Secondary Malignancies From Prostate Cancer Radiation Treatment: A Risk Analysis of the Influence of Target Margins and Fractionation Patterns

[Does radiation therapy for prostate cancer increase the risk of second cancers?]

PURPOSE

The increased risk of second cancer after prostate radiotherapy is a debated clinical concern. The objective of the study was to assess the risk of occurrence of second cancers after prostate radiation therapy based on the analysis the literature, and to identify potential factors explaining the discrepancies in results between studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the literature was carried out, comparing the occurrence of second cancers in patients all presenting with prostate cancer, treated or not by radiation.

RESULTS

This review included 30 studies reporting the occurrence of second cancers in 2,112,000 patients treated or monitored for localized prostate cancer, including 1,111,000 by external radiation therapy and 103,000 by brachytherapy. Regarding external radiation therapy, the average follow-up was 7.3years. The majority of studies (80%) involving external radiation therapy, compared to no external radiation therapy, showed an increased risk of second cancers with a hazard ratio ranging from 1.13 to 4.9, depending on the duration of the follow-up. The median time to the occurrence of these second cancers after external radiotherapy ranged from 4 to 6years. An increased risk of second rectal and bladder cancer was observed in 52% and 85% of the studies, respectively. Considering a censoring period of more than 10 years after irradiation, 57% and 100% of the studies found an increased risk of rectal and bladder cancer, without any impact in overall survival. Studies of brachytherapy did not show an increased risk of second cancer. However, these comparative studies, most often old and retrospective, had many methodological biases.

CONCLUSION

Despite numerous methodological biases, prostate external radiation therapy appears associated with a moderate increase in the risk of second pelvic cancer, in particular bladder cancer, without impacting survival. Brachytherapy does not increase the risk of a second cancer.

Secondary cancer risk from modern external-beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer patients: Impact of fractionation and dose distribution

Modern radiotherapy (RT) uses altered fractionation, long beam-on time and image-guided procedure. This study aimed to compare secondary cancer risk (SCR) associated with primary field, scatter/leakage radiations and image-guided procedure in prostate treatment using intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), CyberKnife stereotactic body RT (CK-SBRT) in relative to 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT). Prostate plans were generated for 3D-CRT, IMRT (39 fractions of 2 Gy), and CK-SBRT (five fractions of 7.25 Gy). Excess absolute risk (EAR) was calculated for organs in the primary field using Schneider's mechanistic model and concept of organ equivalent dose (OED) to account for dose inhomogeneity. Doses from image-guided procedure and scatter/leakage radiations were determined by phantom measurements. The results showed that hypofractionation relative to conventional fractionation yielded lower SCR for organs in primary field (p ≤ 0.0001). SCR was further modulated by dose-volume distribution. For organs near the field edge, like the rectum and pelvic bone, CK-SBRT plan rendered better risk profiles than IMRT and 3D-CRT because of the absence of volume peak in high dose region (relative risk [RR]: 0.65, 0.22, respectively, p ≤ 0.0004). CK-SBRT and IMRT generated more scatter/leakage and imaging doses than 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). But primary field was the major contributor to SCR. EAR estimates (risk contributions, primary field: scatter/leakage radiations: imaging procedure) were 7.1 excess cases per 104 person-year (PY; 3.64:2.25:1) for CK-SBRT, 9.93 (7.32:2.33:1) for IMRT and 8.24 (15.99:2.35:1) for 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). We conclude that modern RT added more but small SCR from scatter/leakage and imaging doses. The primary field is a major contributor of risk which can be mitigated by the use of hypofractionation.

Generalized approach for radiotherapy treatment planning by optimizing projected health outcome: preliminary results for prostate radiotherapy patients

Research in cancer care increasingly focuses on survivorship issues, e.g. managing disease- and treatment-related morbidity and mortality occurring during and after treatment. This necessitates innovative approaches that consider treatment side effects in addition to tumor cure. Current treatment-planning methods rely on constrained iterative optimization of dose distributions as a surrogate for health outcomes. The goal of this study was to develop a generally applicable method to directly optimize projected health outcomes. We developed an outcome-based objective function to guide selection of the number, angle, and relative fluence weight of photon and proton radiotherapy beams in a sample of ten prostate-cancer patients by optimizing the projected health outcome. We tested whether outcome-optimized radiotherapy (OORT) improved the projected longitudinal outcome compared to dose-optimized radiotherapy (DORT) first for a statistically significant majority of patients, then for each individual patient. We assessed whether the results were influenced by the selection of treatment modality, late-risk model, or host factors. The results of this study revealed that OORT was superior to DORT. Namely, OORT maintained or improved the projected health outcome of photon- and proton-therapy treatment plans for all ten patients compared to DORT. Furthermore, the results were qualitatively similar across three treatment modalities, six late-risk models, and 10 patients. The major finding of this work was that it is feasible to directly optimize the longitudinal (i.e. long- and short-term) health outcomes associated with the total (i.e. therapeutic and stray) absorbed dose in all of the tissues (i.e. healthy and diseased) in individual patients. This approach enables consideration of arbitrary treatment factors, host factors, health endpoints, and times of relevance to cancer survivorship. It also provides a simpler, more direct approach to realizing the full beneficial potential of cancer radiotherapy.

Justification and optimization of radiation exposures: a new framework to aggregate arbitrary detriments and benefits

Myriad radiation effects, including benefits and detriments, complicate justifying and optimizing radiation exposures. The purpose of this study was to develop a comprehensive conceptual framework and corresponding quantitative methods to aggregate the detriments and benefits of radiation exposures to individuals, groups, and populations. In this study, concepts from the ICRP for low dose were integrated with clinical techniques focused on high dose to develop a comprehensive figure of merit (FOM) that takes into account arbitrary host- and exposure-related factors, endpoints, and time points. The study built on existing methods with three new capabilities: application to individuals, groups, and populations; extension to arbitrary numbers and types of endpoints; and inclusion of limitation, where relevant. The FOM was applied to three illustrative exposure situations: emergency response, diagnostic imaging, and cancer radiotherapy, to evaluate its utility in diverse settings. The example application to radiation protection revealed the FOM's utility in optimizing the benefits and risks to a population while keeping individual exposures below applicable regulatory limits. Examples in diagnostic imaging and cancer radiotherapy demonstrated the FOM's utility for guiding population- and patient-specific decisions in medical applications. The major finding of this work is that it is possible to quantitatively combine the benefits and detriments of any radiation exposure situation involving an individual or population to perform cost-effectiveness analyses using the ICRP key principles of radiation protection. This FOM fills a chronic gap in the application of radiation-protection theory, i.e., limitations of generalized frameworks to algorithmically justify and optimize radiation exposures. This new framework potentially enhances objective optimization and justification, especially in complex exposure situations.

Cancer risk assessment in modern radiotherapy workflow with medical big data

Modern radiotherapy (RT) is being enriched by big digital data and intensive technology. Multimodality image registration, intelligence-guided planning, real-time tracking, image-guided RT (IGRT), and automatic follow-up surveys are the products of the digital era. Enormous digital data are created in the process of treatment, including benefits and risks. Generally, decision making in RT tries to balance these two aspects, which is based on the archival and retrieving of data from various platforms. However, modern risk-based analysis shows that many errors that occur in radiation oncology are due to failures in workflow. These errors can lead to imbalance between benefits and risks. In addition, the exact mechanism and dose-response relationship for radiation-induced malignancy are not well understood. The cancer risk in modern RT workflow continues to be a problem. Therefore, in this review, we develop risk assessments based on our current knowledge of IGRT and provide strategies for cancer risk reduction. Artificial intelligence (AI) such as machine learning is also discussed because big data are transforming RT via AI.

The influence of inter-fractional anatomy variation on secondary cancer risk estimates following radiotherapy

PURPOSE

In silico studies comparing estimated risks of radiation-induced secondary cancer (SC) are frequently performed in assessment of radiotherapy techniques. Since inter-patient anatomy variations can result in considerable differences in estimated risk we aimed to explore the influence of inter-fractional organ motion patterns on SC risk.

METHODS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans were generated on the planning CT (pCT) scans of eight prostate cancer patients. In addition, the treatment plans were re-calculated on 8-9 repeat CTs (rCTs) of each patient acquired throughout the treatment course. Relative risk (RR) of SC (VMAT/IMPT) was calculated for the planned and the re-calculated dose distributions using the organ equivalent dose concept adapted to a linear and a bell-shaped competition dose-response model.

RESULTS

Day-to-day variations in anatomy lead to fluctuations in SC risk estimates of the same order of magnitude as those caused by inter-patient variations. Using the competition model, the RR range for bladder cancer based on the pCTs was 0.4-3.4, while a considerably wider range was found when including all rCTs (0.2-6.7). There was nevertheless a correlation in RR based on repeat CTs for individual patients, indicating that patient-specific SC risks could be estimated.

CONCLUSIONS

The estimated relative risks varied considerably across rCTs and could change the risk in favour of VMAT/IMPT depending on the anatomy of the day. The results demonstrate the importance of performing in silico studies of SC risk on a cohort of patients or multiple CTs when structures subject to organ motion are involved.

Comparative study of the calculated risk of radiation-induced cancer after photon- and proton-beam based radiosurgery of liver metastases

INTRODUCTION

The potential of proton therapy to improve the sparing of the healthy tissue has been demonstrated in several studies. However, even small doses delivered to the organs at risk (OAR) may induce long-term detriments after radiotherapy. In this study, we investigated the possibility to reduce the risk of radiation-induced secondary cancers with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), when used for radiosurgery of liver metastases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten patients, previously treated for liver metastases with photon-beam based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) were retrospectively planned for radiosurgery with IMPT. A treatment plan comparison was then performed in terms of calculated risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer. The risks were estimated using two distinct models (Dasu et al., 2005; Schneider et al., 2005, 2009). The plans were compared pairwise with a two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test with a significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS

Reduced risks for induction of fatal and other types of cancers were estimated for the IMPT plans (p<0.05) with the Dasu et al.

MODEL

Using the Schneider et al. model, lower risks for carcinoma-induction with IMPT were estimated for the skin, lungs, healthy part of the liver, esophagus and the remaining part of the body (p<0.05). The risk of observing sarcomas in the bone was also reduced with IMPT (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study indicate that the risks of radiation-induced secondary cancers after radiosurgery of liver metastases may be reduced, if IMPT is used instead of photon-beam based SBRT.

Modelling of organ-specific radiation-induced secondary cancer risks following particle therapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Radiation-induced cancer is a serious late effect that may follow radiotherapy. A considerable uncertainty is associated with carcinogenesis from photon-based treatment, and even less established when including relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for particle therapy. The aim of this work was therefore to estimate and in particular explore relative risks (RR) of secondary cancer (SC) following particle therapy as applied in treatment of prostate cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

RRs of radiation-induced SC in the bladder and rectum were estimated using a bell-shaped dose-response model incorporating RBE and fractionation effects. The risks from volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were compared to intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and scanning carbon ions for ten patients.

RESULTS

The mean estimated RR (95% CI) of SC for VMAT/C-ion was 1.31 (0.65-2.18) for the bladder and 0.58 (0.41-0.80) for the rectum. Corresponding values for VMAT/IMPT were 1.72 (1.06-2.37) and 1.10 (0.78-1.43). The radio-sensitivity parameter α had the strongest influence on the results with decreasing RR for increasing values of α.

CONCLUSION

Based on the wide spread in RR between patients and variations across the included parameter values, the risk profiles of the rectum and bladder were not dramatically different for the investigated radiotherapy techniques.

Risk of radiation-induced secondary rectal and bladder cancer following radiotherapy of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

An elevated risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer (SC) has been observed in prostate cancer patients after radiotherapy (RT), rising to as high as one in 70 patients with more than 10 years follow-up. In this study we have estimated SC risks following RT with both previous and contemporary techniques, including proton therapy, using risk models based on different dose-response relationships.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

RT plans treating the prostate and seminal vesicles with either conformal radiotherapy (CRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) were created for 10 patients. The risks of radiation-induced cancer were estimated for the bladder and rectum using dose-response models reflecting varying degrees of cell sterilisation: a linear model, a linear-plateau model and a bell-shaped model also accounting for fractionated RT.

RESULTS

The choice of risk models was found to rank the plans quite differently, with the CRT plans having the lowest SC risk using the bell-shaped model, while resulting in the highest risk applying the linear model. Considering all dose-response scenarios, median relative risks of VMAT versus IMPT were 1.1-1.7 for the bladder and 0.9-1.8 for the rectum. Risks of radiation-induced bladder and rectal cancers were lower from VMAT if exposed at 80 years versus IMPT if exposed at 50 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The SC risk estimations for the bladder and rectum revealed no clear relative relationship between the contemporary techniques and CRT, with divergent results depending on choice of model. However, the SC risks for these organs when using IMPT were lower or comparable to VMAT. SC risks could be assessed when considering referral of prostate cancer patients to proton therapy, taking also general patient characteristics, such as age, into account.

Are IMRT treatments in the head and neck region increasing the risk of secondary cancers?

BACKGROUND

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been increasingly employed for treating head and neck (H&N) tumours due to its ability to produce isodoses suitable for the complex anatomy of the region. The aim of this study was to assess possible differences between IMRT and conformal radiation therapy (CRT) with regard to risk of radiation-induced secondary malignancies for H&N tumours.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

IMRT and CRT plans were made for 10 H&N adult patients and the resulting treatment planning data were used to calculate the risk of radiation-induced malignancies in four different tissues. Three risk models with biologically relevant parameters were used for calculations. The influence of scatter radiation and repeated imaging sessions has also been investigated.

RESULTS

The results showed that the total lifetime risks of developing radiation-induced secondary malignancies from the two treatment techniques, CRT and IMRT, were comparable and in the interval 0.9-2.5%. The risk contributions from the primary beam and scatter radiation were comparable, whereas the contribution from repeated diagnostic imaging was considerably smaller.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that the redistribution of the dose characteristic to IMRT leads to a redistribution of the risks in individual tissues. However, the total levels of risk were similar between the two irradiation techniques considered.

Second primary cancers after radiation for prostate cancer: a review of data from planning studies

A review of planning studies was undertaken to evaluate estimated risks of radiation induced second primary cancers (RISPC) associated with different prostate radiotherapy techniques for localised prostate cancer. A total of 83 publications were identified which employed a variety of methods to estimate RISPC risk. Of these, the 16 planning studies which specifically addressed absolute or relative second cancer risk using dose-response models were selected for inclusion within this review. There are uncertainties and limitations related to all the different methods for estimating RISPC risk. Whether or not dose models include the effects of the primary radiation beam, as well as out-of-field regions, influences estimated risks. Regarding the impact of IMRT compared to 3D-CRT, at equivalent energies, several studies suggest an increase in risk related to increased leakage contributing to out-of-field RISPC risk, although in absolute terms this increase in risk may be very small. IMRT also results in increased low dose normal tissue irradiation, but the extent to which this has been estimated to contribute to RISPC risk is variable, and may also be very small. IMRT is often delivered using 6MV photons while conventional radiotherapy often requires higher energies to achieve adequate tissue penetration, and so comparisons between IMRT and older techniques should not be restricted to equivalent energies. Proton and brachytherapy planning studies suggest very low RISPC risks associated with these techniques. Until there is sufficient clinical evidence regarding RISPC risks associated with modern irradiation techniques, the data produced from planning studies is relevant when considering which patients to irradiate, and which technique to employ.

Impact of margin size on the predicted risk of radiogenic second cancers following proton arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

We previously determined that the predicted risk of radiogenic second cancer in the bladder and rectum after proton arc therapy (PAT) was less than or equal to that after volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with photons, but we did not consider the impact of margin size on that risk. The current study was thus conducted to evaluate margin size's effect on the predicted risks of second cancer for the two modalities and the relative risk between them. Seven treatment plans with margins ranging from 0 mm in all directions to 6 mm posteriorly and 8 mm in all other directions were considered for both modalities. We performed risk analyses using three risk models with varying amounts of cell sterilization and calculated ratios of risk for the corresponding PAT and VMAT plans. We found that the change in risk with margin size depended on the risk model but that the relative risk remained nearly constant with margin size, regardless of the amount of cell sterilization modeled. We conclude that while margin size influences the predicted risk of a second cancer for a given modality, it appears to affect both modalities in roughly equal proportions so that the relative risk between PAT and VMAT is approximately equivalent.