1
|
Ahrens C, Beatrice L, Meier V, Rohrer Bley C. Radiation toxicity grading after chemoradiotherapy of canine urinary tract carcinomas: Comparing VRTOG to VRTOG_v2.0. Vet Comp Oncol 2024; 22:255-264. [PMID: 38544415 DOI: 10.1111/vco.12973] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2023] [Revised: 03/07/2024] [Accepted: 03/08/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024]
Abstract
Radiation toxicities may be underestimated after treatment of transitional cell carcinoma in dogs' lower urinary tract. Assessing acute and late toxicities and differentiating them from progressive disease (PD) impacts further therapeutic approach. We retrospectively assessed dogs treated with definitive-intent chemoradiotherapy (12 × 3.8 Gy, various first-line chemotherapeutics). Local tumour control, radiation toxicities and survival were evaluated. We classified radiation toxicities according to the previously published radiation toxicity scheme "VRTOG" as well as the updated version, "VRTOG_v2.0". Fourteen dogs with transitional cell carcinoma of bladder ± urethra (n = 8), +prostate (n = 3) or solely urethra (n = 3), were included. Median follow-up was 298 days (range 185-1798 days), median overall survival 305 days (95%CI = 209;402) and 28.6% deaths were tumour-progression-related. Acute radiation toxicity was mild and self-limiting with both classification systems: In VRTOG, 5 dogs showed grade 1, and 1 dog grade 2 toxicity. In VRTOG_v2.0, 2 dogs showed grade 1, 3 dogs grade 2, and 3 dogs grade 3 toxicity. Late toxicity was noted in 14.2% of dogs (2/14) with the VRTOG, both with grade 3 toxicity. With VRTOG_v2.0, a larger proportion of 42.9% of dogs (6/14) showed late toxicities: Four dogs grade 3 (persistent incontinence), 2 dogs grade 5 (urethral obstructions without PD resulting in euthanasia). At time of death, 5 dogs underwent further workup and only 3 were confirmed to have PD. With the updated VRTOG_v2.0 classification system, more dogs with probable late toxicity are registered, but it is ultimately difficult to distinguish these from disease progression as restaging remains to be the most robust determinant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlotta Ahrens
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Laura Beatrice
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Valeria Meier
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Carla Rohrer Bley
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Maggio A, Rancati T, Gatti M, Cante D, Avuzzi B, Bianconi C, Badenchini F, Farina B, Ferrari P, Giandini T, Girelli G, Landoni V, Magli A, Moretti E, Petrucci E, Salmoiraghi P, Sanguineti G, Villa E, Waskiewicz JM, Guarneri A, Valdagni R, Fiorino C, Cozzarini C. Quality of Life Longitudinal Evaluation in Prostate Cancer Patients from Radiotherapy Start to 5 Years after IMRT-IGRT. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:839-848. [PMID: 38392056 PMCID: PMC10887595 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31020062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2023] [Revised: 01/22/2024] [Accepted: 01/30/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to study the evolution of quality of life (QoL) in the first 5 years following Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) and to determine possible associations with clinical/treatment data. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients were enrolled in a prospective multicentre observational trial in 2010-2014 and treated with conventional (74-80 Gy, 1.8-2 Gy/fr) or moderately hypofractionated IMRT (65-75.2 Gy, 2.2-2.7 Gy/fr). QoL was evaluated by means of EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline, at radiation therapy (RT) end, and every 6 months up to 5 years after IMRT end. Fourteen QoL dimensions were investigated separately. The longitudinal evaluation of QoL was analysed by means of Analysis of variances (ANOVA) for multiple measures. RESULTS A total of 391 patients with complete sets of questionnaires across 5 years were available. The longitudinal analysis showed a trend toward the significant worsening of QoL at RT end for global health, physical and role functioning, fatigue, appetite loss, diarrhoea, and pain. QoL worsening was recovered within 6 months from RT end, with the only exception being physical functioning. Based on ANOVA, the most impaired time point was RT end. QoL dimension analysis at this time indicated that acute Grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity significantly impacted global health, physical and role functioning, fatigue, appetite loss, diarrhoea, and pain. Acute Grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity resulted in lower role functioning and higher pain. Prophylactic lymph-nodal irradiation (WPRT) resulted in significantly lower QoL for global health, fatigue, appetite loss, and diarrhoea; lower pain with the use of neoadjuvant/concomitant hormonal therapy; and lower fatigue with the use of an anti-androgen. CONCLUSIONS In this prospective, longitudinal, observational study, high radiation IMRT doses delivered for PCa led to a temporary worsening of QoL, which tended to be completely resolved at six months. Such transient worsening was mostly associated with acute GI/GU toxicity, WPRT, and higher prescription doses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angelo Maggio
- Istituto di Candiolo-FPO, IRCCS, 10060 Candiolo, Italy; (M.G.); (A.G.)
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (T.R.); (B.A.); (F.B.); (T.G.); (R.V.)
| | - Marco Gatti
- Istituto di Candiolo-FPO, IRCCS, 10060 Candiolo, Italy; (M.G.); (A.G.)
| | - Domenico Cante
- Ospedale di Ivrea, A.S.L. TO4, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (E.P.)
| | - Barbara Avuzzi
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (T.R.); (B.A.); (F.B.); (T.G.); (R.V.)
| | - Cinzia Bianconi
- IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milano, Italy; (C.B.); (C.F.); (C.C.)
| | - Fabio Badenchini
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (T.R.); (B.A.); (F.B.); (T.G.); (R.V.)
| | - Bruno Farina
- Ospedale degli Infermi, 13875 Biella, Italy; (B.F.); (G.G.)
| | - Paolo Ferrari
- Comprensorio Sanitario di Bolzano, 39100 Bolzano, Italy; (P.F.); (J.M.W.)
| | - Tommaso Giandini
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (T.R.); (B.A.); (F.B.); (T.G.); (R.V.)
| | | | - Valeria Landoni
- IRCCS Istituto Tumori Regina Elena, 00144 Roma, Italy; (V.L.); (G.S.)
| | | | | | - Edoardo Petrucci
- Ospedale di Ivrea, A.S.L. TO4, 10015 Ivrea, Italy; (D.C.); (E.P.)
| | | | | | - Elisa Villa
- Cliniche Gavazzeni-Humanitas, 24121 Bergamo, Italy; (P.S.); (E.V.)
| | | | - Alessia Guarneri
- Istituto di Candiolo-FPO, IRCCS, 10060 Candiolo, Italy; (M.G.); (A.G.)
| | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (T.R.); (B.A.); (F.B.); (T.G.); (R.V.)
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20122 Milano, Italy
| | - Claudio Fiorino
- IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milano, Italy; (C.B.); (C.F.); (C.C.)
| | - Cesare Cozzarini
- IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milano, Italy; (C.B.); (C.F.); (C.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Alborghetti L, Castriconi R, Sosa Marrero C, Tudda A, Ubeira-Gabellini MG, Broggi S, Pascau J, Cubero L, Cozzarini C, De Crevoisier R, Rancati T, Acosta O, Fiorino C. Selective sparing of bladder and rectum sub-regions in radiotherapy of prostate cancer combining knowledge-based automatic planning and multicriteria optimization. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 28:100488. [PMID: 37694264 PMCID: PMC10482897 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100488] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2023] [Revised: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 08/23/2023] [Indexed: 09/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and Purpose The association between dose to selected bladder and rectum symptom-related sub-regions (SRS) and late toxicity after prostate cancer radiotherapy has been evidenced by voxel-wise analyses. The aim of the current study was to explore the feasibility of combining knowledge-based (KB) and multi-criteria optimization (MCO) to spare SRSs without compromising planning target volume (PTV) dose delivery, including pelvic-node irradiation. Materials and Methods Forty-five previously treated patients (74.2 Gy/28fr) were selected and SRSs (in the bladder, associated with late dysuria/hematuria/retention; in the rectum, associated with bleeding) were generated using deformable registration. A KB model was used to obtain clinically suitable plans (KB-plan). KB-plans were further optimized using MCO, aiming to reduce dose to the SRSs while safeguarding target dose coverage, homogeneity and avoiding worsening dose volume histograms of the whole bladder, rectum and other organs at risk. The resulting MCO-generated plans were examined to identify the best-compromise plan (KB + MCO-plan). Results The mean SRS dose decreased in almost all patients for each SRS. D1% also decreased in the large majority, less frequently for dysuria/bleeding SRS. Mean differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05) and ranged between 1.3 and 2.2 Gy with maximum reduction of mean dose up to 3-5 Gy for the four SRSs. The better sparing of SRSs was obtained without compromising PTVs coverage. Conclusions Selectively sparing SRSs without compromising PTV coverage is feasible and has the potential to reduce toxicities in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Further investigation to better quantify the expected risk reduction of late toxicities is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Alborghetti
- IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Medical Physics, Milano, Italy
| | | | - Carlos Sosa Marrero
- CLCC Eugène Marquis, INSERM, LTSI—UMR1099, F-35000, Univ Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Alessia Tudda
- IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Medical Physics, Milano, Italy
| | | | - Sara Broggi
- IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Medical Physics, Milano, Italy
| | - Javier Pascau
- Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Bioengineering Department, Madrid, Spain
| | - Lucia Cubero
- Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Bioengineering Department, Madrid, Spain
| | - Cesare Cozzarini
- IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Radiotherapy, Milano, Italy
| | | | - Tiziana Rancati
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT), Progetto Prostata, Milano, Italy
| | - Oscar Acosta
- CLCC Eugène Marquis, INSERM, LTSI—UMR1099, F-35000, Univ Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Claudio Fiorino
- IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Medical Physics, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Brand DH, Brüningk SC, Wilkins A, Naismith O, Gao A, Syndikus I, Dearnaley DP, van As N, Hall E, Gulliford S, Tree AC. The Fraction Size Sensitivity of Late Genitourinary Toxicity: Analysis of Alpha/Beta (α/β) Ratios in the CHHiP Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:327-336. [PMID: 35985457 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.08.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2022] [Revised: 08/04/2022] [Accepted: 08/06/2022] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Moderately hypofractionated external beam intensity modulated radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer is now standard-of-care. Normal tissue toxicity responses to fraction size alteration are nonlinear: the linear-quadratic model is a widely used framework accounting for this, through the α/β ratio. Few α/β ratio estimates exist for human late genitourinary endpoints; here we provide estimates derived from a hypofractionation trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS The CHHiP trial randomized 3216 men with localized prostate cancer 1:1:1 between conventionally fractionated intensity modulated RT (74 Gy/37 fractions (Fr)) and 2 moderately hypofractionated regimens (60 Gy/20 Fr and 57 Gy/19 Fr). RT plan and suitable follow-up assessment was available for 2206 men. Three prospectively assessed clinician-reported toxicity scales were amalgamated for common genitourinary endpoints: dysuria, hematuria, incontinence, reduced flow/stricture, and urine frequency. Per endpoint, only patients with baseline zero toxicity were included. Three models for endpoint grade ≥1 (G1+) and G2+ toxicity were fitted: Lyman Kutcher-Burman (LKB) without equivalent dose in 2 Gy/Fr (EQD2) correction [LKB-NoEQD2]; LKB with EQD2-correction [LKB-EQD2]; LKB-EQD2 with dose-modifying-factor (DMF) inclusion [LKB-EQD2-DMF]. DMFs were age, diabetes, hypertension, pelvic surgery, prior transurethral resection of prostate (TURP), overall treatment time and acute genitourinary toxicity (G2+). Bootstrapping generated 95% confidence intervals and unbiased performance estimates. Models were compared by likelihood ratio test. RESULTS The LKB-EQD2 model significantly improved performance over LKB-NoEQD2 for just 3 endpoints: dysuria G1+ (α/β = 2.0 Gy; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.2 Gy), hematuria G1+ (α/β = 0.9 Gy; 95% CI, 0.1-2.2 Gy) and hematuria G2+ (α/β = 0.6 Gy; 95% CI, 0.1-1.7 Gy). For these 3 endpoints, further incorporation of 2 DMFs improved on LKB-EQD2: acute genitourinary toxicity and prior TURP (hematuria G1+ only), but α/β ratio estimates remained stable. CONCLUSIONS Inclusion of EQD2-correction significantly improved model fitting for dysuria and hematuria endpoints, where fitted α/β ratio estimates were low: 0.6 to 2 Gy. This suggests therapeutic gain for clinician-reported GU toxicity, through hypofractionation, might be lower than expected by typical late α/β ratio assumptions of 3 to 5 Gy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas H Brand
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Urology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
| | - Sarah C Brüningk
- Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering, ETH Zurich, Basel, Switzerland; Swiss Institute for Bioinformatics (SIB), Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Anna Wilkins
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Urology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Olivia Naismith
- Radiotherapy Trials QA Group (RTTQA), Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Annie Gao
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Urology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Isabel Syndikus
- Radiotherapy Department, Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | - David P Dearnaley
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Urology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nicholas van As
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Urology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Emma Hall
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Gulliford
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Radiotherapy Physics, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alison C Tree
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom; Urology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Li M, Fan Y, Trapp C, Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Ma J, Buchner A, Lu S, Xu B, Stief C, Wang X, Zhou C, Belka C, Rogowski P. Elective nodal radiotherapy with a gapless radiation field junction for oligorecurrent prostate cancer after previous radiotherapy. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 39:100571. [PMID: 36605290 PMCID: PMC9807861 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2022.100571] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2022] [Revised: 12/16/2022] [Accepted: 12/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the feasibility of subsequent elective nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) for nodal recurrences after previous radiotherapy with a defined planning approach for a gapless radiation field junction. Methods Patients with 1) previous radiotherapy of prostate or prostatic fossa and subsequent pelvic ENRT or 2) previous pelvic radiotherapy and subsequent ENRT to paraaortic lymph nodes (LN) and gapless junction of both radiation fields were analyzed. The cumulative maximum dose (Dmax-cum) and the maximum cumulative dose in 1 cc (D1cc-cum) were estimated. Absolute toxicity and the toxicity exceeding baseline were evaluated. Results Twenty-two patients with PSMA-PET/CT-staged nodal oligorecurrence after prior radiotherapy were treated with pelvic (14 patients) or paraaortic ENRT (9 patients). One patient was treated sequentially at both locations. Median time between first and second RT was 20.2 months. Median doses to the lymphatic pathways and to PET-positive LN were 47.5 Gy and 64.8 Gy, respectively. The planning constraint of an estimated Dmax-cum ≤ 95 Gy and of D1cc-cum < 90 Gy were achieved in 23/23 cases and 22/23 cases, respectively. Median follow-up was 33.5 months. There was no additional acute or late toxicity ≥ grade 3. Worst acute toxicity exceeding baseline was grade 1 in 68.2% and grade 2 in 22.7% of patients. Worst late toxicity exceeding baseline was grade 1 in 31.8% and grade 2 in 18.2% of patients. Conclusion ENRT for nodal recurrences after a previous radiotherapy with gapless junction of radiation fields seems to be feasible, applying the dose constraints Dmax-cum ≤ 95 Gy and D1cc-cum < 90 Gy without grade 3 acute or late toxicities exceeding baseline.
Collapse
Key Words
- ADT, androgen deprivation therapy
- CTCAE, common terminology criteria for adverse events
- CTV, clinical target volume
- D1cc-cum, maximum cumulative dose in 1 cc
- Dmax-cum, cumulative maximum dose
- ENRT
- ENRT, elective nodal radiotherapy
- EQD2, equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions
- Gapless radiation field junction
- IGRT, image-guided radiotherapy
- IMRT, intensity-modulated radiotherapy
- LN, lymph nodes
- Nodal oligorecurrence
- OAR, organs at risk
- PSA, prostate-specific antigen
- PSMA-PET/CT
- PSMA-PET/CT, prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography
- RT, radiotherapy
- Reirradiation
- SBRT, stereotactic body radiotherapy
- SIB, simultaneous integrated boost
- VMAT, volumetric modulated arc therapy
Collapse
|
6
|
Brand DH, Kirby AM, Yarnold JR, Somaiah N. How Low Can You Go? The Radiobiology of Hypofractionation. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2022; 34:280-287. [PMID: 35260319 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2022.02.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2021] [Revised: 01/25/2022] [Accepted: 02/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Hypofractionated radical radiotherapy is now an accepted standard of care for tumour sites such as prostate and breast cancer. Much research effort is being directed towards more profoundly hypofractionated (ultrahypofractionated) schedules, with some reaching UK standard of care (e.g. adjuvant breast). Hypofractionation exerts varying influences on each of the major clinical end points of radiotherapy studies: acute toxicity, late toxicity and local control. This review will discuss these effects from the viewpoint of the traditional 5 Rs of radiobiology, before considering non-canonical radiobiological effects that may be relevant to ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy. The principles outlined here may assist the reader in their interpretation of the wealth of clinical data presented in the tumour site-specific articles in this special issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D H Brand
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - A M Kirby
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - J R Yarnold
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - N Somaiah
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kerns SL, Amidon Morlang A, Lee SM, Peterson DR, Marples B, Zhang H, Bylund K, Rosenzweig D, Hall W, De Ruyck K, Rosenstein BS, Stock RG, Gómez-Caamaño A, Vega A, Sosa-Fajardo P, Taboada-Valladares B, Aguado-Barrera ME, Parker C, Veldeman L, Fonteyne V, Bultijnck R, Talbot CJ, Symonds RP, Johnson K, Rattay T, Webb A, Lambrecht M, de Ruysscher D, Vanneste B, Choudhury A, Elliott RM, Sperk E, Herskind C, Veldwijk MR, Rancati T, Avuzzi B, Valdagni R, Azria D, Farcy Jacquet MP, Chang-Claude J, Seibold P, West C, Janelsins M, Chen Y, Messing E, Morrow G. Use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors is associated with reduced risk of late bladder toxicity following radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2022; 168:75-82. [PMID: 35077710 PMCID: PMC8986577 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.01.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2021] [Revised: 01/10/2022] [Accepted: 01/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of late hematuria following prostate cancer radiotherapy identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) near AGT, encoding angiotensinogen. We tested the hypothesis that patients taking angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) have a reduced risk of late hematuria. We additionally tested genetically-defined hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS Prostate cancer patients undergoing potentially-curative radiotherapy were enrolled onto two multi-center observational studies, URWCI (N = 256) and REQUITE (N = 1,437). Patients were assessed pre-radiotherapy and followed prospectively for development of toxicity for up to four years. The cumulative probability of hematuria was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable grouped relative risk models assessed the effect of ACEi on time to hematuria adjusting for clinical factors and stratified by enrollment site. A polygenic risk score (PRS) for blood pressure was tested for association with hematuria in REQUITE and our Radiogenomics Consortium GWAS. RESULTS Patients taking ACEi during radiotherapy had a reduced risk of hematuria (HR 0.51, 95%CI 0.28 to 0.94, p = 0.030) after adjusting for prior transurethral prostate and/or bladder resection, heart disease, pelvic node radiotherapy, and bladder volume receiving 70 Gy, which are associated with hematuria. A blood pressure PRS was associated with hypertension (odds ratio per standard deviation 1.38, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.46, n = 5,288, p < 0.001) but not hematuria (HR per standard deviation 0.96, 95%CI 0.87 to 1.06, n = 5,126, p = 0.41). CONCLUSIONS Our study is the first to show a radioprotective effect of ACEi on bladder in an international, multi-site study of patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy. Mechanistic studies are needed to understand how targeting the angiotensin pathway protects the bladder.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah L Kerns
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States.
| | - Ashley Amidon Morlang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Sharon M Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Derick R Peterson
- Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Brian Marples
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Hong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Kevin Bylund
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Doug Rosenzweig
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - William Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
| | - Kim De Ruyck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Barry S Rosenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States; Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
| | - Richard G Stock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
| | - Antonio Gómez-Caamaño
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS, Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Ana Vega
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica-Servizo Galego de Saude (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBERER), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Paloma Sosa-Fajardo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS, Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica-Servizo Galego de Saude (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Begoña Taboada-Valladares
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS, Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Miguel E Aguado-Barrera
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica-Servizo Galego de Saude (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Chris Parker
- Department of Uro-oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Liv Veldeman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Valérie Fonteyne
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Renée Bultijnck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - R Paul Symonds
- Leicester Cancer Research Centre, University of Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Kerstie Johnson
- Leicester Cancer Research Centre, University of Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Tim Rattay
- Leicester Cancer Research Centre, University of Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Webb
- Department of Genetics and Genome Biology, University of Leicester, United Kingdom
| | | | - Dirk de Ruysscher
- KU Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium; Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro Clinic), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Ben Vanneste
- KU Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium; Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro Clinic), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Ananya Choudhury
- Division of Cancer Sciences, the University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, Manchester, the Netherlands
| | - Rebecca M Elliott
- Division of Cancer Sciences, the University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, Manchester, the Netherlands
| | - Elena Sperk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Carsten Herskind
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Marlon R Veldwijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Avuzzi
- Department of Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - David Azria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Montpellier Cancer Institute, Université Montpellier, Inserm U1194, France
| | | | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | - Petra Seibold
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Catharine West
- Division of Cancer Sciences, the University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, Manchester, the Netherlands
| | - Michelle Janelsins
- Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Yuhchyau Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Edward Messing
- Department of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| | - Gary Morrow
- Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, United States
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wages NA, Sanders JC, Smith A, Wood S, Anscher MS, Varhegyi N, Krupski TL, Harris TJ, Showalter TN. Hypofractionated Postprostatectomy Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer to Reduce Toxicity and Improve Patient Convenience: A Phase 1/2 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 109:1254-1262. [PMID: 33227441 PMCID: PMC7965239 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2020] [Revised: 09/16/2020] [Accepted: 11/02/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The phase 1 portion of this multicenter, phase 1/2 study of hypofractionated (HypoFx) prostate bed radiation therapy (RT) as salvage or adjuvant therapy aimed to identify the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity. The phase 2 portion aimed to assess the health-related quality of life (QoL) of using this HypoFx regimen. METHODS AND MATERIALS Eligibility included standard adjuvant or salvage prostate bed RT indications. Patients were assigned to receive 1 of 3 daily RT schedules: 56.6 Gy in 20 Fx, 50.4 Gy in 15 Fx, or 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx. Regional nodal irradiation and androgen deprivation therapy were not allowed. Participants were followed for 2 years after treatment with outcome measures based on prostate-specific antigen levels, toxicity assessments (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v4.0), QoL measures (the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] and EuroQol EQ-5D instruments), and out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS There were 32 evaluable participants, and median follow-up was 3.53 years. The shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity was determined to be 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx, with most patients (23) treated with this schedule. Grade 3 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities occurred in 3 patients and 1 patient, respectively. There was 1 grade 4 sepsis event. Higher dose to the hottest 25% of the rectum was associated with increased risk of grade 2+ GI toxicity; no dosimetric factors were found to predict for GU toxicity. There was a significant decrease in the mean bowel, but not bladder, QoL score at 1 year compared with baseline. Prostate-specific antigen failure occurred in 34.3% of participants, using a definition of nadir plus 2 ng/mL. Metastases were more likely to occur in regional lymph nodes (5 of 7) than in bones (2 of 7). The mean out-of-pocket cost for patients during treatment was $223.90. CONCLUSIONS We identified 42.6 Gy in 10 fractions as the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity in this phase 1/2 study. There was a higher than expected rate of grade 2 to 3 GU and GI toxicity and a decreased EPIC bowel QoL domain with this regimen. Future studies are needed to explore alternative adjuvant/salvage HypoFx RT schedules after radical prostatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nolan A Wages
- Division of Translational Research & Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia.
| | - Jason C Sanders
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - Amy Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - Songserea Wood
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - Mitchell S Anscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia
| | - Nikole Varhegyi
- Division of Translational Research & Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - Tracey L Krupski
- Department of Urology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - Timothy J Harris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia
| | - Timothy N Showalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bresolin A, Garibaldi E, Faiella A, Cante D, Vavassori V, Waskiewicz JM, Girelli G, Avuzzi B, Villa E, Magli A, Noris Chiorda B, Munoz F, Sanguineti G, Gabriele P, Gatti M, Rancati T, Valdagni R, Di Muzio N, Fiorino C, Cozzarini C. Predictors of 2-Year Incidence of Patient-Reported Urinary Incontinence After Post-prostatectomy Radiotherapy: Evidence of Dose and Fractionation Effects. Front Oncol 2020; 10:1207. [PMID: 32850354 PMCID: PMC7396712 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To investigate predictors of patient-reported urinary incontinence (PRUI) in the first 2 years after post-prostatectomy radiotherapy (PORT) with particular emphasis on possible dose-effect relationships. Patients and Methods: Two-hundred-thirteen patients, whose clinical and dosimetric data were prospectively collected within a registered multi-institutional cohort study, underwent PORT with adjuvant (n = 106) or salvage (n = 107) intent with conventional (n = 123, prescribed dose to the prostatic bed: 66.6–79.8Gy in 1.8–2.0Gy/fr) or moderately hypo- (n = 90, 65.8–76.8Gy in 2.1–2.7Gy/fr) fractionation during the period 2011–2017. PRUI was evaluated through the ICIQ-SF questionnaire filled in at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. The analysis focused on three ICIQ-based clinically relevant endpoints: (a) very frequent leakage (FREQUENCY, ICIQ3 score >3), (b) moderate to severe amount of urine loss (AMOUNT, ICIQ4>2) (c) objective severe symptoms (OBJECTIVE, ICIQ3+4>5). Predictors of the incidence within 2 years for the three endpoints were investigated focusing only on patients without endpoint symptoms at baseline. A uni-variable logistic regression analysis was performed in order to determine the best dose metrics describing PRUI risk in terms of 2-Gy equivalent dose (EQD2) calculated with different α/β values reported in the literature (0.8, 3, 5Gy), and to identify the most significant clinical variables. Variables showing p < 0.20 at uni-variable analysis were entered into a backward stepwise multi-variable logistic regression analysis. Lastly, the goodness of fit and model calibration were evaluated and internally validated. Results: Patients without symptoms at baseline experienced (a), (b), and/or (c) within 2 years in 41/130 (32%), 40/192 (21%), and 41/129 (32%) of the cases, respectively. EQD2 for α/β = 0.8Gy was the best dose metric associated with PRUI. Multi-variable analysis identified baseline incontinence levels as the strongest predictor for all endpoints (p < 0.006). Both FREQUENCY and OBJECTIVE were significantly influenced also by EQD2(α/β = 0.8Gy). The goodness of fit was excellent, as was the calibration; internal calibration confirmed apparent performance. Conclusion: Baseline mild urinary incontinence symptoms strongly modulate the 2-year risk of PRUI. In addition, FREQUENCY is characterized by a marked dose-effect relationship also influencing the trend of OBJECTIVE, with results more reliable than AMOUNT as an objective index. A strong impact of fractionation on severe PRUI after post-prostatectomy radiotherapy also emerged.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Bresolin
- IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Ospedale San Raffaele, Medical Physics, Milan, Italy
- Fondazione Centro San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Elisabetta Garibaldi
- Istituto di Candiolo—Fondazione del Piemonte per l'Oncologia IRCCS, Radiotherapy, Turin, Italy
| | - Adriana Faiella
- IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori “Regina Elena,” Radiotherapy, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | - Barbara Avuzzi
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Radiotherapy, Milan, Italy
| | - Elisa Villa
- Cliniche Gavazzeni-Humanitas, Radiotherapy, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Alessandro Magli
- Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria S. Maria della Misericordia, Radiotherapy, Udine, Italy
| | | | - Fernando Munoz
- Ospedale Regionale Parini-AUSL Valle d'Aosta, Radiotherapy, Aosta, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sanguineti
- IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori “Regina Elena,” Radiotherapy, Rome, Italy
| | - Pietro Gabriele
- Istituto di Candiolo—Fondazione del Piemonte per l'Oncologia IRCCS, Radiotherapy, Turin, Italy
| | - Marco Gatti
- Istituto di Candiolo—Fondazione del Piemonte per l'Oncologia IRCCS, Radiotherapy, Turin, Italy
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Prostate Cancer Program, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Radiotherapy, Milan, Italy
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Prostate Cancer Program, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Nadia Di Muzio
- Istituto Scientifico Ospedale San Raffaele, Radiotherapy, Milan, Italy
- University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Fiorino
- IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Ospedale San Raffaele, Medical Physics, Milan, Italy
- *Correspondence: Claudio Fiorino
| | - Cesare Cozzarini
- Istituto Scientifico Ospedale San Raffaele, Radiotherapy, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Santos PMG, Barsky AR, Hwang WT, Deville C, Wang X, Both S, Bekelman JE, Christodouleas JP, Vapiwala N. Comparative toxicity outcomes of proton-beam therapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the postoperative setting. Cancer 2019; 125:4278-4293. [PMID: 31503338 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32457] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2019] [Revised: 05/09/2019] [Accepted: 05/10/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite increasing utilization of proton-beam therapy (PBT) in the postprostatectomy setting, no data exist regarding toxicity outcomes relative to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The authors compared acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity outcomes in patients with prostate cancer (PC) who received treatment with postprostatectomy IMRT versus PBT. METHODS With institutional review board approval, patients with PC who received adjuvant or salvage IMRT or PBT (70.2 gray with an endorectal balloon) after prostatectomy from 2009 through 2017 were reviewed. Factors including combined IMRT and PBT and/or concurrent malignancies prompted exclusion. A case-matched cohort analysis was performed using nearest-neighbor 3-to-1 matching by age and GU/GI disorder history. Logistic and Cox regressions were used to identify univariate and multivariate associations between toxicities and cohort/dosimetric characteristics. Toxicity-free survival (TFS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Three hundred seven men (mean ± SD age, 59.7 ± 6.3 years; IMRT, n = 237; PBT, n = 70) were identified, generating 70 matched pairs. The median follow-up was 48.6 and 46.1 months for the IMRT and PBT groups, respectively. Although PBT was superior at reducing low-range (volumes receiving 10% to 40% of the dose, respectively) bladder and rectal doses (all P ≤ .01), treatment modality was not associated with differences in clinician-reported acute or late GU/GI toxicities (all P ≥ .05). Five-year grade ≥2 GU and grade ≥1 GI TFS was 61.1% and 73.7% for IMRT, respectively, and 70.7% and 75.3% for PBT, respectively; and 5-year grade ≥3 GU and GI TFS was >95% for both groups (all P ≥ .05). CONCLUSIONS Postprostatectomy PBT minimized low-range bladder and rectal doses relative to IMRT; however, treatment modality was not associated with clinician-reported GU/GI toxicities. Future prospective investigation and ongoing follow-up will determine whether dosimetric differences between IMRT and PBT confer clinically meaningful differences in long-term outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia Mae G Santos
- Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Andrew R Barsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Wei-Ting Hwang
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Xingmei Wang
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Stefan Both
- Department of Medical Physics, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Justin E Bekelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - John P Christodouleas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Boria AJ, Perez-Torres CJ. Minimal difference between fractionated and single-fraction exposure in a murine model of radiation necrosis. Radiat Oncol 2019; 14:144. [PMID: 31409408 PMCID: PMC6691651 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-019-1356-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2019] [Accepted: 08/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Despite the success of fractionation in clinical practice to spare healthy tissue, it remains common for mouse models used to study the efficacy of radiation therapy to use minimal or no fractionation. The goal of our study was to create a fractionated mouse model of radiation necrosis that we could compare to our single fraction model. Methods Precision X-Ray’s X-Rad 320 cabinet irradiator was used to irradiate the cerebrum of mice with four different fractionation schemes, while a 7 T Bruker magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner using T2 and post-contrast T1 imaging was used to track the development of radiation necrosis over the span of six weeks. Results All four fractionation schemes with single fraction equivalent doses (SFED) less than 50 Gy for the commonly accepted alpha/beta ratio (α/β) value of 2–3 Gy produced radiation necrosis comparable to what would be achieved with single fraction doses of 80 and 90 Gy. This is surprising when previous work using single fractions of 50 Gy produced no visible radiation necrosis, with the results of this study showing fractionation not sparing brain tissue as much as expected. Conclusion Further interpretation of these results must take into consideration other studies which have shown a lack of sparing when fractionation has been incorporated, as well as consider factors such as the use of large doses per fraction, the time between fractions, and the limitations of using a murine model to analyze the human condition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew J Boria
- School of Health Sciences, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, Hampton Hall 1263A, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA
| | - Carlos J Perez-Torres
- School of Health Sciences, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, Hampton Hall 1263A, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA. .,Purdue University Center for Cancer Research, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Cuccia F, Mortellaro G, Serretta V, Valenti V, Tripoli A, Gueci M, Luca N, Lo Casto A, Ferrera G. Hypofractionated postoperative helical tomotherapy in prostate cancer: a mono-institutional report of toxicity and clinical outcomes. Cancer Manag Res 2018; 10:5053-5060. [PMID: 30464605 PMCID: PMC6214338 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s182016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose This is a mono-institutional study of acute and late toxicities and early biochemical control of a retrospective series of 75 prostate cancer patients treated with moderate postoperative hypofractionation delivered by helical tomotherapy (HT). Patients and methods From April 2013 to June 2017, 75 patients received adjuvant (n=37) or salvage (n=38) treatment, delivering to prostate bed a total dose of 63.8 Gy (equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions=67.4 Gy) using 2.2 Gy fractions. Whole-pelvis irradiation was performed in 63% of cases (median dose, 49.3 Gy; range, 48–55.1 Gy). Concurrent hormonal therapy was administered in 46% of cases. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0) was adopted for acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity evaluations. Biochemical progression was defined as PSA level increase of ≥0.2 or more above the postoperative radiotherapy (RT) nadir. Results Acute GU toxicities were as follows: G1 in 46% and G2 in 4%, detecting no G≥3 events. For GI toxicity, we recorded G1 in 36% and G2 in 18%. With a median follow-up of 30 months (range, 12–58 months), we found late toxicity G2 GI in 6.6% and G≥2 GU in 5.3%, including two patients who underwent surgical incontinence correction. Acute GI≥2 toxicity and diabetes were found to be predictive of late GI≥2 toxicity (P=0.04 and P=0.0019). Actuarial 2- and 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survivals were 88% and 73%, respectively, for the entire population. Conclusion In our experience, moderate hypofractionated postoperative RT with HT was feasible and safe, with reports of low incidence of toxicity and promising biochemical control rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Cuccia
- Radiation Oncology School, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, .,Radiation Oncology, ARNAS-Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy,
| | | | - Vincenzo Serretta
- Section of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncological and Oral Science, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Vito Valenti
- Radiation Oncology School, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, .,Radiation Oncology, ARNAS-Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy,
| | - Antonella Tripoli
- Radiation Oncology School, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, .,Radiation Oncology, ARNAS-Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy,
| | - Marina Gueci
- Radiation Oncology School, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, .,Radiation Oncology, ARNAS-Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy,
| | - Nicoletta Luca
- Radiation Oncology School, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, .,Radiation Oncology, ARNAS-Civico Hospital, Palermo, Italy,
| | - Antonio Lo Casto
- Radiation Oncology School, Section of Radiological Sciences, DIBIMED, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Carrara M, Massari E, Cicchetti A, Giandini T, Avuzzi B, Palorini F, Stucchi C, Fellin G, Gabriele P, Vavassori V, Degli Esposti C, Cozzarini C, Pignoli E, Fiorino C, Rancati T, Valdagni R. Development of a Ready-to-Use Graphical Tool Based on Artificial Neural Network Classification: Application for the Prediction of Late Fecal Incontinence After Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 102:1533-1542. [PMID: 30092335 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.07.2014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2017] [Revised: 06/19/2018] [Accepted: 07/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study was designed to apply artificial neural network (ANN) classification methods for the prediction of late fecal incontinence (LFI) after high-dose prostate cancer radiation therapy and to develop a ready-to-use graphical tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this study, 598 men recruited in 2 national multicenter trials were analyzed. Information was recorded on comorbidity, previous abdominal surgery, use of drugs, and dose distribution. Fecal incontinence was prospectively evaluated through self-reported questionnaires. To develop the ANN, the study population was randomly split into training (n = 300), validation (n = 149), and test (n = 149) sets. Mean grade of longitudinal LFI (ie, expressed as the average incontinence grade over the first 3 years after radiation therapy) ≥1 was considered the endpoint. A suitable subset of variables able to better predict LFI was selected by simulating 100,000 ANN configurations. The search for the definitive ANN was then performed by varying the number of inputs and hidden neurons from 4 to 5 and from 1 to 9, respectively. A final classification model was established as the average of the best 5 among 500 ANNs with the same architecture. An ANN-based graphical method to compute LFI prediction was developed to include one continuous and n dichotomous variables. RESULTS An ANN architecture was selected, with 5 input variables (mean dose, previous abdominal surgery, use of anticoagulants, use of antihypertensive drugs, and use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant hormone therapy) and 4 hidden neurons. The developed classification model correctly identified patients with LFI with 80.8% sensitivity and 63.7% ± 1.0% specificity and an area under the curve of 0.78. The developed graphical tool may efficiently classify patients in low, intermediate, and high LFI risk classes. CONCLUSIONS An ANN-based model was developed to predict LFI. The model was translated in a ready-to-use graphical tool for LFI risk classification, with direct interpretation of the role of the predictors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauro Carrara
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
| | - Eleonora Massari
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandro Cicchetti
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Tommaso Giandini
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Avuzzi
- Department of Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Palorini
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Stucchi
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Giovanni Fellin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ospedale Santa Chiara, Trento, Italy
| | - Pietro Gabriele
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Istituto di Candiolo-Fondazione del Piemonte per l'Oncologia IRCCS, Candiolo, Italy
| | - Vittorio Vavassori
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cliniche Gavazzeni-Humanitas, Bergamo, Italy
| | | | - Cesare Cozzarini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Emanuele Pignoli
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Fiorino
- Department of Medical Physics, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Picardi C, Perret I, Miralbell R, Zilli T. Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the postoperative setting: What is the evidence so far? Cancer Treat Rev 2018; 62:91-96. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2017] [Revised: 11/05/2017] [Accepted: 11/06/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
15
|
Patient-reported urinary incontinence after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Quantifying the dose–effect. Radiother Oncol 2017; 125:101-106. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.07.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2017] [Revised: 07/27/2017] [Accepted: 07/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
16
|
Understanding Urinary Toxicity after Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: First Steps Forward. TUMORI JOURNAL 2017; 103:395-404. [DOI: 10.5301/tj.5000681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/21/2017] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
One of the most relevant achievements of Professor Gianni Bonadonna was the implementation of the methodology of controlled clinical trials in medical oncology. It is valid for all cancer types, oncological disciplines and clinical endpoints, both survival and toxicity. This narrative review reports on the status of the current knowledge of the radiation-induced urinary syndrome after external-beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. In recent years, the syndrome has been the object of large-scale prospective observational trials specifically devoted to investigating the association of patient and treatment features with acute/late urinary toxicity. The first results of these trials allow initial attempts at predictive modeling, which can serve as a basis for the optimization of patient selection and treatment planning.
Collapse
|
17
|
O'Callaghan ME, Raymond E, Campbell JM, Vincent AD, Beckmann K, Roder D, Evans S, McNeil J, Millar J, Zalcberg J, Borg M, Moretti K. Patient-Reported Outcomes After Radiation Therapy in Men With Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of Prognostic Tool Accuracy and Validity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 98:318-337. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2016] [Revised: 02/02/2017] [Accepted: 02/14/2017] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
18
|
Improta I, Palorini F, Cozzarini C, Rancati T, Avuzzi B, Franco P, Degli Esposti C, Del Mastro E, Girelli G, Iotti C, Vavassori V, Valdagni R, Fiorino C. Bladder spatial-dose descriptors correlate with acute urinary toxicity after radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Phys Med 2016; 32:1681-1689. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.08.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2016] [Revised: 08/16/2016] [Accepted: 08/17/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
|
19
|
Macroscopic Hematuria After Conventional or Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy: Results From a Prospective Phase 3 Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 96:304-312. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.05.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2016] [Revised: 04/21/2016] [Accepted: 05/18/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
20
|
Landoni V, Fiorino C, Cozzarini C, Sanguineti G, Valdagni R, Rancati T. Predicting toxicity in radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Phys Med 2016; 32:521-32. [PMID: 27068274 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.03.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2015] [Revised: 02/15/2016] [Accepted: 03/02/2016] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
This comprehensive review addresses most organs at risk involved in planning optimization for prostate cancer. It can be considered an update of a previous educational review that was published in 2009 (Fiorino et al., 2009). The literature was reviewed based on PubMed and MEDLINE database searches (from January 2009 up to September 2015), including papers in press; for each section/subsection, key title words were used and possibly combined with other more general key-words (such as radiotherapy, dose-volume effects, NTCP, DVH, and predictive model). Publications generally dealing with toxicity without any association with dose-volume effects or correlations with clinical risk factors were disregarded, being outside the aim of the review. A focus was on external beam radiotherapy, including post-prostatectomy, with conventional fractionation or moderate hypofractionation (<4Gy/fraction); extreme hypofractionation is the topic of another paper in this special issue. Gastrointestinal and urinary toxicity are the most investigated endpoints, with quantitative data published in the last 5years suggesting both a dose-response relationship and the existence of a number of clinical/patient related risk factors acting as dose-response modifiers. Some results on erectile dysfunction, bowel toxicity and hematological toxicity are also presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valeria Landoni
- Medical Physics, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Regina Elena, Rome, Italy
| | - Claudio Fiorino
- Medical Physics, Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Palorini F, Botti A, Carillo V, Gianolini S, Improta I, Iotti C, Rancati T, Cozzarini C, Fiorino C. Bladder dose-surface maps and urinary toxicity: Robustness with respect to motion in assessing local dose effects. Phys Med 2016; 32:506-11. [PMID: 27053449 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2015] [Revised: 02/29/2016] [Accepted: 03/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of inter-fraction modifications of bladder during RT of prostate cancer on bladder dose surface maps (DSM). Eighteen patients treated with daily image-guided Tomotherapy and moderate hypofractionation (70-72.8Gy at 2.5-2.6Gy/fr in 28 fractions and full bladder) were considered. Bladder contours were delineated on co-registered daily Megavoltage CT (MVCT) by a single observer and copied on the planning CT to generate dose-volume/surface histograms (DVH/DSH) and bladder DSMs. Discrepancies between planned and daily absorbed doses were analyzed through the average of individual systematic errors, the population systematic errors and the population random errors for the DVH/DSHs and DSMs. In total, 477 DVH/DSH and 472 DSM were available. DSH and DVH showed small population systematic errors of absolute surfaces (<3.4cm(2)) and volumes (<8.4cm(3)) at the highest doses. The dose to the posterior bladder base assessed on DSMs showed a mean systematic error below 1Gy, with population systematic and random errors within 4 and 3Gy, respectively. The region surrounding this area shows higher mean systematic errors (1-3Gy), population systematic (8-11Gy) and random (5-7Gy) errors. In conclusion, DVH/DSH and DSMs are quite stable with respect to inter-fraction variations in the high-dose region, within about 2cm from bladder base. Larger systematic variations occur in the anterior portion and cranially 2.5-3.5cm from the base. Results suggest that dose predictors related to the high dose area (including the trigone dose) are likely to be sufficiently reliable with respect to the expected variations due to variable bladder filling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Palorini
- Medical Physics, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - A Botti
- Medical Physics, Arcispedale S. M. Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - V Carillo
- Medical Physics, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - S Gianolini
- Medical Software Solutions GmbH, Hagendorn, Switzerland
| | - I Improta
- Medical Physics, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - C Iotti
- Radiotherapy, Arcispedale S. M. Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - T Rancati
- Prostate Cancer Program, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - C Cozzarini
- Radiotherapy, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - C Fiorino
- Medical Physics, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Fiorino C, Cozzarini C. In Regard to Lewis et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 94:859-60. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2015] [Accepted: 01/06/2016] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
|
23
|
Fiorino C, Briganti A, Cozzarini C. Re: Mark K. Buyyounouski. Radiobiological Modeling and the Study of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2014;66:1031–2. Eur Urol 2015; 67:e56-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2014] [Accepted: 10/21/2014] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
|