An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: updated analysis of RTOG 94-13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for High-Risk and Very High-Risk Locoregional Prostate Cancer in the Modern Era: Real-World Experience from an Asian Cohort

This study retrospectively evaluates the clinical outcomes of definitive volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for high-risk or very high-risk locoregional prostate cancer patients from an Asian institution. Consecutive patients who received VMAT (76 Gy in 38 fractions) between January 2017 and June 2022 were included. Whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) (46 Gy in 23 fractions) was employed for clinically node-negative disease (cN0) and a Roach estimated risk of ≥15%, as well as simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of 55-57.5 Gy to node-positive (cN1) disease. The primary endpoint was biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS). Secondary endpoints included radiographic relapse-free survival (RRFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS) and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS). A total of 209 patients were identified. After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, the 4-year actuarial BRFS, RRFS, MFS and PCSS were 85.2%, 96.8%, 96.8% and 100%, respectively. The incidence of late grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were 15.8% and 11.0%, respectively. No significant difference in cancer outcomes or toxicity was observed between WPRT and prostate-only radiotherapy for cN0 patients. SIB to the involved nodes did not result in increased toxicity. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) group 5 and cN1 stage were associated with worse RRFS (p < 0.05). PSMA PET-CT compared to conventional imaging staging was associated with better BRFS in patients with ISUP grade group 5 (p = 0.039). Five-year local experience demonstrates excellent clinical outcomes. PSMA PET-CT staging for high-grade disease and tailored pelvic irradiation based on nodal risk should be considered to maximize clinical benefit.

Overview of Radiation Therapy in the Management of Localized and Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal is to describe the evolution of radiation therapy (RT) utilization in the management of localized and metastatic prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Long term data for a variety of hypofractionated definitive RT dose-fractionation schemes has matured, allowing patients and providers many standard-of-care options to choose from. Post-prostatectomy, adjuvant RT has largely been replaced by an early salvage approach. Multiparametric MRI and PSMA PET have enabled increasingly targeted RT delivery to the prostate and oligometastatic tumors. Areas of active investigation include determining the value of proton beam therapy and perirectal spacers, and optimally incorporate genomic tumor profiling and next generation hormonal therapies with RT in the curative setting. The use of radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer is rapidly evolving. In the coming years, there will be continued improvements in a variety of areas to enhance the value of RT in multidisciplinary prostate cancer management.

Prostate cancer and elective nodal radiation therapy for cN0 and pN0-a never ending story? : Recommendations from the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO)

For prostate cancer, the role of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) for cN0 or pN0 patients has been under discussion for years. Considering the recent publications of randomized controlled trials, the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) aimed to discuss and summarize the current literature. Modern trials have been recently published for both treatment-naïve patients (POP-RT trial) and patients after surgery (SPPORT trial). Although there are more reliable data to date, we identified several limitations currently complicating the definitions of general recommendations. For patients with cN0 (conventional or PSMA-PET staging) undergoing definitive radiotherapy, only men with high-risk factors for nodal involvement (e.g., cT3a, GS ≥ 8, PSA ≥ 20 ng/ml) seem to benefit from ENI. For biochemical relapse in the postoperative situation (pN0) and no PSMA imaging, ENI may be added to patients with risk factors according to the SPPORT trial (e.g., GS ≥ 8; PSA > 0.7 ng/ml). If PSMA-PET/CT is negative, ENI may be offered for selected men with high-risk factors as an individual treatment approach.

Approach to Patients with High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Radiation Oncology Perspective

OPINION STATEMENT

High-risk localized prostate cancer is a challenging clinical entity to treat, with heterogeneous responses to an evolving array of multidisciplinary treatment approaches. In addition, this disease state is growing in incidence due to a variety of factors, including shifting recommendations that discouraged routine prostate cancer screening. Current guidelines now incorporate an informed decision-making process for prostate cancer screening and evaluation. More work is underway to improve targeted screening for certain at-risk populations and to implement greater personalization in the use of diagnostic tools. Once diagnosed with high-risk localized disease, a multimodality treatment paradigm is warranted. Radiation-in its various forms and combinations-plays a large and continually evolving role in the management of high-risk prostate cancer, yet treatment outcomes are still suboptimal. There is a growing need to improve upon current treatment approaches, and better personalize a particular treatment recommendation based on both tumor and patient characteristics, as well as patient preference and goals of therapy. Given that treatment generally requires more than one therapy, there are notable implications on long-term quality of life, especially with respect to overlapping and cumulative side effects of local and systemic therapies, respectively. The desire for aggressive therapy to optimize cancer control outcomes must be weighed against the risk of morbidities and overtreatment and discussed with each patient so that an informed decision about treatment and care can be determined. High-level evidence to support treatment recommendations, where available, is critical for a data-driven and tailored approach to address all goals of care.

Radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: clinical outcomes and factors influencing biochemical recurrence

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) includes adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) and salvage radiotherapy (SRT), which can prevent or cure biochemical recurrence.

AIMS

To evaluate long-term outcomes of RT after RP and to examine factors affecting biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS).

METHODS

Sixty-six received ART and 73 received SRT between 2005 and 2012 were included. The clinical outcomes and late toxicities were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to examine factors affecting bRFS.

RESULTS

Median follow-up from RP was 111 months. Five-year bRFS and 10-year distant metastasis-free survival from RP were 82.8% and 84.5% in ART, and 74.6% and 92.4% in SRT, respectively. The most frequent late toxicity was hematuria, which was higher in ART (p = .01). No recurrence within RT field was occurred. On univariate analysis, pelvic RT was associated with favorable bRFS in ART (p = .048). In SRT, post-RP prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (< 0.05 ng/mL), PSA nadir after RT (≤ 0.01 ng/mL), and time to PSA nadir (≥ 10 months) were associated with favorable bRFS (p = .03, p < .001, and p = .002, respectively). On multivariate analysis, post-RP PSA level and time to PSA nadir were independent predictive factors for bRFS in SRT (p = .04 and p = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

ART and SRT had favorable outcomes with no recurrence within RT field. In SRT, the time to PSA nadir after RT (≥ 10 months) was found to be a new predictor for favorable bRFS and useful in assessing treatment efficacy.

A Randomized Feasibility Trial of Stereotactic Prostate Radiation Therapy With or Without Elective Nodal Irradiation in High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer (SPORT Trial)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial comparing SABR with prostate-only (P-SABR) or with prostate plus pelvic lymph nodes (PPN-SABR) in patients with unfavorable intermediate- or high-risk localized prostate cancer and to explore potential toxicity biomarkers.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Thirty adult men with at least 1 of the following features were randomized 1:1 to P-SABR or PPN-SABR: clinical magnetic resonance imaging stage T3a N0 M0, Gleason score ≥7 (4+3), and prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL. P-SABR patients received 36.25 Gy/5 fractions/29 days, and PPN-SABR patients received 25 Gy/5 fractions to pelvic nodes, with the final cohort receiving a boost to the dominant intraprostatic lesion of 45 to 50 Gy. Phosphorylated gamma-H2AX (γH2AX) foci numbers, citrulline levels, and circulating lymphocyte counts were quantified. Acute toxicity information (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03) was collected weekly at each treatment and at 6 weeks and 3 months. Physician-reported late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) toxicity was recorded from 90 days to 36 months postcompletion of SABR. Patient-reported quality of life (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and International Prostate Symptom Score) scores were recorded with each toxicity time point.

RESULTS

The target recruitment was achieved, and treatment was successfully delivered in all patients. A total of 0% and 6.7% (P-SABR) and 6.7% and 20.0% (PPN-SABR) experienced acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity, respectively. At 3 years, 6.7% and 6.7% (P-SABR) and 13.3% and 33.3% (PPN-SABR) had experienced late grade ≥2 GI and GU toxicity, respectively. One patient (PPN-SABR) had late grade 3 GU toxicity (cystitis and hematuria). No other grade ≥3 toxicity was observed. In addition, 33.3% and 60% (P-SABR) and 64.3% and 92.9% (PPN-SABR) experienced a minimally clinically important change in late Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite bowel and urinary summary scores, respectively. γH2AX foci numbers at 1 hour after the first fraction were significantly higher in the PPN-SABR arm compared with the P-SABR arm (P = .04). Patients with late grade ≥1 GI toxicity had significantly greater falls in circulating lymphocytes (12 weeks post-radiation therapy, P = .01) and a trend toward higher γH2AX foci numbers (P = .09) than patients with no late toxicity. Patients with late grade ≥1 bowel toxicity and late diarrhea experienced greater falls in citrulline levels (P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

A randomized trial comparing P-SABR with PPN-SABR is feasible with acceptable toxicity. Correlations of γH2AX foci, lymphocyte counts, and citrulline levels with irradiated volume and toxicity suggest potential as predictive biomarkers. This study has informed a multicenter, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial in the United Kingdom.

Analysis of a Biopsy-Based Genomic Classifier in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of the NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9202, 9413, and 9902 Phase 3 Randomized Trials

PURPOSE

Decipher is a genomic classifier (GC) prospectively validated postprostatectomy. We validated the performance of the GC in pretreatment biopsy samples within the context of 3 randomized phase 3 high-risk definitive radiation therapy trials.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A prespecified analysis plan (NRG-GU-TS006) was approved to obtain formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue from biopsy specimens from the NRG biobank from patients enrolled in the NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9202, 9413, and 9902 phase 3 randomized trials. After central review, the highest-grade tumors were profiled on clinical-grade whole-transcriptome arrays and GC scores were obtained. The primary objective was to validate the independent prognostic ability for the GC for distant metastases (DM), and secondary for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) with Cox univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

GC scores were obtained on 385 samples, of which 265 passed microarray quality control (69%) and had a median follow-up of 11 years (interquartile range, 9-13). In the pooled cohort, on univariable analysis, the GC was shown to be a prognostic factor for DM (per 0.1 unit; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-1.41; P < .001), PCSM (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.41; P < .001), and OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22; P < .001). On multivariable analyses, the GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently associated with DM (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09-1.36), PCSM (sHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.39), and OS (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) after adjusting for age, Prostate Specific Antigen, Gleason score, cT stage, trial, and randomized treatment arm. GC had similar prognostic ability in patients receiving short-term or long-term androgen-deprivation therapy, but the absolute improvement in outcome varied by GC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first validation of a gene expression biomarker on pretreatment prostate cancer biopsy samples from prospective randomized trials and demonstrates an independent association of GC score with DM, PCSM, and OS. High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state, and GC can improve risk stratification to help personalize shared decision making.

Advances in the management of radiation-induced cystitis in patients with pelvic malignancies

OBJECTIVE

Radiotherapy plays a vital role as a treatment for malignant pelvic tumors, in which the bladder represents a significant organ at risk involved during tumor radiotherapy. Exposing the bladder wall to high doses of ionizing radiation is unavoidable and will lead to radiation cystitis (RC) because of its central position in the pelvic cavity. Radiation cystitis will result in several complications (e.g. frequent micturition, urgent urination, and nocturia) that can significantly reduce the patient's quality of life and in very severe cases become life-threatening.

METHODS

Existing studies on the pathophysiology, prevention, and management of radiation-induced cystitis from January 1990 to December 2021 were reviewed. PubMed was used as the main search engine. Besides the reviewed studies, citations to those studies were also included.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

In this review, the symptoms of radiation cystitis and the mainstream grading scales employed in clinical situations are presented. Next, preclinical and clinical research on preventing and treating radiation cystitis are summarized, and an overview of currently available prevention and treatment strategies as guidelines for clinicians is provided. Treatment options involve symptomatic treatment, vascular interventional therapy, surgery, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), bladder irrigation, and electrocoagulation. Prevention includes filling up the bladder to remove it from the radiation field and delivering radiation based on helical tomotherapy and CT-guided 3D intracavitary brachytherapy techniques.

DNA-methylation and genomic copy number in primary tumors and corresponding lymph node metastases in prostate cancer from patients with low and high Gleason score

Purpose

In prostate cancer, the indication to irradiate the pelvic lymphatic pathways in clinical node-negative patients is solely based on clinical nomograms. To define biological risk patterns of lymphatic spread, we studied DNA-methylation and genomic copy number in primary tumors and corresponding lymph nodes metastases.

Methods/Patients

DNA-methylation and genomic copy number profiles of primary tumors (PT) and paired synchronous lymph node metastases (LN) from Gleason Score (GS)-6/7a (n = 20 LN-positive, n = 20 LN-negative) and GS-9/10 patients (LN-positive n = 20) after prostatectomy and lymphonodectomy were analyzed.

Results

GS-6/7a pN0 PTs and GS-6/7a pN1 PTs differed in histone H3K27me3/H3K9me3 mediated methylation. PTs compared to LNs, in both, GS-6/7a pN1 and GS-9/10 pN1 patients showed large differences in DNA-methylation mediated by histones H3K4me1/2, in addition to copy number changes of chromosomal regions 11q13.1, 14q11.2 and 15q26.1. Between GS-6/7a pN1 and GS-9/10 pN1 patients, methylation levels differed more when comparing LNs than PTs. 16q21-22.1 was specifically lost in GS-9/10 pN0 PTs. Immune system-related pathways characterized the differences between PTs and LNs in both GS-6/7a pN1 and GS-9/10 pN1 patients. Comparing PTs and LKs between GS-6/7a pN1 and GS-9/10 pN1 patients revealed altered transmembrane and G-protein-coupled receptor signaling.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that progression of prostate cancer, including lymphatic spread, is associated with histone-mediated DNA-methylation and we hypothesize a methylation signature predicting lymphatic spread in GS-6/7a patients from primary tumors. Lymphatic spread in GS-6/7a patients, flanked by DNA-methylation and CNA alterations, appears to be more complex than in GS-9/10 patients, in whom the primary tumors already appear to bear lymph node metastasis-enabling alterations.

VMAT partial arc technique decreases dose to organs at risk in whole pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer when compared to full arc VMAT and IMRT

Whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) can sterilize microscopic lymph node metastases in treatment of prostate cancer. WPRT, compared to prostate only radiotherapy (PORT), is associated with increased acute gastrointestinal, and hematological toxicities. To further explore minimizing normal tissue toxicities associated with WPRT in definitive IMRT for prostate cancer, this planning study compared dosimetric differences between static 9-field-IMRT, full arc VMAT, and mixed partial-full arc VMAT techniques. In this retrospective study, 12 prostate cancer patients who met the criteria for WPRT were randomly selected for this study. The initial volume, PTV46, included the prostate, seminal vesicles, and pelvic nodes with margin and was prescribed to 4600 cGy. The cone-down volume, PTV78, included the prostate and proximal seminal vesicles with margin to a total dose of 7800 cGy. For each CT image set, 3 plans were generated for each of the PTVs: an IMRT plan, a full arc (FA) VMAT plan, and a mixed partial-full arc (PFA) VMAT plan, using 6MV photons energy. According to RTOG protocols none of the plans had a major Conformity Index (CI) violation by any of the 3 planning techniques. PFA plan had the best mean CI index of 1.00 and significantly better than IMRT (p = 0.03) and FA (p = 0.007). For equivalent PTV coverage, the average composite gradient index of the PFA plans was better than the IMRT and the FA plans with values 1.92, 2.03, and 2.01 respectively. The defference was statistically significant between PFA/IMRT and PFA/FA, with p- values of < 0.001. The IMRT plans and the PFA plans provided very similar doses to the rectum, bladder, sigmoid colon, and femoral heads, which were lower than the dose in the FA plans. There was a significant decrease in the mean dose to the rectum from 4524 cGy with the FA to 4182 cGy with the PFA and 4091 cGy with IMRT (p < 0.001). The percent of rectum receiving 4000 cGy was also the highest with FA at 66.1% compared to 49.9% (PFA) and 47.5% (IMRT). There was a significant decrease in the mean dose to the bladder from 3922 cGy (FA) to 3551 cGy (PFA) and 3612 cGy (IMRT) (p < 0.001). The percent of bladder receiving 4000 cGy was also the highest with FA at 45.4% compared to 36.6% (PFA) and 37.4% (IMRT). The average mean dose to the sigmoid colon decreased from 4177 cGy (FA) to 3893 cGy (PFA) and 3819 cGy (IMRT). The average mean dose to the femoral heads decreased from 2091 cGy (FA) to 2026 cGy (PFA) and 1987 cGy (IMRT). Considering the improvement in plan quality indices recorded in this study including the dose gradient and the dose to organs at risk, mixed partial-full arc plans may be the preferred VMAT treatment technique over full arc plans for prostate cancer treatments that include nodal volumes.

High weekly integral dose and larger fraction size increase risk of fatigue and worsening of functional outcomes following radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

Introduction

We hypothesized that increasing the pelvic integral dose (ID) and a higher dose per fraction correlate with worsening fatigue and functional outcomes in localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

Methods

The study design was a retrospective analysis of two prospective observational cohorts, REQUITE (development, n=543) and DUE-01 (validation, n=228). Data were available for comorbidities, medication, androgen deprivation therapy, previous surgeries, smoking, age, and body mass index. The ID was calculated as the product of the mean body dose and body volume. The weekly ID accounted for differences in fractionation. The worsening (end of radiotherapy versus baseline) of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 scores in physical/role/social functioning and fatigue symptom scales were evaluated, and two outcome measures were defined as worsening in ≥2 (WS2) or ≥3 (WS3) scales, respectively. The weekly ID and clinical risk factors were tested in multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results

In REQUITE, WS2 was seen in 28% and WS3 in 16% of patients. The median weekly ID was 13.1 L·Gy/week [interquartile (IQ) range 10.2-19.3]. The weekly ID, diabetes, the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and the dose per fraction were significantly associated with WS2 [AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve) =0.59; 95% CI 0.55-0.63] and WS3 (AUC=0.60; 95% CI 0.55-0.64). The prevalence of WS2 (15.3%) and WS3 (6.1%) was lower in DUE-01, but the median weekly ID was higher (15.8 L·Gy/week; IQ range 13.2-19.3). The model for WS2 was validated with reduced discrimination (AUC=0.52 95% CI 0.47-0.61), The AUC for WS3 was 0.58.

Conclusion

Increasing the weekly ID and the dose per fraction lead to the worsening of fatigue and functional outcomes in patients with localized PCa treated with EBRT.

Prostate only radiotherapy using external beam radiotherapy: A clinician's perspective

Prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) is widely used as the definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer. Prostate cancer has an α/β ratio; therefore, radiotherapy (RT) with a large fraction size is biologically effective for tumor control. The current external beam RT technique for PORT has been improved from three-dimensional conformal RT to intensity-modulated, stereotactic body, and image-guided RTs. These methods are associated with reduced radiation exposure to normal tissues, decreasing urinary and bowel toxicity. Several trials have shown improved local control with dose escalation through the aforementioned methods, and the efficacy and safety of intensity-modulated and stereotactic body RTs have been proven. However, the management of RT in patients with prostate cancer has not been fully elucidated. As a clinician, there are several concerns regarding the RT volume and dose considering the patient's age and comorbidities. Therefore, this review aimed to discuss the radiobiological basis and external beam technical advancements in PORT for localized prostate cancer from a clinician's perspective.

The cost of elective nodal coverage in prostate cancer: Late quality of life outcomes and dosimetric analysis with 0, 45 or 54 Gy to the pelvis

•

Pelvic nodal radiation to 54 Gy correlates with worse urinary quality of life.

•

Pelvic nodal radiation to 45 Gy does not correlate with urinary quality of life.

•

Post-operative radiation resulted in greater urinary quality of life decline.

•

Pelvic nodal radiation did not correlate with bowel quality of life.

Purpose

Elective pelvic lymph node radiotherapy (PLNRT) in prostate cancer is often omitted from definitive (n = 267) and post prostatectomy (n = 160) radiotherapy (RT) due to concerns regarding toxicity and efficacy. Data comparing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with or without PLNRT is limited. Our long-term supposition is that PLNRT, particularly to higher doses afforded by IMRT, will decrease pelvic failure rate in select patients. We aim to establish the impact of two different PLNRT doses on long term quality of life (QOL).

Methods and materials

Prostate cancer patients (n = 428) recorded baseline scores using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), prior to definitive or post-prostatectomy RT. PLNRT, if given, was prescribed to 45 or 54 Gy at 1.8 Gy per fraction. New EPIC scores were recorded 20–36 months after radiotherapy. Absolute change in each domain subscale and summary score was recorded, along with if these changes met minimally important difference (MID) criteria. A separate multivariate analysis (MVA) was performed for each measure. Subsequent dosimetric analysis was performed.

Results

Frequency of a MID decline was significantly greater with PLNRT to 54 Gy for urinary function, incontinence, and overall. No urinary decline was correlated with PLNRT to 45 Gy. PLNRT to 54 Gy was significant for decline in urinary function, bother, irritative, incontinence, and overall score in one or both MVA models while 45 Gy was not. Postoperative status was significant for decline in urinary function, incontinence, and overall. Amongst postoperative patients, there was significantly greater decline in urinary function score in the salvage setting. Neither 54 nor 45 Gy significantly affected bowel subscale or overall score decline.

Conclusions

Using conventional fractionation, adding PLNRT to 54 Gy, but not 45 Gy, correlates with worse urinary QOL, with postoperative patients experiencing a steeper decline. PLNRT had no significant impact on bowel QOL with either dose.

A prospective phase II study of prostate-specific antigen-guided salvage radiotherapy and 68Ga-PSMA-PET for biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy - The PROPER 1 trial

Background and purpose

The treatment of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after prostatectomy is challenging as the site of the recurrence is often undetectable. Our aim was to test a personalised treatment concept for BCR based on PSA kinetics during salvage radiotherapy (SRT) combined with prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET).

Materials and methods

This phase II trial included 100 patients with BCR. PSMA-PET was performed at baseline. PSA was measured weekly during SRT. Initially, 70 Gy in 35 fractions was prescribed to the prostate bed. Radiotherapy was adapted after 50 Gy. Non-responders (PSA still ≥ 0.15 ng/mL) received sequential lymph node irradiation with a boost to PSMA-PET positive lesions, while responders (PSA < 0.15 ng/mL) continued SRT as planned. PET-findings were only taken into consideration for treatment planning in case of PSA non-response after 50 Gy.

Results

Data from 97 patients were eligible for analysis. Thirty-four patients were classified as responders and 63 as non-responders. PSMA-PET was positive in 3 patients (9%) in the responder group and in 22 (35%) in the non-responder group (p = 0.007). The three-year failure-free survival was 94% for responders and 68% for non-responders (median follow-up 38 months). There were no significant differences in physician-reported urinary and bowel toxicity. Patient-reported diarrhoea at end of SRT was more common among non-responders.

Conclusion

This new personalised treatment concept with intensified SRT based on PSA response demonstrated a high tumour control rate in both responders and non-responders. These results suggest a clinically significant effect with moderate side effects in a patient group with otherwise poor prognosis. PSMA-PET added limited value. The treatment approach is now being evaluated in a phase III trial.Clinical trial registration numbers: NCT02699424&ISRCTN45905321.

ACR-ABS-ASTRO Practice Parameter for Transperineal Permanent Brachytherapy of Prostate Cancer

AIM/OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND

The American College of Radiology (ACR), American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) have jointly developed the following practice parameter for transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer. Transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer is the interstitial implantation of low-dose rate radioactive seeds into the prostate gland for the purpose of treating localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

This practice parameter was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters-Radiation Oncology of the Commission on Radiation Oncology, in collaboration with ABS and ASTRO.

RESULTS

This practice parameter provides a framework for the appropriate use of low-dose rate brachytherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer either as monotherapy or as part of a treatment regimen combined with external-beam radiation therapy. The practice parameter defines the qualifications and responsibilities of all involved radiation oncology personnel, including the radiation oncologist, medical physicist, dosimetrist, radiation therapist, and nursing staff. Patient selection criteria and the utilization of supplemental therapies such as external-beam radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy are discussed. The logistics of the implant procedure, postimplant dosimetry assessment, and best practices with regard to safety and quality control are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to established standards can help to ensure that permanent prostate brachytherapy is delivered in a safe and efficacious manner.

Survival Outcomes in Men with Unfavorable Intermediate-Risk and High-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated with Prostate-Only versus Whole Pelvic Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

Men with unfavorable intermediate-risk (UIR-PCa) or high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa) are often treated with definitive external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus androgen deprivation therapy. Treatment is frequently intensified by electively treating the pelvic lymph nodes (LNs) with whole pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT), but practice patterns and the benefits of WPRT are not well defined. We hypothesized that men treated with WPRT would have improved overall survival (OS) relative to men treated with prostate-only radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

National Cancer Database records of men diagnosed between 2008-2015 with UIR-PCa or HR-PCa and treated with prostate EBRT±androgen deprivation therapy (72-86.4 Gy) with (15,175) or without (13,549) WPRT were reviewed. Risk of LN involvement was calculated using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram. Measured confounders were balanced with inverse probability of treatment weighting and OS hazard ratios (HRs) were generated using multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

Of the men, 53% received WPRT. Every 1% increase in risk of LN involvement correlated with a 1% increase in risk of death (p <0.001). WPRT trended toward improved OS in all men with UIR-PCa and HR-PCa (HR: 0.95 [95% CI: 0.90-1.006], p=0.055). WPRT correlated with improved OS in men with Gleason 9 and 10 disease (HR: 0.87 [0.78-0.98], p=0.02) or risk of LN involvement ≥10% (HR: 0.93 [0.87-0.99], p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Men with higher LN risk scores and Gleason grade benefited from WPRT. These results complement the recent POP-RT randomized trial in mostly positron emission tomography/computerized tomography-staged patients, demonstrating that a more heterogeneous population of men staged without functional imaging benefits from WPRT.

Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of the efficacy of enzalutamide versus apalutamide for the treatment of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

To date, the efficacy of the androgen receptor inhibitors enzalutamide and apalutamide for the treatment of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) has not been compared directly in a clinical trial setting. Indirect comparisons can be used to assess relative efficacy and provide important information to guide treatment decisions. PROSPER and SPARTAN were double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trials in patients with nmCRPC with overall similar study designs and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Using an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison, based on the final data from the PROSPER and SPARTAN studies, we assessed the comparative efficacy of enzalutamide and apalutamide, both plus androgen deprivation therapy.

METHODS

Using placebo as the common comparator, individual patient data from PROSPER were matched to the aggregate patient data from SPARTAN and efficacy endpoints from PROSPER were re-weighted accordingly. Patient baseline characteristics and endpoints were clinically and statistically tested to identify potential effect modifiers, according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Hazard ratios for overall survival (OS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and time to chemotherapy (TTCx) were re-estimated for PROSPER using weighted Cox proportional hazards models and indirectly compared with those of SPARTAN using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Estimated hazard ratios [95% credible interval (CrI)] for enzalutamide versus apalutamide were 0.80 (95% CrI 0.58-1.10) for OS, 0.94 (95% CrI 0.69-1.29) for MFS2, and 0.90 (95% CrI 0.63-1.29) for TTCx. Similar results were seen for sensitivity analyses conducted for OS and MFS. Bayesian probability analyses showed a 91.7% favoring enzalutamide for OS, 65.1% for MFS, and 71.4% for TTCx.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this matching-adjusted indirect comparison of final data from PROSPER and SPARTAN indicate comparable efficacy of enzalutamide and apalutamide with potentially a greater probability of longer MFS, OS, and TTCx in patients with nmCRPC treated with enzalutamide versus apalutamide.

Two-year profile of the records of patients referred to Adana city hospital urology clinic due to PSA high in primary care: a retrospective review

Objective: To retrospectively evaluate the two-year records of patients referred to Adana City Training and Research Hospital by family physicians because of high prostate specific antigen (PSA), and to reveal the profile and related outcomes for clinical practices of family physicians about prostate cancer screening. Material and Method: The files of 102 patients, who were referred to our clinic by their family physicians due to high PSA between April 2019 and May 2021, were retrospectively evaluated. Demographic data of patients, presence of additional disease, family history, control serum PSA value examined in family medicine centers and in our hospital at time of first admission, complete urinalysis (TIT), ultrasonography (USG) and multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMR) findings, transrectal ultrasonographic biopsy (TRUS-BX) results and biopsy were noted. The treatments administered according to the results (radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, chemotherapy) were recorded. Results: The mean age of the patients was 52.8±8.9 years. The PSA value of the patients at time of admission was 8.0±3.8 ng/ml. The mean PSA values measured at the time of admission to primary care and at the time of admission to Adana clinic after referral were 8.0±3.8 ng/ml and 8.0±3.0 ng/ml, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between these values (p=0.2). Among all the patients presenting with elevated PSA, 36 (35%) patients underwent TRUS Bx, had prostate cancer as a result of pathology and underwent radical prostatectomy, which was the most common definitive treatment method with statistical significance (p

Non-organ confined stage and upgrading rates in exclusive PSA high-risk prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The pathological stage of prostate cancer with high-risk prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, but otherwise favorable and/or intermediate risk characteristics (clinical T-stage, Gleason Grade group at biopsy [B-GGG]) is unknown. We hypothesized that a considerable proportion of such patients will exhibit clinically meaningful GGG upgrading or non-organ confined (NOC) stage at radical prostatectomy (RP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2010-2015) we identified RP-patients with cT1c-stage and B-GGG1, B-GGG2, or B-GGG3 and PSA 20-50 ng/ml. Rates of GGG4 or GGG5 and/or rates of NOC stage (≥ pT3 and/or pN1) were analyzed. Subsequently, separate univariable and multivariable logistic regression models tested for predictors of NOC stage and upgrading at RP.

RESULTS

Of 486 assessable patients, 134 (28%) exhibited B-GGG1, 209 (43%) B-GGG2, and 143 (29%) B-GGG3, respectively. The overall upgrading and NOC rates were 11% and 51% for a combined rate of upgrading and/or NOC stage of 53%. In multivariable logistic regression models predicting upgrading, only B-GGG3 was an independent predictor (odds ratio [OR]: 5.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.21-14.19; p < 0.001). Conversely, 33%-66% (OR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.42-3.95; p = 0.001) and >66% of positive biopsy cores (OR: 4.85; 95% CI: 2.84-8.42; p < 0.001), as well as B-GGG2 and B-GGG3 were independent predictors for NOC stage (all p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In cT1c-stage patients with high-risk PSA baseline, but low- to intermediate risk B-GGG, the rate of upgrading to GGG4 or GGG5 is low (11%). However, NOC stage is found in the majority (51%) and can be independently predicted with percentage of positive cores at biopsy and B-GGG.

Androgen Receptor Gene Pathway Upregulation and Radiation Resistance in Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is currently used as a salvage intervention for men with oligometastatic prostate cancer (PC), and increasingly so since the results of the Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for the Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Cancers (SABR-COMET) trial reported a significant improvement in overall survival with SABR. The addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to localised prostate radiotherapy improves survival as it sensitises PC to radiotherapy-induced cell death. The importance of the androgen receptor (AR) gene pathway in the development of resistance to radiotherapy is well established. In this review paper, we will examine the data to determine how we can overcome the upregulation of the AR pathway and suggest a strategy for improving outcomes in men with oligometastatic hormone-sensitive PC.

"Meta-analysis of elective pelvic nodal irradiation using moderate hypofractionation for high-risk prostate cancer" (MENHYP-ENI)

OBJECTIVES

Despite several advances in planning and delivery of radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer, the role of elective pelvic nodal irradiation (EPNI) remains controversial for high-risk disease. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of patients treated with moderate hypofractionated RT (MHF-RT) with EPNI using modern radiotherapy techniques.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified on Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and proceedings of annual meetings through October 2021. We followed the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A meta-regression analysis was performed to assess a possible correlation between selected variables and outcomes. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with a total of 1745 patients, median follow-up 61 months, treated with EPNI employing MHF-RT were included. The biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) at 5-, 7- and 10-year was 90% (95% CI 88-94%), 83% (95%CI 78-91%) and 78% (95%CI 68-88%). The 5-year prostate cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, distant metastases-free survival and overall survival were 98% (95%CI 97-99%), 88.7% (95%CI 85-93%), 91.2% (95%CI 88-92%), and 93% (95%CI 90-96%), respectively. The rates of local, pelvic, and distant recurrence were 0.38% (95%CI 0-2%), 0.13% (95%CI 0-1.5%), and 7.35% (95%CI 2-12%), respectively. The rate of late GI and GU toxicity grade ≥ 2 were 6.7% (95%CI 4-9%), and 11.3% (95%CI 7.6-15%), with heterogeneity, but with rare cases of toxicity grade 3-5.

CONCLUSION

EPNI with concomitant MHF-RT provides satisfactory bRFS in the long-term follow-up, with low rates of GU and GI severe toxicities and minimal pelvic and local failure.

Androgen Flare after LHRH Initiation Is the Side Effect That Makes Most of the Beneficial Effect When It Coincides with Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer tumor growth is stimulated by androgens. Surgical castration or medical castration using long-acting luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists or antagonists is the backbone of the treatments of metastatic disease. Treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer was accomplished with radiation therapy alone until multiple studies showed that combining radiation therapy with LHRH agonists results in significant survival benefit. While the goal of the use of LHRH agonists was to suppress testosterone levels during radiation, we show, through review of previous studies, that survival benefit was achieved only when LHRH was initiated during the course of radiation, and thus androgen flare during the first 1–3 weeks after the initiation of LHRH is most likely the reason for higher survival. Androgens drive tumor cells into mitosis, and mitotic death is the dominant mechanism of tumor cell kill by radiation.

Abstract

Treatment of metastatic prostate cancer was historically performed via bilateral orchiectomy to achieve castration. An alternative to surgical castration is the administration of subcutaneous recombinant luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH). LHRH causes the pituitary gland to produce luteinizing hormone (LH), which results in synthesis and secretion of testosterone from the testicles. When LHRH levels are continuously high, the pituitary gland stops producing LH, which results in reduced testosterone production by the testicles. Long-acting formulations of LHRH were developed, and its use replaced surgical orchiectomy in the vast majority of patients. Combining LHRH and radiation therapy was shown to increase survival of prostate cancer patients with locally advanced disease. Here, we present a hypothesis, and preliminary evidence based on previous randomized controlled trials, that androgen surge during radiation, rather than its suppression, could be responsible for the enhanced prostate cancer cell kill during radiation. Starting LHRH agonist on the first day of radiation therapy, as in the EORTC 22863 study, should be the standard of care when treating locally advanced prostate cancer. We are developing formulations of short-acting LHRH agonists that induce androgen flare, without subsequent androgen deprivation, which could open the door for an era in which locally advanced prostate cancer could be cured while patients maintain potency.

Effects of Whole Pelvic Radiotherapy on the Distribution of Lymphocyte Subpopulations in Prostate Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

In the current study, we have investigated the effects of the different modalities of treatment (volume of radiotherapy [RT], previous surgery) as well as the Gleason score of prostate cancer (PC) on the lymphocyte composition of PC patients undergoing RT.

METHODS

This is a monoinstitutional study that prospectively included PC patients that underwent RT from January 2016 until December 2017. To compare the different evaluations, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used among 2 times (Timepoint 0 to Timepoint 1). Percentage variation was calculated for all the lymphocyte subpopulation and was correlated with clinical parameters (previous surgery, Gleason score, and pelvic irradiation) with the χ2 test. The statistical analysis was repeated also on the stratified dataset according to the above parameters (previous surgery, Gleason score, and whole pelvic radiotherapy [WPRT]).

RESULTS

One hundred and eleven patients were included in the present analysis. All the lymphocyte subpopulations resulted significantly lower after RT. The modifications of several lymphocyte subpopulations correlated with previous surgery, Gleason score, and WPRT, although stratified analysis demonstrated that WPRT showed the greatest correlation.

CONCLUSION

Our results could be used to design a prospective trial in order to study the use of WPRT on the lymphocyte subpopulations.

Association between pelvic nodal radiotherapy and patient-reported functional outcomes through 5 years among men undergoing external-beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: An assessment of the comparative effectiveness analysis of surgery and radiation (CEASAR) cohort

BACKGROUND

The role of pelvic irradiation in men receiving external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer is unclear, in part due to a lack of data on patient-reported outcomes. We sought to compare functional outcomes for men receiving prostate and pelvic versus prostate-only radiotherapy, longitudinally over 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a population-based, prospective cohort study of men with clinically-localized prostate cancer undergoing EBRT. We examined the effect of prostate and pelvic (n = 102) versus prostate-only (n = 485) radiotherapy on patient-reported disease-specific (using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite[EPIC]-26) and general health-related (using the SF-36) function, over 5 years. Regression models were adjusted for outcome-specific baseline function, clinicopathologic characteristics, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

RESULTS

587 men (median [quartiles] age 69 [64-73] years) met inclusion criteria and completed ≥1 post-treatment survey. More men treated with prostate and pelvic radiotherapy had high-risk disease (58% vs. 18%, P < 0.01) and received ADT (75% vs. 41%, P < 0.01). These men reported worse sexual (6 months-5 years), hormonal (at 6 months), and physical (6 months-5 years) function. Accounting for baseline function, patient and tumor characteristics, and use of ADT, pelvic irradiation was not associated with statistically or clinically significant differences in bowel function, urinary incontinence, irritative voiding symptoms or sexual function through 5-years (all P > 0.05). Marginally clinically important differences were noted in hormonal function at 3-years (adjusted mean difference 4.7, 95% confidence interval [1.2-8.3]; minimally clinically important difference (MCID) 4 to 6) and 5-years (4.2, [0.4-8.0]) following treatment. After adjustment, there was a transient statistically significant, but not clinically important, difference in emotional well-being at 6 months (3.0, [0.19-5.8]; MCID 6) that resolved by 1 year and no differences in physical functioning or energy and fatigue.

CONCLUSION

This prospective, population-based cohort study of men with localized prostate cancer treated with EBRT, showed no clinically important differences in disease-specific or general health-related quality of life with the addition of pelvic irradiation to prostate radiotherapy, supporting the use of pelvic radiotherapy when it may be of clinical benefit, such as men with increased risk of nodal involvement.

Dose-escalated pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer in definitive or postoperative setting

PURPOSE

Given the absence of standardized planning approach for clinically node-positive (cN1) prostate cancer (PCa), we collected data about the use of prophylactic pelvic irradiation and nodal boost. The aim of the present series is to retrospectively assess clinical outcomes after this approach to compare different multimodal treatment strategies in this scenario.

METHODS

Data from clinical records of patients affected by cN1 PCa and treated in six different Italian institutes with prophylactic pelvic irradiation and boost on pathologic pelvic lymph nodes detected with CT, MRI or choline PET/CT were retrospectively reviewed and collected. Clinical outcomes in terms of overall survival (OS) and biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS) were explored. The correlation between outcomes and baseline features (International Society of Urological Pathology-ISUP pattern, total dose to positive pelvic nodes ≤ / > 60 Gy, sequential or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) administration and definitive vs postoperative treatment) was explored.

RESULTS

ISUP pattern < 2 was a significant predictor of improved b-RFS (HR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.1220-0.7647, P = 0.0113), while total dose < 60 Gy to positive pelvic nodes was associated with worse b-RFS (HR = 3.59, 95% CI 1.3245-9.741, P = 0.01). Conversely, treatment setting (postoperative vs definitive) and treatment delivery technique (SIB vs sequential boost) were not associated with significant differences in terms of b-RFS (HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.338-2.169, P = 0.743, and HR = 2.39, 95% CI 0.93-6.111, P = 0.067, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Results from the current analysis are in keeping with data from literature showing that pelvic irradiation and boost on positive nodes are effective approaches. Upfront surgical approach was not associated with better clinical outcomes.

Up- and downgrading in single intermediate-risk positive biopsy core prostate cancer

Background

Up- and/or downgrading rates in single intermediate-risk positive biopsy core are unknown.

Methods

We identified single intermediate-risk (Gleason grade group (GGG) 2/GGG3) positive biopsy core prostate cancer patients (≤ cT2c and PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL) within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2010–2015). Subsequently, separate uni- and multivariable logistic regression models tested for independent predictors of up- and downgrading.

Results

Of 1,328 assessable patients with single core positive intermediate-risk prostate cancer at biopsy, 972 (73%) harbored GGG2 versus 356 (27%) harbored GGG3. Median PSA (5.5 vs 5.7; p = 0.3), median age (62 vs 63 years; p = 0.07) and cT1-stage (77 vs 75%; p = 0.3) did not differ between GGG2 and GGG3 patients. Of individuals with single GGG2 positive biopsy core, 191 (20%) showed downgrading to GGG1 versus 35 (4%) upgrading to GGG4 or GGG5 at RP. Of individuals with single GGG3 positive biopsy core, 36 (10%) showed downgrading to GGG1 versus 42 (12%) significant upgrading to GGG4 or GGG5 at RP. In multivariable logistic regression models, elevated PSA (10–20 ng/mL) was an independent predictor of upgrading to GGG4/GGG5 in single GGG3 positive biopsy core patients (OR:2.89; 95%-CI: 1.31–6.11; p = 0.007).

Conclusion

In single GGG2 positive biopsy core patients, downgrading was four times more often recorded compared to upgrading. Conversely, in single GGG3 positive biopsy core patients, up- and downgrading rates were comparable and should be expected in one out of ten patients.

Mixed-Beam Approach for High-Risk Prostate Cancer Carbon-Ion Boost Followed by Photon Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy: Preliminary Results of Phase II Trial AIRC-IG-14300

Purpose

This study represents a descriptive analysis of preliminary results of a Phase II trial on a novel mixed beam radiotherapy (RT) approach, consisting of carbon ions RT (CIRT) followed by intensity-modulated photon RT, in combination with hormonal therapy, for high-risk prostate cancer (HR PCa) with a special focus on acute toxicity.

Methods

Primary endpoint was the evaluation of safety in terms of acute toxicity. Secondary endpoints were early and long-term tolerability of treatment, quality of life (QoL), and efficacy. Data on acute and late toxicities were collected according to RTOG/EORTC. QoL of enrolled patients was assessed by IPSS, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-PR25, and sexual activity by IIEF-5.

Results

Twenty-six patients were enrolled in the study, but only 15 completed so far the RT course and were included. Immediately after CIRT, no patients experienced GI/GU toxicity. At 1 and 3 months from the whole course RT completion, no GI/GU toxicities greater than grade 2 were observed. QoL scores were overall satisfactory.

Conclusions

The feasibility of the proposed mixed treatment schedule was assessed, and an excellent acute toxicity profile was recorded. Such findings instil confidence in the continuation of this mixed approach, with evaluation of long-term tolerability and efficacy.

The Impact of Pelvic Nodal Radiotherapy on Hematologic Toxicity: A Systematic Review with Focus on Leukopenia, Lymphopenia and Future Perspectives in Prostate Cancer Treatment

INTRODUCTION

Hematologic toxicity (HT), particularly leukopenia, is a common side-effect of oncologic treatments for pelvic malignancies. Pelvic nodal radiotherapy (PNRT) has been associated with HT development mainly through incidental bone marrow (BM) irradiation; however, several questions remain about the clinical impact of radiotherapy-related HT. Herein, we perform a systematic review of the available evidence on PNRT and HT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive systematic literature search was performed through EMBASE. Hand searching and clinicaltrials.gov were also used.

RESULTS

While BM-related dose-volume parameters and BM-sparing techniques have been more thoroughly investigated in pelvic malignancies such as cervical, anal, and rectal cancers, the importance of BM as an organ-at-risk has received less attention in prostate cancer treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We examined the available evidence regarding the impact of PNRT on HT, with a focus on prostate cancer treatment. We suggest that BM should be regarded as an organ-at-risk for patients undergoing PNRT.

Ten Year Results of Extensive Nodal Radiotherapy and Moderately Hypofractionated Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Unfavorable Intermediate-, High-, and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

Several phase III randomized trials of moderate hypofractionation, including a higher proportion of high-risk prostate cancer patients treated only to the prostate, failed to demonstrate the superiority of hypofractionated regimens. There is only one randomized phase III trial, of moderately hypofractionated high-dose radiotherapy to the prostate-only versus pelvic irradiation and prostate boost, with a sufficiently long follow-up. It demonstrated better biochemical and disease-free survival when lymph nodal radiotherapy was added. Here we present the 10-year results of our experience based on an Institutional protocol adopted after a phase I–II study, on patients with unfavorable intermediate- (UIR), high- (HR), and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (PCa) treated with pelvic lymph nodal irradiation (WPRT) and moderately hypofractionated high-dose (HD) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the prostate. Prognostic factors for relapse, as well as acute and late gastro-intestinal (GI) and genito-urinary (GU) toxicity were also analyzed.

Abstract

Aims: To report 10-year outcomes of WPRT and HD moderately hypofractionated SIB to the prostate in UIR, HR, and VHR PCa. Methods: From 11/2005 to 12/2015, 224 UIR, HR, and VHR PCa patients underwent WPRT at 51.8 Gy/28 fractions and SIB at 74.2 Gy (EQD2 88 Gy) to the prostate. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was prescribed in up to 86.2% of patients. Results: Median follow-up was 96.3 months (IQR: 71–124.7). Median age was 75 years (IQR: 71.3–78.1). At last follow up, G3 GI–GU toxicity was 3.1% and 8%, respectively. Ten-year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) was 79.8% (95% CI: 72.3–88.1%), disease-free survival (DFS) 87.8% (95% CI: 81.7–94.3%), overall survival (OS) 65.7% (95% CI: 58.2–74.1%), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) 94.9% (95% CI: 91.0–99.0%). Only two patients presented local relapse. At univariate analysis, VHR vs. UIR was found to be a significant risk factor for biochemical relapse (HR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.17–6.67, p = 0.021). After model selection, only Gleason Score ≥ 8 emerged as a significant factor for biochemical relapse (HR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.12–4.9, p = 0.023). Previous TURP (HR = 3.5, 95% CI: 1.62–7.54, p = 0.001) and acute toxicity ≥ G2 (HR = 3.1, 95% CI = 1.45–6.52, p = 0.003) were significant risk factors for GU toxicity ≥ G3. Hypertension was a significant factor for GI toxicity ≥ G3 (HR = 3.63, 95% CI: 1.06–12.46, p = 0.041). ADT (HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.12–0.8, p = 0.015) and iPsa (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16–0.83, p = 0.0164) played a protective role. Conclusions: WPRT and HD SIB to the prostate combined with long-term ADT, in HR PCa, determine good outcomes with acceptable toxicity.

Therapeutic Sequences in the Treatment of High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Paving the Way Towards Multimodal Tailored Approaches

Various definitions are currently in use to describe high-risk prostate cancer. This variety in definitions is important for patient counseling, since predicted outcomes depend on which classification is applied to identify patient’s prostate cancer risk category. Historically, strategies for the treatment of localized high-risk prostate cancer comprise local approaches such as surgery and radiotherapy, as well as systemic approaches such as hormonal therapy. Nevertheless, since high-risk prostate cancer patients remain the group with higher-risk of treatment failure and mortality rates, nowadays, novel treatment strategies, comprising hypofractionated-radiotherapy, second-generation antiandrogens, and hadrontherapy, are being explored in order to improve their long-term oncological outcomes. This narrative review aims to report the current management of high-risk prostate cancer and to explore the future perspectives in this clinical setting.

Effective Organs-at-Risk Dose Sparing in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Using a Half-Beam Technique in Whole Pelvic Irradiation

BACKGROUND

Although there are some controversies regarding whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) due to its gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities, it is considered for patients with gynecological, rectal, and prostate cancer. To effectively spare organs-at-risk (OAR) doses using multi-leaf collimator (MLC)'s optimal segments, potential dosimetric benefits in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using a half-beam technique (HF) were investigated for WPRT.

METHODS

While the size of a fully opened field (FF) was decided to entirely include a planning target volume in all beam's eye view across arc angles, the HF was designed to use half the FF from the isocenter for dose optimization. The left or the right half of the FF was alternatively opened in VMAT-HF using a pair of arcs rotating clockwise and counterclockwise. Dosimetric benefits of VMAT-HF, presented with dose conformity, homogeneity, and dose-volume parameters in terms of modulation complex score, were compared to VMAT optimized using the FF (VMAT-FF). Consequent normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) by reducing the irradiated volumes was evaluated as well as dose-volume parameters with statistical analysis for OAR. Moreover, beam-on time and MLC position precision were analyzed with log files to assess plan deliverability and clinical applicability of VMAT-HF as compared to VMAT-FF.

RESULTS

While VMAT-HF used 60%-70% less intensity modulation complexity than VMAT-FF, it showed superior dose conformity. The small intestine and colon in VMAT-HF showed a noticeable reduction in the irradiated volumes of up to 35% and 15%, respectively, at an intermediate dose of 20-45 Gy. The small intestine showed statistically significant dose sparing at the volumes that received a dose from 15 to 45 Gy. Such a dose reduction for the small intestine and colon in VMAT-HF presented a significant NTCP reduction from that in VMAT-FF. Without sacrificing the beam delivery efficiency, VMAT-HF achieved effective OAR dose reduction in dose-volume histograms.

CONCLUSIONS

VMAT-HF led to deliver conformal doses with effective gastrointestinal-OAR dose sparing despite using less modulation complexity. The dose of VMAT-HF was delivered with the same beam-on time with VMAT-FF but precise MLC leaf motions. The VMAT-HF potentially can play a valuable role in reducing OAR toxicities associated with WPRT.

Risk Factors of Biochemical Failure in Locally Advanced Carcinoma Prostate Treated With Definitive External Beam Radiotherapy and Androgen Deprivation Therapy: Experience From Tertiary Care Center in North India

Background Locally advanced prostate cancer (LACAP), despite external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) along with antiandrogen therapy (ADT) has risk of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression. Furthermore, number of studies have emphasized on different prognostic factors. The purpose of our study is to analyze risk factors for biochemical failure (BF) in these patients treated at our institute. Methods Our study is a single-institution retrospective observational done at a tertiary care center in North India. Between January 2018 and December 2020, we retrospectively identified 34 patients managed at our institute as per multidisciplinary board (MBD). Demographic, clinical, radiological, pathological and treatment-related parameters were assessed as potential risk factors. End-point of the study was to find significant risk factors for BF. Statistical analysis was done on SPSS, version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results All eligible patients received EBRT with ADT as per institution policy. Mean follow-up period was 20 months during which two (5.9%) patients had BF at a mean of 30 months after EBRT. Four-year PSA-progression-free survival rate was 73%. On univariate analysis, prognostic factors associated with high risk of BF were Gleason score and clinical T stage. Conclusion In summary, prognostic factors for high risk of BF leading to clinical progression are Gleason score 9 or 10 and clinical T3b stage.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Clinically Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: A Single-Institutional Retrospective Study

Simple Summary

Recently, it has been shown that radiation therapy (RT) together with androgen-depletion therapy (ADT) might be more beneficial compared with ADT alone for clinically node-positive (cN1) prostate cancer. However, there are a limited number of studies that have addressed specific RT techniques and analyzed their clinical results. The present study was a retrospective analysis of cN1 prostate cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT), in addition to ADT, in our hospital. The present study suggests that ADT plus SIB-IMRT for cN1 prostate cancer treatment was safe and effective, was well tolerated, and had acceptable rates of late toxicity. Further prospective multicenter studies would be required to confirm the robustness of the present results.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes and the toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT) combined with androgen-deprivation therapy for clinically node-positive (cN1) prostate cancer. We retrospectively analyzed 97 patients with cN1 prostate cancer who received SIB-IMRT between June 2008 and October 2017 at our hospital. The prescribed dosages delivered to the prostate and seminal vesicle, elective node area, and residual lymph nodes were 69, 54, and 60 Gy in 30 fractions, respectively. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to determine 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS). Toxicity was evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ver. 4.0. Over a median follow-up duration of 60 months, the 5-year bRFS, RFS, OS, and PCSS were 85.1%, 88.1%, 92.7% and 95.0%, respectively. Acute Grade 2 genito-urinary (GU) and gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicities were observed in 10.2% and 2.1%, respectively, with no grade ≥3 toxicities being detected. The cumulative incidence rates of 5-year Grade ≥2 late GU and GI toxicities were 4.7% and 7.4%, respectively, with no Grade 4 toxicities being detected. SIB-IMRT for cN1 prostate cancer demonstrated favorable 5-year outcomes with low incidences of toxicity.

Feasibility and Outcome of PSMA-PET-Based Dose-Escalated Salvage Radiotherapy Versus Conventional Salvage Radiotherapy for Patients With Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Introduction

Prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography-(PSMA-PET) imaging facilitates dose-escalated salvage radiotherapy (DE-SRT) with simultaneous-integrated boost (SIB) for PET-positive lesions in patients with prostate cancer (PC). Therefore, we aimed to compare toxicity rates of DE-SRT with SIB to conventional SRT (C-SRT) without SIB and to report outcome.

Materials and Methods

We evaluated 199 patients who were treated with SRT between June 2014 and June 2020. 101 patients received DE-SRT with SIB for PET-positive local recurrence and/or PET-positive lymph nodes. 98 patients were treated with C-SRT to the prostate bed +/− elective pelvic lymphatic pathways without SIB. All patients received PSMA-PET imaging prior to DE-SRT ([68Ga]PSMA-11: 45.5%; [18F]-labeled PSMA: 54.5%). Toxicity rates for early (<6 months) and late (>6 months) gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities rectal bleeding, proctitis, stool incontinence, and genitourinary (GU) toxicities hematuria, cystitis, urine incontinence, urinary obstruction, and erectile dysfunction were assessed. Further, we analyzed the outcome with disease-free survival (DFS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response.

Results

The overall toxicity rates for early GI (C-SRT: 2.1%, DE-SRT: 1.0%) and late GI (C-SRT: 1.4%, DE-SRT: 5.3%) toxicities ≥ grade 2 were similar. Early GU (C-SRT: 2.1%, DE-SRT: 3.0%) and late GU (C-SRT: 11.0%, DE-SRT: 14.7%) toxicities ≥ grade 2 were comparable, as well. Early and late toxicity rates did not differ significantly between DE-SRT versus C-SRT in all subcategories (p>0.05). PSA response (PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml) in the overall group of patients with DE-SRT was 75.0% and 86.4% at first and last follow-up, respectively.

Conclusion

DE-SRT showed no significantly increased toxicity rates compared with C-SRT and thus is feasible. The outcome of DE-SRT showed good results. Therefore, DE-SRT with a PSMA-PET-based SIB can be considered for the personalized treatment in patients with recurrent PC.

Radiation treatment in prostate cancer: covering the waterfront

OBJECTIVES

To present an overview of radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer over the past decade.

METHODS

The literature on prostate cancer radiation therapy was reviewed and summarised. Radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer has dramatically evolved in the past decade, with superior techniques and exciting advances, pushing the role of the radiation oncologist to new frontiers.

RESULTS

Innovations in imaging, treatment delivery, and a deeper understanding of biology has resulted in more tailored RT for individuals. In the present review, we summarise the changing landscape and broadly discuss new developments in prostate RT.

CONCLUSIONS

Questions and challenges remain in the field, however there are multiple opportunities to further improve upon RT for our patients with prostate cancer.

Overcoming Resistance to Immunotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer Using Radiation: A Review

Radiation therapy remains at the center of head and neck cancer treatment. With improvements in treatment delivery, radiation therapy has become an affective ablative modality for head and neck cancers. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are now also playing a more active role both in the locally advanced and metastatic setting. With improved systemic options, local noninvasive modalities including radiation therapy are playing a critical role in overcoming resistance in head and neck cancer. The aim of this review is to describe the role of radiation therapy in modulating the tumor microenvironment and how radiation dose, fractionation and treatment field can impact the immune system and potentially effect outcomes when combined with immunotherapy. The review will encompass several common scenarios where radiation is used to improve outcomes and overcome potential resistance that may develop with immunotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), including upfront locally advanced disease receiving definitive radiation and recurrent disease undergoing re-irradiation. Lastly, we will review the potential toxicities of combined therapy and future directions of their role in the management of HNSCC.

Prostate-Only Versus Whole-Pelvic Radiation Therapy in High-Risk and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer (POP-RT): Outcomes From Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

We report the clinical outcomes of a randomized trial comparing prophylactic whole-pelvic nodal radiotherapy to prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in high-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

This phase III, single center, randomized controlled trial enrolled eligible patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for node-negative prostate adenocarcinoma, with estimated nodal risk ≥ 20%. Randomization was 1:1 to PORT (68 Gy/25# to prostate) or whole-pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT, 68 Gy/25# to prostate, 50 Gy/25# to pelvic nodes, including common iliac) using computerized stratified block randomization, stratified by Gleason score, type of androgen deprivation, prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, and prior transurethral resection of the prostate. All patients received image-guided, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and minimum 2 years of androgen deprivation therapy. The primary end point was 5-year biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), and secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

From November 2011 to August 2017, a total of 224 patients were randomly assigned (PORT = 114, WPRT = 110). At a median follow-up of 68 months, 36 biochemical failures (PORT = 25, WPRT = 7) and 24 deaths (PORT = 13, WPRT = 11) were recorded. Five-year BFFS was 95.0% (95% CI, 88.4 to 97.9) with WPRT versus 81.2% (95% CI, 71.6 to 87.8) with PORT, with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.10 to 0.52; P < .0001). WPRT also showed higher 5-year DFS (89.5% v 77.2%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.73; P = .002), but 5-year OS did not appear to differ (92.5% v 90.8%; HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.05; P = .83). Distant metastasis-free survival was also higher with WPRT (95.9% v 89.2%; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.82; P = .01). Benefit in BFFS and DFS was maintained across prognostic subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic pelvic irradiation for high-risk, locally advanced prostate cancer improved BFFS and DFS as compared with PORT, but OS did not appear to differ.

Long-Term Outcomes of Dose-Escalated Pelvic Lymph Node Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) With a Simultaneous Hypofractionated Boost to the Prostate for Very High-Risk Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: A Prospective Phase II Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

There remains limited data as to the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of higher doses of elective radiation therapy to the pelvic lymph nodes in men with high-risk prostate cancer. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate moderate dose escalation to the pelvic lymph nodes using a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients were eligible with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the prostate, a calculated lymph node risk of at least 25%, Karnofsky performance scale ≥70, and no evidence of M1 disease. Acute and late toxicity were prospectively collected at each follow-up using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v4.0). The pelvic lymph nodes were treated to a dose of 56 Gy over 28 fractions with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate to a total dose of 70 Gy over 28 fractions using intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were prospectively enrolled from October 2010 to August 2014. Median patient age was 70 years (57-83), pretreatment prostate-specific antigen was 11.5 ng/mL (3.23-111.5), T stage was T2c (T1c-T3b), and Gleason score was 9 (6-9). CTCAE v4.0 rate of any grade 1 or 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were 55% and 44%, respectively, and there was 1 reported acute grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity, both unrelated to protocol therapy. With a median follow-up of 6.4 years, the biochemical failure free survival rate was 80.2%, and mean biochemical progression free survival was 8.3 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.2-9.4). The prostate cancer specific survival was 95.2%, and mean prostate cancer specific survival was 8.7 years (95% CI, 8.0-9.4). Five-year distant metastases free survival was 96%. Medians were not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single arm, small, prospective feasibility study, nodal radiation therapy dose escalation was safe, feasible, and seemingly well tolerated. Rates of progression free survival are highly encouraging in this population of predominately National Comprehensive Cancer Network very high-risk patients.

Management of Prostate Cancer with Systemic Therapy: A Prostate Cancer Unit Perspective

The scenario of systemic therapy for prostate cancer is rapidly evolving, with new drugs and new treatment options. To update the background knowledge of shared uro-oncologic practice, we reviewed current statements and landmarks in systemic therapy. A number of new agents are under investigation in non-metastatic and metastatic disease. Similarly, new target imaging technologies are under development to improve the detection rate of true non-metastatic and true metastatic patient. Five new drugs have shown to be effective on progression-free and overall survival in metastatìc prostate cancer. However, the optimal sequencing of these treatments requires further investigation. The tolerability and side effects of the new drugs are also crucial issues to be discussed, as well as their activity against the disease. The uro-oncologic team has to stay updated about new medical therapies in order to be confident in debating with other professionals involved in prostate cancer decision making. Different points of view and nuances should be shared during multidisciplinary group discussions to achieve a balanced decision in disease management.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy (RT) is an established, potentially curative treatment option for all risk constellations of localized prostate cancer (PCA). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and dose-escalated RT can further improve outcome in high-risk (HR) PCA. In recent years, shorter RT schedules based on hypofractionated RT have shown equal outcome. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly conformal RT technique enabling ultra-hypofractionation which has been shown to be safe and efficient in patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCA. There is a paucity of data on the role of SBRT in HR PCA. In particular, the need for pelvic elective nodal irradiation (ENI) needs to be addressed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to analyze the available data on observed toxicities, ADT prescription practice, and oncological outcome to shed more light on the value of SBRT in HR PCA.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and Embase electronic databases for the terms "prostate cancer" AND "stereotactic" AND "radiotherapy" in June 2020. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations.

RESULTS

After a rigorous selection process, we identified 18 individual studies meeting all selection criteria for further analyses. Five additional studies were included because their content was judged as relevant. Three trials have reported on prostate SBRT including pelvic nodes; 2 with ENI and 1 with positive pelvic nodes only. The remaining studies investigated SBRT of the prostate only. Grade 2+ acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity was between 12% and 46.7% in the studies investigating pelvic nodes irradiation and ranged from 0% to 89% in the prostate only studies. Grade 2+ chronic GU toxicity was between 7% and 60% vs. 2% and 56.7%. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) grade 2+ toxicity was between 0% to 4% and 0% to 18% for studies with and without pelvic nodes irradiation, respectively. Chronic GI grade 2+ toxicity rates were between 4% and 50.1% vs. 0% and 40%. SBRT of prostate and positive pelvic nodes only showed similar toxicity rates as SBRT for the prostate only. Among the trials that reported on ADT use, the majority of HR PCA patients underwent ADT for at least 2 months; mostly neoadjuvant and concurrent. Biochemical control rates ranged from 82% to 100% after 2 years and 56% to 100% after 3 years. Only a few studies reported longer follow-up data.

CONCLUSION

At this point, SBRT with or without pelvic ENI cannot be considered the standard of care in HR PCA, due to missing level 1 evidence. Treatment may be offered to selected patients at specialized centers with access to high-precision RT. While concomitant ADT is the current standard of care, the necessary duration of ADT in combination with SBRT remains unclear. Ideally, all eligible patients should be enrolled in clinical trials.

Patterns of care for prostate cancer radiotherapy-results from a survey among German-speaking radiation oncologists

Background

Emerging moderately hypofractionated and ultra-hypofractionated schemes for radiotherapy (RT) of prostate cancer (PC) have resulted in various treatment options. The aim of this survey was to evaluate recent patterns of care of German-speaking radiation oncologists for RT of PC.

Methods

We developed an online survey which we distributed via e‑mail to all registered members of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). The survey was completed by 109 participants between March 3 and April 3, 2020. For evaluation of radiation dose, we used the equivalent dose at fractionation of 2 Gy with α/β = 1.5 Gy, equivalent dose (EQD2 [1.5 Gy]).

Results

Median EQD2(1.5 Gy) for definitive RT of the prostate is 77.60 Gy (range: 64.49–84.00) with median single doses (SD) of 2.00 Gy (range: 1.80–3.00), while for postoperative RT of the prostate bed, median EQD2(1.5 Gy) is 66.00 Gy (range: 60.00–74.00) with median SD of 2.00 Gy (range: 1.80–2.00). For definitive RT, the pelvic lymph nodes (LNs) are treated in case of suspect findings in imaging (82.6%) and/or according to risk formulas/tables (78.0%). In the postoperative setting, 78.9% use imaging and 78.0% use the postoperative tumor stage for LN irradiation. In the definitive and postoperative situation, LNs are irradiated with a median EQD2(1.5 Gy) of 47.52 Gy with a range of 42.43–66.00 and 41.76–62.79, respectively.

Conclusion

German-speaking radiation oncologists’ patterns of care for patients with PC are mainly in line with the published data and treatment recommendation guidelines. However, dose prescription is highly heterogenous for RT of the prostate/prostate bed, while the dose to the pelvic LNs is mainly consistent.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00066-020-01738-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Association between incidental dose outside the prostate and tumor control after modern image-guided radiotherapy

Background and purpose

External beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer deposits incidental dose to a region surrounding the target volume. Previously, an association was identified between tumor control and incidental dose for patients treated with conventional radiotherapy. We investigated whether such an association exists for patients treated using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and tighter margins.

Materials and methods

Computed tomography scans and three-dimensional treatment planning dose distributions were available from the Dutch randomized HYPRO trial for 397 patients in the standard fractionation arm (39 × 2 Gy) and 407 patients in the hypofractionation arm (19 × 3.4 Gy), mainly delivered using online image-guided IMRT. Endpoint was any treatment failure within 5 years. A mapping of 3D dose distributions between anatomies was performed based on distance to the surface of the prostate delineation. Mean mapped dose distributions were computed for patient groups with and without failure, obtaining dose difference distributions. Random patient permutations were performed to derive p values and to identify relevant regions.

Results

For high-risk patients treated in the conventional arm, higher incidental dose was significantly associated with a higher probability of tumor control in both univariate and multivariate analysis. The locations of the excess dose mainly overlapped with the position of obturator internus muscles at about 2.5 cm from the prostate surface. No such relationship could be established for intermediate-risk patients.

Conclusions

An association was established between reduced treatment failure and the delivery of incidental dose outside the prostate for high-risk patients treated using conventionally fractionated IMRT.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2020 version of 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 Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2016 and 2020. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. Risk-adapted screening should be offered to men at increased risk from the age of 45 yr and to breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers, who have been confirmed to be at risk of early and aggressive disease (mainly BRAC2), from around 40 yr of age. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is performed, a combination of targeted and systematic biopsies must be offered. There is currently no place for the routine use of tissue-based biomarkers. Whilst prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography is the most sensitive staging procedure, the lack of outcome benefit remains a major limitation. Active surveillance (AS) should always be discussed with low-risk patients, as well as with selected intermediate-risk patients with favourable International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the AS journey and the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A strong recommendation to consider moderate hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term hormonal treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. The 2020 EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for their use in clinical practice. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Updated prostate cancer guidelines are presented, addressing screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. These guidelines rely on the available scientific evidence, and new insights will need to be considered and included on a regular basis. In some cases, the supporting evidence for new treatment options is not yet strong enough to provide a recommendation, which is why continuous updating is important. Patients must be fully informed of all relevant options and, together with their treating physicians, decide on the most optimal management for them.

Patterns of practice of androgen deprivation therapy combined to radiotherapy in favorable and unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer. Results of The PROACT Survey from the French GETUG Radiation Oncology group

PURPOSE

The intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) group is heterogeneous in terms of prognosis. For unfavorable or favorable IR PCa treated by radiotherapy, the optimal strategy remains to be defined. In routine practice, the physician's decision to propose hormonal therapy (HT) is controversial. The PROACT survey aimed to evaluate pattern and preferences of daily practice in France in this IR population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A web questionnaire was distributed to French radiotherapy members of 91 centers of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Uro-Genitales (GETUG). The questionnaire included four sections concerning: (i) the specialists who prescribe treatments and multidisciplinary decisions (MTD) validation; (ii) the definition of IR subsets of patients; (iii) radiotherapy parameters; (iv) the pattern of practice regarding cardiovascular (CV) and (iv) metabolic evaluation. A descriptive presentation of the results was used.

RESULTS

Among the 82 responses (90% of the centers), HT schedules and irradiation techniques were validated by specific board meetings in 54% and 45% of the centers, respectively. Three-fourths (76%) of the centers identified a subset of IR patients for a dedicated strategy. The majority of centers consider PSA>15 (77%) and/or Gleason 7 (4+3) (87%) for an unfavorable IR definition. Overall, 41% of the centers performed systematically a CV evaluation before HT prescription while 61% consider only CV history/status in defining the type of HT. LHRH agonists are more frequently prescribed in both favorable (70%) and unfavorable (98%) IR patients. Finally, weight (80%), metabolic profile (70%) and CV status (77%) of patients are considered for follow-up under HT.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first survey on HT practice in IR PCa. The PROACT survey indicates that three-quarters of the respondents identify subsets of IR-patients in tailoring therapy. The CV status of the patient is considered in guiding the HT decision, its duration and type of drug.

Clinical Implementation of Knowledge-Based Automatic Plan Optimization for Helical Tomotherapy

PURPOSE

To implement knowledge-based (KB) automatic planning for helical TomoTherapy (HTT). The focus of the first clinical implementation was the case of high-risk prostate cancer, including pelvic node irradiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred two HTT clinical plans were selected to train a KB model using the RapidPlan tool incorporated in the Eclipse system (v13.6, Varian Inc). The individually optimized KB-based templates were converted into HTT-like templates and sent automatically to the HTT treatment planning system through scripting. The full dose calculation was set after 300 iterations without any additional planner intervention. Internal (20 patients in the training cohort) and external (28 new patients) validation were performed to assess the performance of the model: Automatic HTT plans (KB-TP) were compared against the original plans (TP) in terms of organs at risk and planning target volume (PTV) dose-volume parameters and by blinded clinical evaluation of 3 expert clinicians.

RESULTS

KB-TP plans were generally better than or equivalent to TP plans in both validation cohorts. A significant improvement in PTVs and rectum-PTV overlap dosimetry parameters were observed for both sets. Organ-at-risk sparing for KB-TP was slightly improved, which was more evident in the external validation group and for bladder and bowel. Clinical evaluation reported KB-TP to be better in 60% of cases and worse in 10% compared with TP (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The fully KB-based automatic planning workflow was successfully implemented for HTT planning optimization in the case of high-risk patients with prostate cancer.