS IN TONGUE AND PROSTATE CANCER USING DAILY KV-CBCT FOR 1000 IMRT AND VMAT TREATMENT FRACTIONS

This study aimed to evaluate the 6D inter-fraction tumour localisation errors in 20 tongue and 20 prostate cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy. The patient tumour localisation errors in lateral, longitudinal and vertical translation axes and pitch, roll and yaw rotational axes were analysed by automatic image registration of daily pretreatment kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT) with planning CT in 1000 fractions. The overall mean error (M), systematic error (Σ), random error (σ) and planning target volume (PTV) margins were evaluated. The frequency distributions of setup errors were normally distributed about the mean except for pitch in the tongue and prostate. The overall 3D vector length ≥ 5 mm was 14.2 and 49.8% in the ca-tongue and ca-prostate, respectively. The frequency of rotational errors ≥1 degree was a maximum of 37 and 59.5%, respectively, in ca-tongue and ca-prostate. The M, Σ and σ for all translational and rotational axes decreased with increasing frequency of verification correction in ca-tongue and ca-prostate patients. Similarly, the PTV margin was reduced with no correction to alternate day correction from a maximum of 4.7 to 2.5 mm in ca-tongue and from a maximum of 8.6 to 4.7 mm in ca-prostate. The results emphasised the vital role of the higher frequency of kV-CBCT based setup correction in reducing M, Σ, σ and PTV margins in ca-tongue and ca-prostate patients.

Moderate hypofractionated helical tomotherapy for older patients with localized prostate cancer: long-term outcomes of a phase I-II trial

BACKGROUND

Our previous study showed that two different regimens of moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) delivered with helical tomotherapy (HT) are well tolerated in older prostate cancer patients. We provide a longterm efficacy and toxicity after > 7 years of follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study recruited 33 patients from February 2009 to July 2011 (76 Gy/34F; Group-1); and 34 from July 2011 to February 2014 (71.6 Gy/28F; 50.4 Gy/25F for the risk of pelvic lymph nodes involvement (LNI) >15%; Group-2). The primary outcomes were biochemical failure (BF), biochemical failure and clinical disease failure (BCDF), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity.

RESULTS

The average ages of two groups were 80 and 77 years and the proportions of patients with LNI > 15% were 69.7% and 73.5%, respectively. At the final follow-up in February 2020, 27.3% and 20.6% cases experienced BF, with a median time until BF of 3.3 years. A total of 38.8% patients reached primary endpoints, in which 18 deaths were reported BCDF events (45.5% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.271). There was no significant difference in 7-year PFS (68.6% vs. 74.8%, p = 0.591), BCDF (45.5% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.271) and OS (71.9% vs. 87.5%, p = 0.376) for full set analysis and for subgroup analysis (all p > 0.05). The incidence of grade ≥ 2 late GU (6.2% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.127) and GI toxicities (9.4% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.554) was comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In older patients with localized prostate cancer, two moderate hypofractionated regimens were all well tolerated with similar, mild late toxicities and satisfactory survival, without necessity of prophylactic pelvic node irradiation.

Comparison of Moderate Hypofractionated Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy Plans With and Without Flattening Filter for Localized Prostate Cancer

Background/Aim The aim of this study was to compare volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) radiation plans between conventional VMAT with flattening filter (cFF-VMAT) and flattening filter-free VMAT (FFF-VMAT) for localized prostate cancer. Materials and methods Ten patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent cFF-VMAT at Yokosuka General Hospital Uwamachi, Yokosuka, Japan, from July 2020 to October 2020 were enrolled. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the target volume, normal organs, monitor units (MU), and beam-on time (BOT) were compared between cFF-VMAT and FFF-VMAT plans. Results No significant difference was observed for DVH parameters for the target volume. No significant difference was observed in all parameters for the bladder and rectum between the cFF-VMAT and FFF-VMAT groups. The mean values of MU were 686 ± 52 and 784 ± 80 in cFF-VMAT and FFF-VMAT, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean BOT was 97.0 ± 6.6 s and 72.9 ± 1.4 s for cFF-VMAT and FFF-VMAT, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion DVH parameters of the target volume and normal organs were not significantly different between the cFF-VMAT and FFF-VMAT plans. In FFF-VMAT, MU was significantly higher, and the BOT was significantly shorter than those in cFF-VMAT.

Hybrid Tomo-Helical and Tomo-Direct radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of the study is to present a new planning approach to provide better planning target volume (PTV) coverage and reduce bladder and rectum dose with hybrid Tomo-Helical (TH)/Tomo-Direct (TD) radiotherapy (RT) for localized prostate cancer (LPC).

METHODS

Twenty-five LPC patients were included in this retrospective study. TH plans, TD plans, and hybrid TH/TD plans were created. Lateral beams were used for the hybrid TD plan and the prescribed dose was 70 Gy in 28 fractions (hybrid plans were combined 45 Gy/ 18 fxs for TH and 25 Gy/10 fxs for TD). Doses of PTV (D2%, D98%, D50%, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), coverage) and organs at risk (OARs) (V50%, V35%, V25%, V5%, and V95%) were analyzed. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze the difference in dosimetric parameters. p-Value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

TH plans showed better CI, and target coverage (p < 0.01) than TD and hybrid plans in all patient plan evaluations. However, TD plans D2%, D98%, and D50% doses were better than TH and hybrid plans. The HI values were similar between the three plans. Significant reductions in bladder and rectum V50%, V35%, and V25% doses (p < 0.001) were observed with hybrid plans compared to TH and TD. Penile bulb V95% and bowel V5% doses were better in the hybrid plans. Left and right femoral head V5% doses were higher in the hybrid plan compared to others (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Concurrently hybrid TH/TD RT plan can be a good option to reduce the doses of the rectum and bladder in the RT of LPC.

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

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

A Multi-Institutional Phase 2 Trial of High-Dose SAbR for Prostate Cancer Using Rectal Spacer

PURPOSE

High-dose SABR for prostate cancer offers the radiobiologic potency of the most intensified radiation therapy regimens but was associated with >90% rates of ulceration of the anterior rectal wall on endoscopic assessment; this infrequently progressed to severe rectal toxicity in prior prospective series. A multi-institutional phase 2 prospective trial was conducted to assess whether placement of a perirectal hydrogel spacer would reduce acute periprostatic rectal ulcer events after high-dose (>40 Gy) SABR.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible patients included men with stage ≤T2c localized grade group 1 to 3 prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≤15 ng/mL, American Urological Association Symptom Index = AUA-SI scores ≤18, and a gland volume ≤80 cm³. Patients underwent perirectal hydrogel spacer placement, followed by SABR of 45 Gy in 5 fractions every other day to the prostate only. Androgen deprivation was not allowed except for cytoreduction. The rectal wall was directly assessed by serial anoscopy during follow-up to determine whether the spacer would reduce acute periprostatic rectal ulcer events from >90% to <70% within 9 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Forty-four men were enrolled and 43 were eligible for protocol analysis. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 48 months. Acute periprostatic ulcers were observed in 6 of 42 patients (14.3%; 95% confidence interval, 6.0%-27%; P < .001) at a median of 2.9 months posttreatment (range, 1.7-5.6 months). All ulcers (grade 1, 5 ulcers; grade 2, 1 ulcer) resolved on repeat anoscopy within 8 months of incidence. There were no grade ≥3 late gastrointestinal toxicities; the incidence of late grade-2 gastrointestinal toxicities was 14.3%, with a prevalence at 3 years of 0%. No toxicities greater than grade 3 occurred in any domain. Four-year freedom from biochemical failure was 93.8% (95% CI, 85.2%-100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Temporary hydrogel spacer placement before high-dose SABR treatment for localized prostate cancer and use of strict dose constraints are associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of rectal ulcer events compared with prior phase 1/2 trial results.

Patient reported toxicity and quality of life after hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for intermediate- and high risk prostate cancer

Background and purpose

For irradiation of localized prostate-cancer, moderately-hypofractionated regimens with a variety of dose per fraction are used. We adopted a regimen of 70 Gy in 28 fractions of 2.5 Gy, using state of the art radiotherapy (RT) and closely monitored the efficacy, toxicity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a large cohort, using patient-reported outcomes.

Materials and methods

Between 2008 and 2016, 462 patients with intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer were treated with RT, 28 fractions of 2.5 Gy, using IMRT/VMAT, an online fiducial-maker based correction protocol and a daily inserted endorectal balloon. Overall freedom from failure (no biochemical or clinical recurrence) , as well as self-reported genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) related toxicity and HRQoL are reported.

Results

Overall freedom from failure rates at 3 and 5 years were 92.0% (89.1–94.9%) and 83.5% (78.6–88.4%), respectively. Prevalence rates of grade ≥ 2 GU/GI-toxicity were 16.3%/6.3% and 22,1%/3.2% after 3 and 5 years respectively. The 5-year actuarial incidences of grade ≥ 2 GU/GI-toxicity were 43.5%/18.5%. HRQoL worsened during RT and gradually recovered thereafter, In accordance with the prevalence rates.

Conclusion

Treatment of intermediate- or high-risk localized prostate cancer with RT to 70 Gy in 28 fractions with IMRT/VMAT, using fiducial markers and an endorectal balloon leads to good long-term tumor control rates and acceptable patient reported toxicity rates. Furthermore, patient-reported outcomes, including HRQoL, are essential for a good comparison between different studies. Finally, prevalence rates show a better correlation with HRQoL than actuarial incidence rates do and might therefore better represent the burden of toxicity.

Clinical Outcomes of the CHIRP Trial: A Phase II Prospective Randomized Trial of Conventionally Fractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Prostate and Pelvic Nodal Radiation Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) may offer treatment advantages for patients with prostate cancer. However, HFRT may also increase the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity compared with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT). Several large trials have found that HFRT is well tolerated in mixed risk population studies. Here, we report on a phase II, randomized controlled study conducted to evaluate these endpoints in exclusively high-risk patients with prostate cancer treated with prostate and pelvic nodal radiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

After giving informed consent, patients with high-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to prostate plus pelvic nodal radiation therapy with either HFRT (68 Gy in 25 fractions) or CFRT (78 Gy in 39 fractions) and 18 months of androgen suppression therapy. Toxicity was scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Biochemical failure was determined by the Phoenix definition. Patients were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 111 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled and 109 patients were treated. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or higher acute GI toxicity was not significantly different between the arms (HFRT 18.9% vs CFRT 21.8%; P = .812). Similarly, acute GU (HFRT 30.2% vs CFRT 30.9%; P = 1.00), late GI (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 10.0%; P = .554), and late GU (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 6.0%; P = .200) were not significantly different between the arms. Median follow-up was 38.0 months (4.8-77.8 months). The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was not significantly different between the 2 arms (97.3% for HFRT vs 91.0% for CFRT; P = .606). The 3-year overall survival was 94.8% in the HFRT arm and 100.0% in the CFRT arm (P = .116).

CONCLUSIONS

HFRT and CFRT using intensity modulated radiation therapy were both well tolerated for patients with high-risk prostate cancer and resulted in similar 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and overall survival.

Early results of localised, high-risk prostate cancer treated by moderate hypo-fractionation (70 Gy at 2·5 Gy per fraction): 5-year experiences of a moderate hypo-fractionation regimen

Background:

Radiotherapy is one of the treatments used to treat prostate cancer, and dose escalation to 74–78 Gy in conventional fractionation is the standard regimen. Currently, according to the hypothesis of low alpha/beta ratio in prostate cancer cells, using hypo-fractionation has been reported in many publications with promising results. This retrospective study was designed to evaluate the implementation of a moderate hypo-fractionation regimen in high-risk prostate cancer in our division.

Materials and Methods:

Between 2012 and 2017, 40 patients with high-risk, localised prostate cancer were treated by a moderate hypo-fractionation regimen (70 Gy at 2·5 Gy per fraction) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy. The data related to treatment outcomes and toxicities were evaluated.

Results:

The mean PSA at diagnosis was 86·2 ng/mL (95% CI 49·9–122·4). Thirty-eight patients received long-term hormonal therapy. Fifty-two percent had a Gleason score of 8–10, and 65% had an initial PSA >20 ng/mL. The mean doses (in EQD2) to the D50% of PTV, D2% of organs at risk (bladder, rectum and bowels) were 80, 78·3, 76·4, and 50·2 Gy, respectively. Two patients had biochemical recurrence during the follow-up period.

Conclusion:

A moderate hypo-fractionation regimen (70 Gy at 2·5 Gy per fraction) is feasible. Our experience found that this regimen yields tolerable, acceptable toxicity profiles in high-risk, localised prostate cancer patients.

Comparison of Treatment-Related Toxicity With Hypofractionated or Conventionally Fractionated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A National Population-Based Study

AIMS

Randomised controlled trials have shown comparable early oncological outcomes after hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy in the radical treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). The effect of hypofractionation on treatment-related gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity remains uncertain, especially in older men and those with locally advanced PCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A population-based study of all patients treated with radical conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (n = 9106) and hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 3027) in all radiotherapy centres in the English National Health Service between 2014 and 2016 was carried out. We identified severe gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity using a validated coding framework and compared conventionally fractionated and hypofractionated radiotherapy using a competing-risks proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

The median age in our cohort was 72 years old and most patients had locally advanced disease (65%). There was no difference in gastrointestinal toxicity (conventionally fractionated radiotherapy: 5.0 events/100 person-years; hypofractionated radiotherapy: 5.2 events/100 person-years; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio: 1.00, 95% confidence interval: 0.89-1.13; P = 0.95) or genitourinary toxicity (conventionally fractionated radiotherapy: 2.3 events/100 person-years; hypofractionated radiotherapy: 2.3 events/100 person-years; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio: 0.92, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-1.10; P = 0.35) between patients who received conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and those who received hypofractionated radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This national cohort study has shown that the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the radical treatment of PCa does not increase rates of severe gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity. Our findings also support the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy in older men and those with locally advanced PCa.

Rectal wall dose-volume effect of pre- or post KUSHEN Ningjiaos relationship with 3D brachytherapy in cervical cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The present prospective study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the rectum following KUSHEN Ningjiaos in cervical cancer. We compared rectal wall changes during brachytherapy with or without KUSHEN Ningjiaos in cervical cancer patients and analyzed the difference in spatial dose distribution, including whole rectum-wall (R-w), anterior rectum-wall (R-a) and posterior rectum-wall (R-p).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred cervical cancer patients with and without KUSHEN Ningjiaos were treated with brachytherapy (600 cGy). The whole R-w was divided into two areas of R-a and R-p, and R-w dose surface map were constructed. The volume of each R-w was compared in patients pre- and post-KUSHEN Ningjiaos.

RESULTS

When the pre- vs. post-KUSHEN groups were compared the volume of R-w increased. In the post-KUSHEN group, a significantly higher proportion of the D2cc of V_R-w and V_R-a compared with the pre-KUSHEN group showed that the D2cc_mean increased from 532.45 cGy to 564.7 cGy and 533.51 cGy to 565.26 cGy, respectively; however, results demonstrated a decrease in the D2cc_mean of R-p from 260.5 cGy to 240.0868 cGy (P < 0.05). The insertion of KUSHEN Ningjiaos resulted in a reduction of the relative volume of R-p exposed to high doses, and regressive analysis showed that the D_R-p-max correlated most strongly with V_R-w and D2cc_R-p (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The insertion of KUSHEN Ningjiaos can protect the rectum. KUSHEN Ningjiaos appears to be safe and well tolerated; therefore, we believe that there will be fewer adverse events after brachytherapy for patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

A multi-center, prospective clinical trial for KUSHEN Ningjiaos was inserted into rectum to reduce the rate of radiation proctitis in three-dimensional brachytherapy of cervical cancer. ChiCTR1900021631 . 2 Mar 2019-Retrospectively registered.

Four-Year Outcomes From a Prospective Phase II Clinical Trial of Moderately Hypofractionated Proton Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy represents an effective treatment for localized prostate cancer (PC). Although large randomized trials have reported the efficacy of photon-based hypofractionated therapy, hypofractionated proton therapy (HFPT) has not been extensively studied. This study was performed to determine the clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients with PC treated with HFPT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2010 and 2017, 184 men were enrolled on a trial of 70 Gy in 28 fractions of HFPT for low- to intermediate-risk PC. Acute and late toxicity was evaluated using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Patient-reported outcomes were measured by International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function Questionnaire, and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite scores.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 49.2 months. Enrolled patients had low-risk (n = 18), favorable intermediate-risk (n = 78), and unfavorable intermediate-risk (n = 88) PC. Four-year rates of biochemical-clinical failure-free survival were 93.5% (95% confidence interval, 89%-98%), 94.4% (89%-100%), 92.5% (86%-100%), and 93.8% (88%-100%) in the overall group and the low-risk, favorable intermediate-risk, and unfavorable intermediate-risk cohorts, respectively (log-rank P > .4). The incidence of acute grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal (GI) and urologic toxicities were 3.8% and 12.5%, respectively. The 4-year incidence of late grade 2 or higher urologic and GI toxicity was 7.6% (4%-13%) and 13.6% (9%-20%), respectively. One late grade 3 GI toxicity was reported. All late toxicities were transient. Patient-reported International Prostate Symptom, International Index of Erectile Function, and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite scores had no significant long-term changes after completion of HFPT (Supplementary Table 1, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.05.069).

CONCLUSIONS

HFPT is associated with low rates of toxicity and does not appear to negatively affect 4-year patient reported urinary and bowel health. Further comparative analyses are warranted to better understand differences between proton and photon HFRT.

Prostate cancer dose-response, fractionation sensitivity and repopulation parameters evaluation from 25 international radiotherapy outcome data sets

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to model the biochemical free survival at 5 years and to evaluate the parameters defining dose-response curve, dose-fractionation radiosensitivity and repopulation.

METHODS

It was carried out a literature search on Pubmed to retrieve data sets of patients treated with external beam radiation therapy of 1.8-4.0 Gy per fraction and overall treatment time of 3 to 10 weeks. 10 groups were identified, based on risk class and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Dose-response curve D₅₀ (dose at 50% probability of control) and g₅₀ (steepness), α/β (dose-fractionation radiosensitivity), and repopulation parameters, d_prolif and T_prolif , were calculated. Bootstrap-based cross-validation was performed and median and 95% CI (confidence interval) were evaluated.

RESULTS

25 data sets, including 20,310 patients, were considered. The median (95% CI) D₅₀ and g₅₀ values were 62 (CI 53 - 66) Gy and 1.6 (0.8 - 2.4). ADT patients showed lower values of D₅₀ and g₅₀ (57 ± 5 Gy and 1.1 ± 0.4) compared to no-ADT patients (65 ± 2 Gy and 2.3 ± 0.6), with p < 0.0001 and p = 0.002. If we did not consider any dependence on overall treatment time, the median (95% CI) value of α/β was 1.4 (1.0 - 1.9) Gy with p < 0.0001 for all patients. The median values of d_{proli f} and T_prolif were 0.0 to 0.3 Gy/d and 18-40 days.

CONCLUSION

Dose-response curve resulted dependent on risk class and ADT, with higher steepness for no-ADT patients. Low values of dose-fractionation radiosensitivity were found, supporting the use of moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy in each risk class. A limited dependence on repopulation was observed.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Prostate cancer response to moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy was reliably quantified considering risk class and androgen deprivation therapy.

How rapid advances in imaging are defining the future of precision radiation oncology

Imaging has an essential role in the planning and delivery of radiotherapy. Recent advances in imaging have led to the development of advanced radiotherapy techniques—including image-guided radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy and proton beam therapy. The optimal use of imaging might enable higher doses of radiation to be delivered to the tumour, while sparing normal surrounding tissues. In this article, we review how the integration of existing and novel forms of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography have transformed tumour delineation in the radiotherapy planning process, and how these advances have the potential to allow a more individualised approach to the cancer therapy. Recent data suggest that imaging biomarkers that assess underlying tumour heterogeneity can identify areas within a tumour that are at higher risk of radio-resistance, and therefore potentially allow for biologically focussed dose escalation. The rapidly evolving concept of adaptive radiotherapy, including artificial intelligence, requires imaging during treatment to be used to modify radiotherapy on a daily basis. These advances have the potential to improve clinical outcomes and reduce radiation-related long-term toxicities. We outline how recent technological advances in both imaging and radiotherapy delivery can be combined to shape the future of precision radiation oncology.

Long-term outcomes of proton therapy for prostate cancer in Japan: a multi-institutional survey of the Japanese Radiation Oncology Study Group

This is the first multi‐institutional retrospective survey of the long‐term outcomes of proton therapy (PT) for prostate cancer in Japan. This retrospective analysis comprised prostate cancer patients treated with PT at seven centers between January 2008 and December 2011 and was approved by each Institutional Review Board. The NCCN classification was used. Biochemical relapse was based on the Phoenix definition (nadir + 2.0 ng/mL). Toxicities were evaluated with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. There were 215, 520, and 556 patients in the low‐risk, intermediate‐risk, and high‐risk groups, respectively. The median follow‐up period of surviving patients was 69 months (range: 7–107). Among all patients, 98.8% were treated using a conventional fractionation schedule and 1.2% with a hypofractionation schedule; 58.5% and 21.5% received neoadjuvant and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy, respectively. The 5‐year biochemical relapse‐free survival (bRFS) and overall survival rates in the low‐risk, intermediate‐risk, and high‐risk groups were 97.0%, 91.1%, and 83.1%, and 98.4%, 96.8%, and 95.2%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, the NCCN classification was a significant prognostic factor for bRFS, but not overall survival. The incidence rates of grade 2 or more severe late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were 4.1% and 4.0%, retrospectively. This retrospective analysis of a multi‐institutional survey suggested that PT is effective and well‐tolerated for prostate cancer. Based on this result, a multi‐institutional prospective clinical trial (UMIN000025453) on PT for prostate cancer has just been initiated in order to define its role in Japan.

Image-Guided Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Purpose

We report the results of a retrospective study of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using CyberKnife for localized prostate cancer. The study focused on the safety and feasibility of this treatment modality.

Materials and methods

Between October 2002 and December 2007, 44 patients suffering from localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate were treated with SBRT using CyberKnife at the Korea Cancer Center Hospital. The patients were divided into 3 groups: a low-risk group (5 patients), an intermediate-risk group (10 patients), and a high-risk group (29 patients). Five patients received 32 Gy in 4 fractions, 28 patients received 34 Gy in 4 fractions, and 11 patients received 36 Gy in 4 fractions.

Results

The median age of the patients was 69 years (range, 53–79 years) and the median duration of follow-up 40 months (range, 12–78 months). There were 6 acute and 3 late grade 2 urinary toxicities, and 4 acute and 5 late grade 2 rectal toxicities, but there were no grade 3 or higher treatment-related toxicities. The 5-year cause-specific survival rate and progression-free survival rate were both 100%. At last follow-up, the biochemical failure-free rate of the low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk patients was 100%, 100% and 90.8%, respectively.

Conclusion

SBRT using CyberKnife for localized prostate cancer is safe and well tolerated. We obtained promising results with 34 Gy in a 4-fraction regimen especially for the high-risk patients. Free full text available at www.tumorionline.it

Morbidity dynamics in proton-photon or photon radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer

Aim

This study evaluated the frequency and long-term dynamics of early and late post irradiation damage after proton-photon or photon therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer.

Background

The results of a randomized study of proton-photon or photon therapy using several fractionation regimes were analyzed in 272 patients with high and intermediate risk of progression.

Materials and methods

Three variants of proton boost fractionation were studied sequentially: 3.0 (8 daily fractions), 4.0 (5 fractions, 3 or 5 fractions/week), and 5.5 (3 fractions, 3 fractions/week) Gy(RBE).

Results

A significant decrease in the severity of both acute and late gastrointestinal injuries is achievable with a proton beam. The dynamics of late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity over a 10-year period were generally characterized by a decrease in severity of morbidity by 30% and 15%, respectively.

Conclusions

Local irradiation with a fractional dose of 3.0-5.5 Gy(RBE) and a cumulative dose of 28.0-28.8 Gy(RBE) for protons significantly reduces the early and late rectitis severity, but does not reduce the risk of lower urinary tract injuries. Fractionation regimens do not significantly differ in toxicity levels.

Stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A review and future directions

Prostate cancer affects over 200000 men annually in the United States alone. The role of conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (RT) is well established as a treatment option for eligible prostate cancer patients; however, the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in this setting is less well defined. Within the past decade, there have been a number of studies investigating the feasibility of SBRT as a potential treatment option for prostate cancer patients. SBRT has been well studied in other disease sites, and the shortened treatment course would allow for greater convenience for patients. There may also be implications for toxicity as well as disease control. In this review we present a number of prospective and retrospective trials of SBRT in the treatment of prostate cancer. We focus on factors such as biochemical progression-free survival, prostate specific antigen (PSA) response, and toxicity in order to compare SBRT to established treatment modalities. We also discuss future steps that the clinical community can take to further explore this new treatment approach. We conclude that initial studies examining the use of SBRT in the treatment of prostate cancer have demonstrated impressive rates of biochemical recurrence-free survival and PSA response, while maintaining a relatively favorable acute toxicity profile, though long-term follow-up is needed.

[Hypofractionated irradiation of prostate cancer: What is the radiobiological understanding in 2017?]

For prostate cancer, hypofractionation has been based since 1999 on radiobiological data, which calculated a very low alpha/beta ratio (1.2 to 1.5Gy). This suggested that a better local control could be obtained, without any toxicity increase. Consequently, two types of hypofractionated schemes were proposed: "moderate" hypofractionation, with fractions of 2.5 to 4Gy, and "extreme" hypofractionation, utilizing stereotactic techniques, with fractions of 7 to 10Gy. For moderate hypofractionation, the linear-quadratic (LQ) model has been used to calculate the equivalent doses of the new protocols. The available trials have often shown a "non-inferiority", but no advantage, while the equivalent doses calculated for the hypofractionated arms were sometimes very superior to the doses of the conventional arms. This finding could suggest either an alpha/beta ratio lower than previously calculated, or a negative impact of other radiobiological parameters, which had not been taken into account. For "extreme" hypofractionation, the use of the LQ model is discussed for high dose fractions. Moreover, a number of radiobiological questions are still pending. The reduced overall irradiation time could be either a positive point (better local control) or a negative one (reduced reoxygenation). The prolonged duration of the fractions could lead to a decrease of efficacy (because allowing for reparation of sublethal lesions). Finally, the impact of the large fractions on the microenvironment and/or immunity remains discussed. The reported series appear to show encouraging short to mid-term results, but the results of randomized trials are still awaited. Today, it seems reasonable to only propose those extreme hypofractionated schemes to well-selected patients, treating small volumes with high-level stereotactic techniques.

A comparison between hydrogel spacer and endorectal balloon: An analysis of intrafraction prostate motion during proton therapy

The purpose of this study was to evaluate intrafraction prostate motion in patients treated with proton therapy and an endorectal balloon or a hydrogel spacer using orthogonal x‐rays acquired before and after each treatment field. This study evaluated 10 patients (662 fields throughout treatment) treated daily with an endorectal balloon (ERB) and 16 patients (840 fields throughout treatment) treated with a hydrogel spacer (GEL) without an ERB. Patient shifts were recorded before and after each treatment field, correlated with a treatment time, using x‐ray imaging and implanted fiducial alignment. For each shift, recorded in X, Y, and Z, a 3D vector was calculated to determine the positional change. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean vector shift between ERB (0.06 cm) and GEL (0.09 cm), (P < 0.001). The mean includes a large number of zero shifts, but the smallest non‐zero shift recorded was 0.2 cm. The largest shifts were, on average, in the Z direction (anterior to posterior). The average Z shift was +0.02 cm for both ERB and GEL. There was no statistical difference between ERB and GEL for shifts greater than 0.3 cm (P = 0.13) or greater than 0.5 cm (P = 0.36). For treatment times between 5 and 9 min, a majority of shifts were less than 0.2 cm, 85.9% for ERB and 73.2% for GEL. There was a significant positive correlation between the vector shifts and field time for both ERB (r = 0.2, P < 0.001) and GEL (r = 0.07, P < 0.04). We have shown that prostate motion is clinically comparable between an ERB and a hydrogel spacer, and the time dependencies are similar. A large majority of shifts for both ERB and hydrogel are well within a typical robust planning margin. For GEL patients, we chose to maintain slightly larger planning margins than for ERB due to already improved rectal sparing with GEL.

Hypofractionated image guided radiation therapy followed by prostate seed implant boost for men with newly diagnosed intermediate and high risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate: Preliminary results of a phase 2 prospective study

PURPOSE

A phase 2 protocol was designed and implemented to assess the toxicity and efficacy of hypofractionated image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IG-IMRT) combined with low-dose rate 103Pd prostate seed implant for treatment of localized intermediate- and high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a report of an interim analysis on 24 patients enrolled on an institutional review board-approved phase 2 single-institution study of patients with intermediate- and high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate. The median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level was 8.15 ng/mL. The median Gleason score was 4 + 3 = 7 (range, 3 + 4 = 7 - 4 + 4 = 8), and the median T stage was T2a. Of the 24 patients, 4 (17%) were high-risk patients as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria, version 2016. The treatment consisted of 2465 cGy in 493 cGy/fraction of IG-IMRT to the prostate and seminal vesicles. This was followed by a 103Pd transperineal prostate implant boost (prescribed dose to 90% of the prostate volume of 100 Gy) using intraoperative planning. Five patients received neoadjuvant, concurrent, and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 18 months (range, 1-42 months). The median nadir prostate-specific antigen was 0.5 ng/mL and time to nadir was 16 months. There was 1 biochemical failure associated with distant metastatic disease without local failure. Toxicity (acute or late) higher than grade 3 was not observed. There was a single instance of late grade 3 genitourinary toxicity secondary to hematuria 2 years and 7 months after radiation treatment. There were no other grade 3 gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Early results on the toxicity and efficacy of the combination of hypofractionated IG-IMRT and low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost are favorable. Longer follow-up is needed to confirm safety and effectiveness.

Single Course IMRT Plan to Deliver 45 Gy to Seminal Vesicles and 81 Gy to Prostate in 45 Fractions

We treat prostate and seminal vesicles (SV) to 45 Gy in 25 fractions (course 1) and boost prostate to 81 Gy in 20 more fractions (course 2) with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). This two-course IMRT with 45 fractions delivered a non-uniform dose to SV and required two plans and two QA procedures. We used Linear Quadratic (LQ) model to develop a single course IMRT plan to treat SV to a uniform dose, which has the same biological effective dose (BED) as that of 45 Gy in 25 fractions and prostate to 81 Gy, in 45 fractions. Single course IMRT plans were compared with two-course IMRT plans, retrospectively for 14 patients. With two-course IMRT, prescription to prostate and SV was 45 Gy in 25 fractions and to prostate only was 36 Gy in 20 fractions, at 1.8 Gy/fraction. With 45-fraction single course IMRT plan, prescription to prostate was 81 Gy and to SV was 52 or 56 Gy for a α/β of 1 and 3, respectively. 52 Gy delivered in 45 fractions has the same BED of 72 Gy3 as that of delivering 45 Gy in 25 fractions, and is called Matched Effective Dose (MED). LQ model was used to calculate the BED and MED to SV for α/β values of 1–10. Comparison between two-course and single course IMRT plans was in terms of MUs, dose-max, and dose volume constraints (DVC). DVC were: 95% PTV to be covered by at least 95% of prescription dose; and 70, 50, and 30% of bladder and rectum should not receive more than 40, 60, and 70% of 81 Gy. SV Volumes ranged from 2.9–30 cc. With two-course IMRT plans, mean dose to SV was non-uniform and varied between patients by 48% (54 to 80 Gy). With single-course IMRT plan, mean dose to SV was more uniform and varied between patients by only 9.6% (58.2 to 63.8 Gy), to deliver MED of 56 Gy for α/β − 1. Single course IMRT plan MUs were slightly larger than those for two-course IMRT plans, but within the range seen for two-course plans (549–959 MUs, n=51). Dose max for single-course plans were similar to two-course plans. Doses to PTV, rectum and bladder with single course plans were as per DVC and comparable to two-course plans. Single course IMRT plan reduces IMRT planning and QA time to half.

Big Data Analytics for Prostate Radiotherapy

Radiation therapy is a first-line treatment option for localized prostate cancer and radiation-induced normal tissue damage are often the main limiting factor for modern radiotherapy regimens. Conversely, under-dosing of target volumes in an attempt to spare adjacent healthy tissues limits the likelihood of achieving local, long-term control. Thus, the ability to generate personalized data-driven risk profiles for radiotherapy outcomes would provide valuable prognostic information to help guide both clinicians and patients alike. Big data applied to radiation oncology promises to deliver better understanding of outcomes by harvesting and integrating heterogeneous data types, including patient-specific clinical parameters, treatment-related dose-volume metrics, and biological risk factors. When taken together, such variables make up the basis for a multi-dimensional space (the "RadoncSpace") in which the presented modeling techniques search in order to identify significant predictors. Herein, we review outcome modeling and big data-mining techniques for both tumor control and radiotherapy-induced normal tissue effects. We apply many of the presented modeling approaches onto a cohort of hypofractionated prostate cancer patients taking into account different data types and a large heterogeneous mix of physical and biological parameters. Cross-validation techniques are also reviewed for the refinement of the proposed framework architecture and checking individual model performance. We conclude by considering advanced modeling techniques that borrow concepts from big data analytics, such as machine learning and artificial intelligence, before discussing the potential future impact of systems radiobiology approaches.

The comparative oncologic effectiveness of available management strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer

The primary goal of modern prostate cancer treatment paradigms is to optimize the balance of predicted benefits associated with prostate cancer treatment against the predicted harms of therapy. However, given the limitations in the existing evidence as well as the significant tradeoffs posed by each treatment, there remain myriad challenges associated with individualized prostate cancer treatment decision-making. In this review, we summarize the existing comparative effectiveness evidence of treatments for localized prostate cancer with an emphasis on oncologic control. While we focus on the major treatment categories of radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and observation, we also provide a review of emerging therapies such as cryotherapy and high-intensity frequency ultrasound (HIFU).

Moderate Hypofractionation with Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Prostate Cancer: Long-term Results of a Phase I-II Study

AIMS

To report 5 year outcome and late toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated with image-guided tomotherapy with a moderate hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 211 prostate cancer patients, 78 low risk, 53 intermediate risk and 80 high risk were treated between 2005 and 2011. Intermediate- and high-risk patients received 51.8 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes and concomitant simultaneous integrated boost to prostate up to 74.2 Gy/28 fractions, whereas low-risk patients were treated to the prostate only with 71.4 Gy/28 fractions. Daily megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) image guidance was applied. Androgen deprivation was prescribed for a median duration of 6 months for low-risk patients (for downsizing), 12 months for intermediate-risk and 36 months for high-risk patients. The 5 year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary CTCAE.v3 toxicity were assessed. The effect of several clinical variables on both outcome and gastrointestinal/genitourinary toxicity was tested by uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 5 years, the late toxicity actuarial incidence was: genitourinary ≥ grade 2: 20.2%; genitourinary ≥ grade 3: 5.9%; gastrointestinal ≥ grade 2: 17%; gastrointestinal ≥ grade 3: 6.3% with lower prevalence at the last follow-up visit (≥ grade 3: genitourinary: 1.9%; gastrointestinal: 1.9%). Major predictors of ≥ grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal late toxicity were genitourinary acute toxicity ≥ grade 2 (hazard ratio: 4.9) and previous surgery (hazard ratio: 3.4). The overall 5 year bRFS was 93.7% (low risk: 94.6%; intermediate risk: 96.2%; high risk: 91.1%), overall survival and CSS were 88.6% (low risk: 90.5%; intermediate risk: 87.4%; high risk: 87%) and 97.5% (low risk: 98.7%; intermediate risk: 95%; high risk: 94.3%), respectively. Risk classes and androgen deprivation were not significantly correlated with either bRFS, overall survival or CSS. Twelve patients experienced a biochemical relapse but none experienced clinically proven local and/or pelvic recurrence.

CONCLUSION

A satisfactory 5 year outcome with an acceptable toxicity profile was observed. The combination of image-guided radiotherapy-intensity-modulated radiotherapy, high equivalent 2 Gy dose (EQD2) with a moderate hypofractionated approach and extensive prophylactic lymph node irradiation also leads to very good outcome in high-risk patients.

Effects of Charged Particles on Human Tumor Cells

The use of charged particle therapy in cancer treatment is growing rapidly, in large part because the exquisite dose localization of charged particles allows for higher radiation doses to be given to tumor tissue while normal tissues are exposed to lower doses and decreased volumes of normal tissues are irradiated. In addition, charged particles heavier than protons have substantial potential clinical advantages because of their additional biological effects, including greater cell killing effectiveness, decreased radiation resistance of hypoxic cells in tumors, and reduced cell cycle dependence of radiation response. These biological advantages depend on many factors, such as endpoint, cell or tissue type, dose, dose rate or fractionation, charged particle type and energy, and oxygen concentration. This review summarizes the unique biological advantages of charged particle therapy and highlights recent research and areas of particular research needs, such as quantification of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for various tumor types and radiation qualities, role of genetic background of tumor cells in determining response to charged particles, sensitivity of cancer stem-like cells to charged particles, role of charged particles in tumors with hypoxic fractions, and importance of fractionation, including use of hypofractionation, with charged particles.

Patient experience in the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: state of the science

Background:

Contemporary therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have shown survival improvements, which do not account for patient experience and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Methods:

This literature review included a search of MEDLINE for randomized clinical trials enrolling ⩾50 patients with mCRPC and reporting on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) since 2010.

Results:

Nineteen of 25 publications describing seven treatment regimens (10 clinical trials and nine associated secondary analyses) met the inclusion criteria and were critically appraised. The most commonly used measures were the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (n=5 trials) and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (n=4 trials) questionnaires. The published data indicated that HRQoL and pain status augmented the clinical efficacy data by providing a better understanding of treatment impact in mCRPC. Abiraterone acetate and prednisone, enzalutamide, radium-223 dichloride and sipuleucel-T offered varying levels of HRQoL benefit and/or pain mitigation versus their respective comparators, whereas three treatments (mitoxantrone, estramustine phosphate and docetaxel, and cabazitaxel) had no meaningful impact on HRQoL or pain. The main limitation of the data were that the PROs utilized were not developed for use in mCRPC patients and hence may not have comprehensively captured symptoms important to this population.

Conclusions:

Recently published randomized clinical trials of new agents for mCRPC have captured elements of the patient experience while on treatment. Further research is required to standardize methods for measuring, quantifying and reporting on HRQoL and pain in patients with mCRPC in the clinical practice setting.

Acute toxicity of hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Dose-escalated hypofractionated radiotherapy (hfrt) using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (imrt), with inclusion of the pelvic lymph nodes (plns), plus androgen suppression therapy (ast) in high-risk prostate cancer patients should improve patient outcomes, but acute toxicity could limit its feasibility.

METHODS

Our single-centre phase ii prospective study enrolled 40 high-risk prostate cancer patients. All patients received hfrt using imrt with daily mega-voltage computed tomography imaging guidance, with 95% of planning target volumes (ptv68 and ptv50) receiving 68 Gy and 50 Gy (respectively) in 25 daily fractions. The boost volume was targeted to the involved plns and the prostate (minus the urethra plus 3 mm and minus 3 mm from adjacent rectal wall) and totalled up to 75 Gy in 25 fractions. Acute toxicity scores were recorded weekly during and 3 months after radiotherapy (rt) administration.

RESULTS

For the 37 patients who completed rt and the 3-month follow-up, median age was 65.5 years (range: 50-76 years). Disease was organ-confined (T1c-T2c) in 23 patients (62.1%), and node-positive in 5 patients (13.5%). All patients received long-term ast. Maximum acute genitourinary (gu) and gastrointestinal (gi) toxicity peaked at grade 2 in 6 of 36 evaluated patients (16.6%) and in 4 of 31 evaluated patients (12.9%) respectively. Diarrhea and urinary frequency were the chief complaints. Dose-volume parameters demonstrated no correlation with toxicity. The ptv treatment objectives were met in 36 of the 37 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This hfrt dose-escalation trial in high-risk prostate cancer has demonstrated the feasibility of administering 75 Gy in 25 fractions with minimal acute gi and gu toxicities. Further follow-up will report late toxicities and outcomes.

Assessment and quantification of patient set-up errors in nasopharyngeal cancer patients and their biological and dosimetric impact in terms of generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD), tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess and quantify patients' set-up errors using an electronic portal imaging device and to evaluate their dosimetric and biological impact in terms of generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) on predictive models, such as the tumour control probability (TCP) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP).

METHODS

20 patients treated for nasopharyngeal cancer were enrolled in the radiotherapy-oncology department of HCA. Systematic and random errors were quantified. The dosimetric and biological impact of these set-up errors on the target volume and the organ at risk (OARs) coverage were assessed using calculation of dose-volume histogram, gEUD, TCP and NTCP. For this purpose, an in-house software was developed and used.

RESULTS

The standard deviations (1SDs) of the systematic set-up and random set-up errors were calculated for the lateral and subclavicular fields and gave the following results: ∑ = 0.63 ± (0.42) mm and σ = 3.75 ± (0.79) mm, respectively. Thus a planning organ at risk volume (PRV) margin of 3 mm was defined around the OARs, and a 5-mm margin used around the clinical target volume. The gEUD, TCP and NTCP calculations obtained with and without set-up errors have shown increased values for tumour, where ΔgEUD (tumour) = 1.94% Gy (p = 0.00721) and ΔTCP = 2.03%. The toxicity of OARs was quantified using gEUD and NTCP. The values of ΔgEUD (OARs) vary from 0.78% to 5.95% in the case of the brainstem and the optic chiasm, respectively. The corresponding ΔNTCP varies from 0.15% to 0.53%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The quantification of set-up errors has a dosimetric and biological impact on the tumour and on the OARs. The developed in-house software using the concept of gEUD, TCP and NTCP biological models has been successfully used in this study. It can be used also to optimize the treatment plan established for our patients.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The gEUD, TCP and NTCP may be more suitable tools to assess the treatment plans before treating the patients.

Dose-Escalated Robotic SBRT for Stage I-II Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is the precise external delivery of very high-dose radiotherapy to targets in the body, with treatment completed in one to five fractions. SBRT should be an ideal approach for organ-confined prostate cancer because (I) dose-escalation should yield improved rates of cancer control; (II) the unique radiobiology of prostate cancer favors hypofractionation; and (III) the conformal nature of SBRT minimizes high-dose radiation delivery to immediately adjacent organs, potentially reducing complications. This approach is also more convenient for patients, and is cheaper than intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Several external beam platforms are capable of delivering SBRT for early-stage prostate cancer, although most of the mature reported series have employed a robotic non-coplanar platform (i.e., CyberKnife). Several large studies report 5-year biochemical relapse rates which compare favorably to IMRT. Rates of late GU toxicity are similar to those seen with IMRT, and rates of late rectal toxicity may be less than with IMRT and low-dose rate brachytherapy. Patient-reported quality of life (QOL) outcomes appear similar to IMRT in the urinary domain. Bowel QOL may be less adversely affected by SBRT than with other radiation modalities. After 5 years of follow-up, SBRT delivered on a robotic platform is yielding outcomes at least as favorable as IMRT, and may be considered appropriate therapy for stage I–II prostate cancer.

Increased radiation dose heterogeneity within the prostate predisposes to urethral strictures in patients receiving moderately hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether radiation dose inhomogeneity within the prostate predisposes to late urinary strictures after moderately hypofractionated definitive external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred seventy-three men with clinically localized prostate cancer met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. All patients received 70 Gy to the prostate delivered over 28 fractions, had at least 2 years of clinical follow-up, and had dose-volume histogram information available for review. The endpoint of this study was the development of a urethral stricture that required a procedural intervention such as urethral dilation or suprapubic catheterization. Dosimetric parameters were evaluated for effect on the rate of urethral stricture formation by univariate Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 49.5 months (range, 24.6-108 months). At 5 years, the actuarial rate of intervention for urethral strictures across all patients was 4.9%. The maximum point dose within the prostate (P = .034, hazard ratio = 1.006) and the mean prostate dose (P = .039, hazard ratio = 1.004) were the only parameters predictive of urethral stricture formation. All patients who developed a urethral stricture were treated by a plan with a maximum prostate dose of >75 Gy (median, 77.67 Gy).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients receiving moderately hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy over 28 fractions, a maximum point dose of 75 Gy within the prostate was associated with an increased probability of developing a urethral stricture that required procedural intervention. The hypothesis that hypofractionation increases susceptibility to toxicity from heterogeneity within the prostate should be confirmed by analyzing data from randomized trials with a conventionally fractionated control arm for comparison.

Hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with prostate cancer (HYPRO): acute toxicity results from a randomised non-inferiority phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In 2007, we began the randomised phase 3 multicentre HYPRO trial to investigate the effect of hypofractionated radiotherapy compared with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy on relapse-free survival in patients with prostate cancer. Here, we examine whether patients experience differences in acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse effects.

METHODS

In this randomised non-inferiority phase 3 trial, done in seven radiotherapy centres in the Netherlands, we enrolled intermediate-risk or high-risk patients aged between 44 and 85 years with histologically confirmed stage T1b-T4 NX-0MX-0 prostate cancer, a PSA concentration of 60 ng/mL or lower, and WHO performance status of 0-2. A web-based application was used to randomly assign (1:1) patients to receive either standard fractionation with 39 fractions of 2 Gy in 8 weeks (five fractions per week) or hypofractionation with 19 fractions of 3·4 Gy in 6·5 weeks (three fractions per week). Randomisation was done with minimisation procedure, stratified by treatment centre and risk group. The primary endpoint is 5-year relapse-free survival. Here we report data for the acute toxicity outcomes: the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Non-inferiority of hypofractionation was tested separately for genitourinary and gastrointestinal acute toxic effects, with a null hypothesis that cumulative incidences of each type of adverse event were not more than 8% higher in the hypofractionation group than in the standard fractionation group. We scored acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxic effects according to RTOG-EORTC criteria from both case report forms and patients' self-assessment questionnaires, at baseline, twice during radiotherapy, and 3 months after completion of radiotherapy. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Patient recruitment has been completed. This study is registered with www.controlled-trials.com, number ISRCTN85138529.

FINDINGS

Between March 19, 2007, and Dec 3, 2010, 820 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with standard fractionation (n=410) or hypofractionation (n=410). 3 months after radiotherapy, 73 (22%) patients in the standard fractionation group and 75 (23%) patients in the hypofractionation group reported grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity; grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity was noted in 43 (13%) patients in the standard fractionation group and in 42 (13%) in the hypofractionation group. Grade 4 acute genitourinary toxicity was reported for two patients, one (<1%) in each group. No grade 4 acute gastrointestinal toxicities were observed. We noted no significant difference in cumulative incidence by 120 days after radiotherapy of grade 2 or worse acute genitourinary toxicity (57·8% [95% CI 52·9-62·7] in the standard fractionation group vs 60·5% (55·8-65·3) in the hypofractionation group; difference 2·7%, 90% CI -2·99 to 8·48; odds ratio [OR] 1·12, 95% CI 0·84-1·49; p=0·43). The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute gastrointestinal toxicity by 120 days after radiotherapy was higher in patients given hypofractionation (31·2% [95% CI 26·6-35·8] in the standard fractionation group vs 42·0% [37·2-46·9] in the hypofractionation group; difference 10·8%, 90% CI 5·25-16·43; OR 1·6; p=0·0015; non-inferiority not confirmed).

INTERPRETATION

Hypofractionated radiotherapy was not non-inferior to standard fractionated radiotherapy in terms of acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity for men with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. In fact, the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute gastrointestinal toxicity was significantly higher in patients given hypofractionation than in those given standard fractionated radiotherapy. Patients remain in follow-up for efficacy endpoints.

FUNDING

The Dutch Cancer Society.

Spacer application for prostate cancer radiation therapy

Definitive radiotherapy is a well-recognized treatment option for localized prostate cancer. Rectum toxicity is the dose-limiting toxicity. Dose-volume correlations have been reported in many studies. The application of a spacer to increase the distance between the prostate and anterior rectal wall is an innovative technique, considerably reducing the dose to the rectum. Hyaluronic acid, human collagen, an inflatable balloon or hydrogel are potential materials to create the desired effect. The number of clinical studies is rapidly increasing. Well-tolerated injection or implantation techniques and low rectal treatment-related toxicity have been demonstrated in prospective studies. Long-term clinical results and the results of randomized studies are needed to better define the beneficial effect for the patient.

A Phase II Trial of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Using a Non-Robotic Linear Accelerator and Real-Time Target Tracking: Report of Toxicity, Quality of Life, and Disease Control Outcomes with 5-Year Minimum Follow-Up

Purpose/Objective(s): Herein, we report the results of an IRB-approved phase II trial of Varian Trilogy/TrueBeam-based stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) monotherapy for low-risk prostate cancer using the Calypso^® System to provide real-time electromagnetic tracking of the prostate’s position during treatment delivery.

Materials/Methods: A total of 102 low-risk patients completed protocol treatment between January 2007 and May 2009. A total dose of 40.0 Gy in 5 every-other-day fractions of 8.0 Gy was prescribed to the planning target volume. Target setup and tracking procedures were as follows: (1) the Calypso^® System was used to achieve target setup prior to each fraction; (2) conebeam CT imaging was then used for correction of setup error and for assessment of target and organs-at-risk deformations; (3) after treatment delivery was initiated, the Calypso^® System then provided real-time intrafractional target tracking. The NCI CTCAE v3.0 was used to assess urinary and rectal toxicity during treatment and at defined follow-up time points. Biochemical response and quality of life measurements were made at concurrent follow-up points.

Results: Urinary toxicities were most common. At 6 months, 19.6, 2.9, and 4.9% of patients reported grades 1–2 urinary frequency, dysuria, and retention, respectively. Rectal toxicities were uncommon. By 12 months, 2.9% of patients reported painless rectal bleeding with subsequent symptom resolution without requiring invasive interventions. Quality of life measurements demonstrated a significant decline over baseline in urinary irritative/obstructive scores at 1 month following SABR but otherwise did not demonstrate any difference for bowel, bladder, and sexual function scores at any other follow-up time point. One patient suffered biochemical recurrence at 6 years following SABR.

Conclusion: At 5 years, minimum follow-up for this favorable patient cohort, prostate SABR resulted in favorable toxicity, quality of life, and biochemical outcomes.

Particle radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Recent advances in external beam radiotherapy have allowed us to deliver higher doses to the tumors while decreasing doses to the surrounding tissues. Dose escalation using high-precision radiotherapy has improved the treatment outcomes of prostate cancer. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy has been widely used throughout the world as the most advanced form of photon radiotherapy. In contrast, particle radiotherapy has also been under development, and has been used as an effective and non-invasive radiation modality for prostate and other cancers. Among the particles used in such treatments, protons and carbon ions have the physical advantage that the dose can be focused on the tumor with only minimal exposure of the surrounding normal tissues. Furthermore, carbon ions also have radiobiological advantages that include higher killing effects on intrinsic radio-resistant tumors, hypoxic tumor cells and tumor cells in the G0 or S phase. However, the degree of clinical benefit derived from these theoretical advantages in the treatment of prostate cancer has not been adequately determined. The present article reviews the available literature on the use of particle radiotherapy for prostate cancer as well as the literature on the physical and radiobiological properties of this treatment, and discusses the role and the relative merits of particle radiotherapy compared with current photon-based radiotherapy, with a focus on proton beam therapy and carbon ion radiotherapy.

Treatment outcome of localized prostate cancer by 70 Gy hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy with a customized rectal balloon

Purpose

We aimed to analyze the treatment outcome and long-term toxicity of 70 Gy hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer using a customized rectal balloon.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed medical records of 86 prostate cancer patients who received curative radiotherapy between January 2004 and December 2011 at our institution. Patients were designated as low (12.8%), intermediate (20.9%), or high risk (66.3%). Thirty patients received a total dose of 70 Gy in 28 fractions over 5 weeks via IMRT (the Hypo-IMRT group); 56 received 70.2 Gy in 39 fractions over 7 weeks via 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (the CF-3DRT group, which served as a reference for comparison). A customized rectal balloon was placed in Hypo-IMRT group throughout the entire radiotherapy course. Androgen deprivation therapy was administered to 47 patients (Hypo-IMRT group, 17; CF-3DRT group, 30). Late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were evaluated according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria.

Results

The median follow-up period was 74.4 months (range, 18.8 to 125.9 months). The 5-year actuarial biochemical relapse-free survival rates for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients were 100%, 100%, and 88.5%, respectively, for the Hypo-IMRT group and 80%, 77.8%, and 63.6%, respectively, for the CF-3DRT group (p < 0.046). No patient presented with acute or late GU toxicity ≥grade 3. Late grade 3 GI toxicity occurred in 2 patients (3.6%) in the CF-3DRT group and 1 patient (3.3%) in the Hypo-IMRT group.

Conclusion

Hypo-IMRT with a customized rectal balloon resulted in excellent biochemical control rates with minimal toxicity in localized prostate cancer patients.

Systematic review of the cost effectiveness of radiation therapy for prostate cancer from 2003 to 2013

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer remains a prevalent diagnosis with a spectrum of treatment choices that offer similar oncologic outcomes but differing side effect profiles and associated costs. As the technology for prostate radiation therapy has advanced, its associated costs have escalated, thus making cost-effectiveness analyses critical to assess the value of competing treatment options, including watchful waiting, surgery, brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), 3D-conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), proton beam therapy (PBT), and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify articles that performed a cost-effectiveness analysis on different radiation treatment options for localized prostate cancer, summarize their findings, and highlight the main drivers of cost effectiveness.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on two databases, PubMed and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry ( https://research.tufts-nemc.org/cear4 ), using search terms that included 'prostate', 'cost effectiveness prostate radiation' and 'cost analysis comparative effectiveness prostate radiation'. Studies were included in this review if the cost data were from 2002 or later, and outcomes reported both cost and effectiveness, preferably including a cost-utility analysis with the outcome of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) as the effectiveness measure.

RESULTS

There were 14 articles between 2003 and 2013 that discussed cost effectiveness of prostate radiotherapy in men over the age of 65. All but four of the papers were from the US; the others were from Canada and the UK. The majority of the papers used Markov decision analysis and estimated cost from a payer's perspective, usually from Medicare reimbursement data. Assumptions for the model and utilities to calculate QALYs were estimated using published literature at the time of the analysis. Each analysis had a sensitivity analysis to compensate for the uncertainty of the model inputs. The main drivers of cost effectiveness were the cost of the radiation treatment and the differential QALYs accrued because of different treatment-related morbidities. Brachytherapy was consistently found to be more cost effective when compared with surgery and other radiation treatment options. IMRT was cost effective when compared with 3D-CRT. PBT was not found to be cost effective in any of the analyses, mostly due to the high costs of PBT. SBRT was the newest technology that was analyzed, and it was also found to be cost effective compared with IMRT and PBT.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-effectiveness research of prostate radiation treatments allows patients, providers, and payers to better understand the true value of each treatment choice. Due to the variation in each of these analyses (e.g., costing, and disease and complication assumptions, etc.), it is difficult to generalize the results. One must be careful in drawing conclusions from these studies and extrapolating to individual patients, particularly with the clear utility dependence seen in the majority of these studies.

Hypofractionated helical tomotherapy (75 Gy at 2.5 Gy per fraction) for localized prostate cancer: long-term analysis of gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity

Background

This study is a report on the long-term analysis of acute and late toxicities for patients with localized prostate cancer treated with hypofractionated helical tomotherapy.

Methods

From January 2008 through August 2013, 70 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated definitively with hypofractionated helical tomotherapy. The helical tomotherapy was designed to deliver 75 Gy in 2.5 Gy per fraction to the prostate gland, 63 Gy in 2.1 Gy per fraction to the seminal vesicles, and 54 Gy in 1.8 Gy per fraction to the pelvic lymph nodes. Incidence rates and predictive factors for radiation toxicities were analyzed retrospectively.

Results

The incidences of grades 0, 1, and 2 acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were 51.4%, 42.9%, and 5.7%, and those of acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity were 7.1%, 64.3%, and 28.6%, respectively. The maximum dose of rectum and bladder V40 and V50 were significant predictive factors for acute GI and GU toxicity. The cutoff value of rectum maximum dose and bladder V40 and V50 by receiver-operating characteristic curves analysis were 76.5 Gy, 17.3%, and 10.2%, respectively. The incidences of grades 0, 1, and 2 late GI toxicity were 82.0%, 14.0%, and 4.0%, and those of late GU toxicity were 18.0%, 56.0%, and 26.0%, respectively. Rectum V70 and bladder V70 and V75 were significant predictive factors for late GI and GU toxicity. The cutoff value of rectum V70 and bladder V70 and V75 by receiver-operating characteristic curves analysis was 2.8%, 2.8%, and 1.0%, respectively.

Conclusion

Hypofractionated helical tomotherapy using a schedule of 75 Gy at 2.5 Gy per fraction had favorable acute and late toxicity rates and no serious complication, such as grade 3 or worse toxicity. To minimize radiation toxicities, constraining the rectum maximum dose to less than 76.5 Gy, rectum V70 to less than 2.8%, bladder V40 to less than 17.3%, bladder V50 to less than 10.2%, bladder V70 to less than 2.8%, and bladder V75 to less than 1.0% would be necessary.

Risk of late toxicity in men receiving dose-escalated hypofractionated intensity modulated prostate radiation therapy: results from a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To report late toxicity outcomes from a randomized trial comparing conventional and hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy and to identify dosimetric and clinical parameters associated with late toxicity after hypofractionated treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Men with localized prostate cancer were enrolled in a trial that randomized men to either conventionally fractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (CIMRT, 75.6 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions) or to dose-escalated hypofractionated IMRT (HIMRT, 72 Gy in 2.4-Gy fractions). Late (≥90 days after completion of radiation therapy) genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were prospectively evaluated and scored according to modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria.

RESULTS

101 men received CIMRT and 102 men received HIMRT. The median age was 68, and the median follow-up time was 6.0 years. Twenty-eight percent had low-risk, 71% had intermediate-risk, and 1% had high-risk disease. There was no difference in late GU toxicity in men treated with CIMRT and HIMRT. The actuarial 5-year grade ≥2 GU toxicity was 16.5% after CIMRT and 15.8% after HIMRT (P=.97). There was a nonsignificant numeric increase in late GI toxicity in men treated with HIMRT compared with men treated with CIMRT. The actuarial 5-year grade ≥2 GI toxicity was 5.1% after CIMRT and 10.0% after HIMRT (P=.11). In men receiving HIMRT, the proportion of rectum receiving 36.9 Gy, 46.2 Gy, 64.6 Gy, and 73.9 Gy was associated with the development of late GI toxicity (P<.05). The 5-year actuarial grade ≥2 GI toxicity was 27.3% in men with R64.6Gy ≥ 20% but only 6.0% in men with R64.6Gy < 20% (P=.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-escalated IMRT using a moderate hypofractionation regimen (72 Gy in 2.4-Gy fractions) can be delivered safely with limited grade 2 or 3 late toxicity. Minimizing the proportion of rectum that receives moderate and high dose decreases the risk of late rectal toxicity after this hypofractionation regimen.

Is biochemical relapse-free survival after profoundly hypofractionated radiotherapy consistent with current radiobiological models?

AIMS

The α/β ratio for prostate cancer is thought to be low and less than for the rectum, which is usually the dose-limiting organ. Hypofractionated radiotherapy should therefore improve the therapeutic ratio, increasing cure rates with less toxicity. A number of models for predicting biochemical relapse-free survival have been developed from large series of patients treated with conventional and moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy. The purpose of this study was to test these models when significant numbers of patients treated with profoundly hypofractionated radiotherapy were included.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature with regard to hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer was conducted, focussing on data recently presented on prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy. For the work described here, we have taken published biochemical control rates for a range of moderately and profoundly fractionated schedules and plotted these together with a range of radiobiological models, which are described.

RESULTS

The data reviewed show consistency between the various radiobiological model predictions and the currently observed data.

CONCLUSION

Current radiobiological models provide accurate predictions of biochemical relapse-free survival, even when profoundly hypofractionated patients are included in the analysis.

Outcome and patient-reported toxicity in localised prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy

Objective

To report outcomes and late toxicity for a hypofractionated dose-escalated radiotherapy schedule in patients treated using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for localised prostate cancer.

Materials and methods

Eighty-eight men with localised prostate cancer were treated with 57 Gy in 19 daily fractions over 4 weeks. A total of 70 out of 88 had high-risk disease. Overall survival, cause-specific survival and biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS, Phoenix definition) were reported. Toxicity was measured retrospectively using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria and assessed prospectively with a validated Late Effects in Normal Tissues Subjective, Objective, Management and Analytic (LENT/SOMA) patient questionnaire.

Results

At 5 years, overall survival was 84%, cause-specific survival 88% and bPFS 65%. In patients with high-risk disease, 5-year bPFS was 62%. There was no RTOG toxicity above grade III. LENT/SOMA questionnaires were returned by 74% patients. Median scores for bowel and urinary function were <1. Maximum bowel and urinary toxicity scores ≥2 were reported by 64% and 59% of patients, respectively. The median score for sexual function was 1·5, but nearly all (96%) patients recorded a toxicity score ≥2 for at least one question.

Conclusions

Dose-escalated hypofractionated radiotherapy delivered using IMRT has promising outcomes and acceptable late toxicity. This fractionation schedule is being compared with conventional treatment within an on-going multicentre phase III clinical trial.