Dose-Escalated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Patients With Intermediate- and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Initial Dosimetry Analysis and Patient Outcomes

Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies).

RESULTS

A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.

Spatial Distribution of Recurrence and Long-Term Toxicity Following Dose Escalation to the Dominant Intra-Prostatic Nodule for Intermediate-High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Insights from a Phase I/II Study

Objectives: We investigated spatial patterns between primary and recurrent tumor sites and assessed long-term toxicity after dose escalation stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to the dominant intra-prostatic nodule (DIN). Materials and methods: In 33 patients with intermediate-high-risk prostate cancer (PCa), doses up to 50 Gy were administered to the DIN. Recurrence sites were determined and compared to the original tumor development sites through multiparametric MRI and 68Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT) images. Overlap rates, categorized as 75% or higher for full overlap, and 25-74% for partial overlap, were assessed. Long-term toxicity is reported. Results: All patients completed treatment, with only one receiving concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Recurrences were diagnosed after a median of 33 months (range: 17-76 months), affecting 13 out of 33 patients (39.4%). Intra-prostatic recurrences occurred in 7 patients (21%), with ≥75% overlap in two, a partial overlap in another two, and no overlap in the remaining three patients. Notably, five patients with intra-prostatic recurrences had synchronous bone and/or lymph node metastases, while six patients had isolated bone or lymph node metastasis without intra-prostatic recurrences. Extended follow-up revealed late grade ≥ 2 GU and GI toxicity in 18% (n = 6) and 6% (n = 2) of the patients. Conclusions: Among patients with intermediate-high-risk PCa undergoing focal dose-escalated SBRT without ADT, DIN recurrences were infrequent. When present, these recurrences were typically located at the original site or adjacent to the initial tumor. Conversely, relapses beyond the DIN and in extra-prostatic (metastatic) sites were prevalent, underscoring the significance of systemic ADT in managing this patient population. Advances in knowledge: Focal dose-escalated prostate SBRT prevented recurrences in the dominant nodule; however, extra-prostatic recurrence sites were frequent.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SIB-VMAT technique) to dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL) for localized prostate cancer: a dose-escalation trial (DESTROY-4)

PURPOSE

DESTROY-4 (DOSE-ESCALATION STUDY OF STEREOTACTIC BODY RADIATION THERAPY) was a Phase I trial aimed to evaluate the safety and the feasibility of escalating doses of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) on MRI-defined Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion (DIL) in low- and intermediate-risk pCa patients using a simultaneous integrated boost-volumetric arc therapy (SIB-VMAT) technique.

METHODS

Eligible patients included those with low- and intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma (NCCN risk classes) and an International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS) ≤ 15. No restriction about DIL and prostate volumes was set. Pretreatment preparation required an enema and the placement of intraprostatic gold fiducials. SBRT was delivered in five consecutive daily fractions. For the first three patients, the DIL radiation dose was set at 8 Gy per fraction up to a total dose of 40 Gy (PTV1) and was gradually increased in succeeding cohorts to total doses of 42.5 Gy, 45.0 Gy, 47.5 Gy, and finally, 50.0 Gy, while keeping the prescription of 35 Gy/7 Gy per fraction for the entire prostate gland. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3 or worse gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurring within 90 days of follow-up (Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events scale 4.0). Patients completed quality-of-life questionnaires at defined intervals.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients with a median age of 75 (range, 58-89) years were enrolled. The median follow-up was 26.3 months (8.9-84 months). 66.7% of patients were classified as intermediate-risk groups, while the others were low-risk groups, according to the NCCN guidelines. Enrolled patients were treated as follows: 8 patients (40 Gy), 5 patients (42.5 Gy), 4 patients (45 Gy), 4 patients (47.5 Gy), and 3 patients (50 Gy). No severe acute toxicities were observed. G1 and G2 acute GU toxicities occurred in 4 (16%) and 3 patients (12.5%), respectively. Two patients (8.3%) and 3 patients (12.5%) experienced G1 and G2 GI toxicities, respectively. Since no DLTs were observed, 50 Gy in five fractions was considered the MTD. The median nadir PSA was 0.20 ng/mL. A slight improvement in QoL values was registered after the treatment.

CONCLUSION

This trial confirms the feasibility and safety of a total SIB-VMAT dose of 35 Gy on the whole gland and 50 Gy on DIL in 5 fractions daily administered in a well-selected low- and intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma population. A phase II study is ongoing to confirm the tolerability of the schedule and assess the efficacy.

HypoFocal SRT Trial: Ultra-hypofractionated focal salvage radiotherapy for isolated prostate bed recurrence after radical prostatectomy; single-arm phase II study; clinical trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy (RT) being established treatments for localised prostate cancer, a significant number of patients experience recurrent disease. While conventionally fractionated RT is still being used as a standard treatment in the postoperative setting, ultra-hypofractionated RT has emerged as a viable option with encouraging results in patients with localised disease in the primary setting. In addition, recent technological advancements in RT delivery and precise definition of isolated macroscopic recurrence within the prostate bed using prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) allow the exploration of ultra-hypofractionated schedules in the salvage setting using five fractions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this single-arm prospective phase II multicentre trial, 36 patients with node-negative prostate adenocarcinoma treated with RP at least 6 months before trial registration, tumour stage pT2a-3b, R0-1, pN0 or cN0 according to the UICC TNM 2009 and evidence of measurable local recurrence within the prostate bed detected by PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI within the last 3 months, will be included. The patients will undergo focal ultra-hypofractionated salvage RT with 34 Gy in five fractions every other day to the site of local recurrence in combination with 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy. The primary outcome of this study is biochemical relapse-free survival at 2 years. Secondary outcomes include acute side effects (until 90 days after the end of RT) of grade 3 or higher based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5, progression-free survival, metastasis-free survival, late side effects and the quality of life (based on European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30, QLQ-PR25).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has received ethical approval from the Ethics Commission of the Canton of Bern (KEK-BE 2022-01026). Academic dissemination will occur through publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05746806.

Five Fractions versus Seven Fractions SBRT for Intermediate- and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Propensity Score Matched Pair Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare two stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) regimens in patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer with regards toxicity and efficacy.

METHODS/MATERIAL

We retrospectively collected data from 198 patients treated with SBRT for prostate cancer at two different institutions. Patients received either 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions (group A) using Cyberknife robotic platform or 42.7 Gy in seven fractions (group B) using a C-arm LINAC (image-guided). Propensity score matching was done (2:1 nearest neighbor matching without replacement), resulting in 120 patients (80 patients for group A, 40 patients for group B). Toxicity, PSA nadir, biochemical failure and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median follow up of all patients was 13 months (range 1-91 months). Overall, 23.3% of patients had ≥G2 acute GU toxicity (21.1% group A versus 30% group B (p = 0.222)) and 6.6% of patients ≥G2 GI toxicity (2.5% versus 15% (p = 0.010)). There was one acute G3 GU toxicity in arm A and one acute G4 rectal bleeding in group B (anticoagulated patient). Regarding late toxicity, 14.1% of patients had ≥G2 late GU toxicity (17.4% versus 6.6% (p = 0.159)) and 5.0% of patients had ≥G2 late GI toxicity (1.4% versus 13.3% (p = 0.013)). There was one G3 late GU toxicity in arm B and two G3 late GI toxicities, one in each arm. Relative median PSA reduction was 92.4% (-53.9-99.9%) from baseline PSA (93.7% (-53.9-99.9%) in group A versus 87.7% (39.8-99.9%) in group B (p = 0.043). In total, 4.2% of patients had biochemical relapse, 5.0% in group A and 2.5% in group B (p = 0.518). One-year DFS in the overall cohort was 97.3%, 98.8% in group A and 94.3% in group B (p = 0.318).

CONCLUSION

Both SBRT regimens have acceptable acute and late toxicity and good efficacy. There are significantly more GI toxicities in the seven-fraction regimen. Longer follow-up is warranted for better comparison of long-term efficacy.

Transperineal ultrasound is a good alternative for intra-fraction motion monitoring for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy

PURPOSES

To report our experience in a prospective study of implementing a transperineal ultrasound system to monitor intra-fractional prostate motion for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This IRB-approved prospective study included 23 prostate SBRT patients treated between 04/2016 and 11/2019 at our institution. The prescription doses were 36.25 Gy to the Low-Dose planning target volume (LD-PTV) and 40 Gy to the High-Dose PTV (HD-PTV) in five fractions with 3 mm planning margins. The transperineal ultrasound system was successfully used in 110 of the 115 fractions. For intra-fraction prostate motion, the real-time prostate displacements measured by ultrasound were exported for analysis. The percentage of time prostate movement exceeded a 2 mm threshold was calculated for each fraction of all patients. T-test was used for all statistical comparisons.

RESULTS

Ultrasound image quality was adequate for prostate delineation and prostate motion tracking. The setup time for each fraction under ultrasound-guided prostate SBRT was 15.0 ± 4.9 min and the total treatment time per fraction was 31.8 ± 10.5 min. The presence of an ultrasound probe did not compromise the contouring of targets or critical structures. For intra-fraction motion, prostate movement exceeded 2 mm tolerance in 23 of 110 fractions for 11 of 23 patients. For all fractions, the mean percentage of time when the prostate moved more than 2 mm in any direction during each fraction was 7%, ranging from 0% to 62% of a fraction.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided prostate SBRT is a good option for intra-fraction motion monitoring with clinically acceptable efficiency.

A pilot study of stereotactic body radiotherapy combined with pelvic radiotherapy and GTVp boost based on multiparameter magnetic resonance image in patients with high-risk prostate cancer

This pilot study aimed to explore the preliminary effects and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) combined with preventive pelvic radiotherapy and primary gross tumor volumes (GTVp) boost in patients with high-risk prostate cancer based on multiparameter magnetic resonance image (mpMRI). Tumors were contoured as GTVp based on mpMRI. The prostate and proximal seminal vesicles were considered as the clinical target volume1. The pelvic lymphatic drainage area constituted clinical target volume 2. Radiation doses were 40Gy or 45Gy/5fractions to planning target volume of primary tumor, 37.5Gy/5f to prostate, seminal vesicle, and positive pelvic lymph nodes, and 25Gy/5f to pelvic synchronously. The treatment was delivered 3 times per week. Volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy were used to complete SBRT. The genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were evaluated. Quality of life data was also captured. A total of 15 patients were enrolled in this study with a median age of 78 (56-87) from 2017 to 2020. All patients received SBRT. At 3 months after radiotherapy, the proportion of PSA < 0.006 ng/mL was 66.7% (10/15). The 2-year biochemical relapse-free survival was 93.3%. The incidence of grade 1 acute GU side effects was 80% (12/15); the incidence of acute grade 1 GI toxicity was 66.7% (10/15); and no grade 2 or higher acute GU and GI side effects was observed. Two patients presented with temporary late grade 2 GI toxicity. International Prostatic System Score increased rapidly after a transient increase at 1 week (P = .001). There were no significant differences in EORTC quality of life scores in all domains except global health status. In this pilot study, it was revealed that SBRT combined with preventive pelvic radiotherapy and GTVp boost based on mpMRI image was effective and well tolerated for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Local Failure after Prostate SBRT Predominantly Occurs in the PI-RADS 4 or 5 Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion

BACKGROUND

A positive post-treatment prostate biopsy following definitive radiotherapy carries significant prognostic implications.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether local recurrences after prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) are associated with the presence of and occur more commonly within the region of a PI-RADS 4 or 5 dominant intra-prostatic lesion (DIL) identified on pre-treatment multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

247 patients with localized prostate cancer treated with SBRT at our institution from 2009-2018 underwent post-treatment biopsies (median time to biopsy: 2.2 years) to evaluate local control.

INTERVENTIONS

Prostate SBRT (median 40 Gy in 5 fractions).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

MRIs were read by a single diagnostic radiologist blinded to other patient characteristics and treatment outcomes. The DIL presence, size, location, and extent were then analyzed to determine associations with the post-treatment biopsy outcomes.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Among patients who underwent post-treatment biopsies, 39/247 (15.8%) were positive for Gleason-gradable prostate adenocarcinoma, of which 35/39 (90%) had a DIL initially present and 29/39 (74.4%) had a positive biopsy within the DIL. Factors independently associated with post-treatment biopsy outcomes included the presence of a DIL (OR 6.95; p = 0.001), radiographic T3 disease (OR 5.23, p < 0.001), SBRT dose ≥40 Gy (OR 0.26, p = 0.003), and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; OR 0.28, p = 0.027). Among patients with a DIL (N = 149), the only factors associated with post-treatment biopsy outcomes included ≥50% percent cores positive (OR 2.4, p = 0.037), radiographic T3 disease (OR 4.04, p = 0.001), SBRT dose ≥40 Gy (OR 0.22, p < 0.001), and use of ADT (OR 0.21, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that men with PI-RADS 4 or 5 DILs have a higher risk of local recurrence after prostate SBRT and that most recurrences are located within the DIL.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We found the presence of a dominant tumor on pre-treatment MRI was strongly associated with residual cancer within the prostate after SBRT and that most recurrences were within the dominant tumor.

Propensity-Weighted Survival Analysis of SBRT vs. Conventional Radiotherapy in Unfavorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), which delivers high-dose precision treatment in ≤5 fractions, is a shorter, more convenient, and less expensive alternative to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CRFT; ∼44 fractions) or moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MFRT; 20-28 fractions). SBRT has not been widely adopted but may have radiobiologic advantages over CFRT/MFRT. We hypothesized that SBRT would be associated with improved overall survival (OS) versus CFRT or MFRT ± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for unfavorable-intermediate-risk prostate cancer (UIR-PCa).

METHODS

Men with UIR-PCa treated with SBRT (35-40Gy in ≤5 fractions) or biologically equivalent doses of CFRT (72-86.4Gy in 1.8-2.0Gy/fraction) or MRFT (≥60Gy in 2.4-3.2Gy/fraction; biologically effective doses ≥120) were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Unweighted and propensity-weighted multivariable Cox analysis (MVA) was used to compare OS hazard ratios.

RESULTS

Of 28,028 men with UIR-PCa who received CFRT with (n = 12,872) or without ADT (n = 12,984); MFRT with (n = 251) or without ADT (n = 281); and SBRT with (n = 212) or without ADT (n = 1,428) were identified. Relative to CFRT without ADT, CFRT+ ADT (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.97, P = .002) and SBRT without ADT (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.89, P = .002) were both associated with improved OS on MVA. Relative to CFRT+ADT, SBRT without ADT correlated with improved OS on MVA (HR:0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.99, P = .04). Propensity-weighted MVA demonstrated that SBRT (HR:0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.98, P = .036) and ADT (HR:0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.97, P = .002) correlated with improved OS. SBRT was not associated with improved OS versus MFRT.

CONCLUSION

SBRT, which offers a cheaper and shorter treatment course that mitigates COVID-19 exposure, was associated with improved OS versus CFRT for UIR-PCa. These results confirm guideline-based recommendations that SBRT is a viable option for UIR prostate cancer. The results from this large retrospective study require further validation in clinical trials.

Evaluating the impact of possible interobserver variability in CBCT-based soft-tissue matching using TCP/NTCP models for prostate cancer radiotherapy

Background

Prostate alignment is subject to interobserver variability in cone-beam CT (CBCT)-based soft-tissue matching. This study aims to analyze the impact of possible interobserver variability in CBCT-based soft-tissue matching for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Methods

Retrospective data, consisting of 156 CBCT images from twelve prostate cancer patients with elective nodal irradiation were analyzed in this study. To simulate possible interobserver variability, couch shifts of 2 mm relative to the resulting patient position of prostate alignment were assumed as potential patient positions (27 possibilities). For each CBCT, the doses of the potential patient positions were re-calculated using deformable image registration-based synthetic CT. The impact of the simulated interobserver variability was evaluated using tumor control probabilities (TCPs) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs).

Results

No significant differences in TCPs were found between prostate alignment and potential patient positions (0.944 ± 0.003 vs 0.945 ± 0.003, P = 0.117). The average NTCPs of the rectum ranged from 5.16 to 7.29 (%) among the potential patient positions and were highly influenced by the couch shift in the anterior–posterior direction. In contrast, the average NTCPs of the bladder ranged from 0.75 to 1.12 (%) among the potential patient positions and were relatively negligible.

Conclusions

The NTCPs of the rectum, rather than the TCPs of the target, were highly influenced by the interobserver variability in CBCT-based soft-tissue matching. This study provides a theoretical explanation for daily CBCT-based image guidance and the prostate-rectum interface matching procedure.

Trial registration: Not applicable.

Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to dominant intra-prostatic lesions during extreme hypofractionation for prostate cancer: the impact of rectal spacers

Purpose

Boosting dominant intra-prostatic lesions (DILs) has the potential to increase the therapeutic ratio in prostate cancer radiotherapy. In this study, employing 5-fraction stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to deliver 40 Gy to the prostate clinical target volume (CTV) while boosting the DIL up to 50 Gy was evaluated for patients before and after rectal spacer insertion.

Materials and methods

24 Computed Tomography (CT) scans of 12 prostate cancer patients with unfavourable intermediate or high risk prostate cancer were employed in this study. At least two treatment plans were generated for each patient to compare pre- and post-spacer insertion plans. Plans were evaluated for target coverage, organs-at-risk doses, and the achievable boost dose level.

Results

The CTV coverage was significantly better in plans with a spacer, V40Gy 98.4% versus 97.0% (p = 0.012). Using spacers significantly reduced rectal dose in all 12 patients in this study. It was possible to boost DIL to 50 Gy to without violating dose constraints in 6 of 12 patients and to 47.5 Gy in 3 patients post-spacer insertion. For 3 patients (25%) it was not possible to boost DIL above 45 Gy even with a spacer in situ. Without a spacer, for 6 patient (50%) clinically acceptable plan were only achieved when the DIL dose was lowered to 45 Gy. In five of these 6 patients the dose limiting structure was the urethra (urethra planning risk volume V45Gy [cc] ≤ 0.1 cc constraint).

Conclusions

Clinically acceptable plans for 5 fraction SABR, 40 Gy to the prostate CTV, with a SIB to DIL (45–50 Gy) were achieved. The boost dose achieved was DIL location dependent and primarily affected by DIL’s proximity to the urethra. Compared to plans before spacer insertion, higher DIL dose were achieved with spacer in situ for 25% of the patients. Moreover, significant reduction in rectal dose and better target coverage were also achieved for all patients with spacers in situ.

Stereotactic Radiotherapy after Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Prostate Cancer in the Adjuvant or Salvage Setting: A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

Stereotactic body radiotherapy, a type of high-precision radiotherapy delivering high doses within few treatment sessions has proven to be effective and well tolerated in prostate cancer patients treated with definite radiotherapy. This systematic review summarizes the available data and analyzes whether this modern treatment may routinely be offered to prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy.

Abstract

(1) Background: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men and can be treated with radical prostatectomy (RPE) or radiotherapy in the primary setting. Stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) has proven to be effective and well tolerated in this setting. However, if SBRT is an equally promising treatment option if applied in the adjuvant or salvage setting after RPE remains unknown. (2) Methods: We searched the PubMed and Embase databases with the following full-text queries in August 2021 for any combination of the terms “SBRT”, “prostate”, “adjuvant”, “postoperative”, “salvage”, “stereotactic radiotherapy”, “prostate bed”. There were no limitations regarding publication date or language. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. (3) Results: We identified 11 individual studies that were included in this systematic review. Three publications included patients without prior radiotherapy and the remaining eight patients with prior radiotherapy. In all but two publications the radiation target was the macroscopic recurrence. SBRT was overall well tolerated with acceptable rates of acute and late gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity. Quality of life was published for two phase I trials with good results. There was a very heterogeneous reporting on biochemical control after SBRT. (4) Conclusions: At this point, ultra-hypofractionated RT using SBRT to the prostate bed remains experimental and its use should be restricted to clinical trials. Given the biological rationale for extreme hypofractionation in patients with prostate cancer and the acceptable toxicity rates that have been reported, further exploration of this field is warranted.

The Journey of Radiotherapy Dose Escalation in High Risk Prostate Cancer; Conventional Dose Escalation to Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) Boost Treatments

High risk prostate cancer (HR-PrCa) is a subset of localized PrCa with significant potential for morbidity and mortality associated with disease recurrence and metastasis. Radiotherapy combined with Androgen Deprivation Therapy has been the standard of care for many years in HR-PrCa. In recent years, dose escalation, hypo-fractionation and high precision delivery with immobilization and image-guidance have substantially changed the face of modern PrCa radiotherapy, improving treatment convenience and outcomes. Ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy delivered with high precision in the form of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) combines delivery of high biologically equivalent dose radiotherapy with the convenience of a shorter treatment schedule, as well as the promise of similar efficacy and reduced toxicity compared to conventional radiotherapy. However, rigorous investigation of SBRT in HR-PrCa remains limited. Here, we review the changes in HR-PrCa radiotherapy through dose escalation, hypo- and ultra-hypo-fractionated radiotherapy boost treatments, and the radiobiological basis of these treatments. We focus on completed and on-going trials in this disease utilizing SBRT as a sole radiation modality or as boost therapy following pelvic radiation.

Evaluation of T2-Weighted MRI for Visualization and Sparing of Urethra with MR-Guided Radiation Therapy (MRgRT) On-Board MRI

Simple Summary

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a standard of care option for prostate cancer patients, utilizing large fractionated dose to shorten treatment times. However, genitourinary (GU) toxicity associated with urethral injury remains prevalent due to non-trivial urethra delineation and sparing at treatment planning and treatment delivery. The aim of our study was to evaluate two optimized urethral MRI sequences (3D HASTE and 3D TSE) with a 0.35T MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) system for urethral visibility and delineation. Among 11 prostate cancer patients, a radiation oncologist qualitatively scored MRgRT 3D HASTE as having the best urethra visibility, superior to CT, clinical MRgRT 3D bSSFP, MRgRT 3D TSE, and similar to diagnostic 3T (2D/3D) T2-weighetd MRI. Moreover, urethra contours from different imaging and clinical workflows demonstrated significant urethra localization variability. Optimized 3D MRgRT HASTE can provide urethral visualization and delineation within an MRgRT workflow for urethral sparing, avoiding cross-modality/system registration errors.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate urethral contours from two optimized urethral MRI sequences with an MR-guided radiotherapy system (MRgRT). Methods: Eleven prostate cancer patients were scanned on a MRgRT system using optimized urethral 3D HASTE and 3D TSE. A resident radiation oncologist contoured the prostatic urethra on the patients’ planning CT, diagnostic 3T T2w MRI, and both urethral MRIs. An attending radiation oncologist reviewed/edited the resident’s contours and additionally contoured the prostatic urethra on the clinical planning MRgRT MRI (bSSFP). For each image, the resident radiation oncologist, attending radiation oncologist, and a senior medical physicist qualitatively scored the prostatic urethra visibility. Using MRgRT 3D HASTE-based contouring workflow as baseline, prostatic urethra contours drawn on CT, diagnostic MRI, clinical bSSFP and 3D TSE were evaluated relative to the contour on 3D HASTE using 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95), mean-distance-to-agreement (MDA), and DICE coefficient. Additionally, prostatic urethra contrast-to-noise-ratios (CNR) were calculated for all images. Results: For two out of three observers, the urethra visibility score for 3D HASTE was significantly higher than CT, and clinical bSSFP, but was not significantly different from diagnostic MRI. The mean HD95/MDA/DICE values were 11.35 ± 3.55 mm/5.77 ± 2.69 mm/0.07 ± 0.08 for CT, 7.62 ± 2.75 mm/3.83 ± 1.47 mm/0.12 ± 0.10 for CT + diagnostic MRI, 5.49 ± 2.32 mm/2.18 ± 1.19 mm/0.35 ± 0.19 for 3D TSE, and 6.34 ± 2.89 mm/2.65 ± 1.31 mm/0.21 ± 0.12 for clinical bSSFP. The CNR for 3D HASTE was significantly higher than CT, diagnostic MRI, and clinical bSSFP, but was not significantly different from 3D TSE. Conclusion: The urethra’s visibility scores showed optimized urethral MRgRT 3D HASTE was superior to the other tested methodologies. The prostatic urethra contours demonstrated significant variability from different imaging and workflows. Urethra contouring uncertainty introduced by cross-modality registration and sub-optimal imaging contrast may lead to significant treatment degradation when urethral sparing is implemented to minimize genitourinary toxicity.

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.

Stereotactic radiotherapy with focal boost for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer: Initial results of the SPARC trial

INTRODUCTION

Dose escalation to dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs) is a novel method to increase the therapeutic ratio in localised prostate cancer. The Stereotactic Prostate Augmented Radiotherapy with Cyberknife (SPARC) trial was designed to determine the feasibility of a focal boost defined with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) using stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were included with newly diagnosed intermediate to high risk prostate cancer with at least one of: Gleason score 4 + 3, stage T3a, or PSA > 20 ng/ml. Visible disease on mpMRI was mandatory and up to 2 separate nodules were allowed. All patients received androgen deprivation. Patients received 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions using CyberKnife® and the DIL received a simultaneous boost to a maximum of 47.5 Gy, as allowed by OAR constraints. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was reported using the RTOG scoring criteria. International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and EQ-5D global health scores were regularly captured.

RESULTS

An interim safety analysis was performed on the first 8 patients, recruited between July 2013 and December 2015. Median follow up was 56 months (range 50-74). Median D95 values for the prostate PTV and boost volume were 36.55 Gy (range 35.87-36.99) and 46.62 Gy (range 44.85-48.25) respectively. Of the dose constraints, 10/80 were not achieved but all were minor dose variations. Grade 2+ acute GU and GI toxicities were 37.5% respectively while grade 2+ late GU and GI toxicities were 12.5% and 0% respectively. IIEF and quality of life scores recovered over time and all patients remain in biochemical remission.

CONCLUSION

The first patients have been successfully treated with prostate SABR and focal boost on the SPARC trial, with excellent adherence to the planning protocol. Toxicity and efficacy results are promising and further recruitment is underway.

Favorable Biochemical Freedom From Recurrence With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Intermediate and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Single Institutional Experience With Long-Term Follow-Up

Purpose/Objective(s): The current study reports long-term overall survival (OS) and biochemical freedom from recurrence (BFFR) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer in a single community hospital setting with early adoption.

Materials/Methods: Ninety-seven consecutive men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer treated with SBRT between 2007 and 2015 were retrospectively studied. Categorical variables for analysis included National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, race, Gleason grade group, T stage, use of androgen deprivation therapy, and planning target volume dose. Continuous variables for analysis included pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA), percent cores positive, age at diagnosis, PSA nadir, prostate volume, percent prostate that received 40 Gy, and minimum dose to 0.03 cc of prostate (Dmin). BFFR was assessed using the Phoenix nadir +2 definition. OS and BFFR were estimated using Kaplan–Meier (KM) methodology with comparisons accomplished using log-rank statistics. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was accomplished with a backwards selection Cox proportional-hazards model with statistical significance taken at the p < 0.05 level.

Results: Median FU is 78.4 months. Five- and ten-year OS KM estimates are 90.9 and 73.2%, respectively, with 19 deaths recorded. MVA reveals pretreatment PSA (p = 0.032), percent prostate 40 Gy (p = 0.003), and race (p = 0.031) were predictive of OS. Five- and nine-year BFFR KM estimates are 92.1 and 87.5%, respectively, with 10 biochemical failures recorded. MVA revealed PSA nadir (p < 0.001) was the only factor predictive of BFFR. Specifically, for every one-unit increase in PSA nadir, there was a 4.2-fold increased odds of biochemical failure (HR = 4.248). No significant differences in BFFR were found between favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk prostate cancer (p = 0.054) with 7-year KM estimates of 96.6, 81.0, and 85.7%, respectively.

Conclusions: Favorable OS and BFFR can be expected after SBRT for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer with non-significant differences seen for BFFR between favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk groups. Our 5-year BFFR compares favorably with the HYPO-RT-PC trial of 84%. PSA nadir was predictive of biochemical failure. This study is ultimately limited by the small absolute number of high-risk patients included.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Prostate Cancer in Men With a High Baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS ≥ 15)

Background: Patients with a high pretreatment IPSS may have higher rates of late urinary morbidity after radiation therapy for prostate cancer (1). Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivers fewer high-dose fractions of radiation, which may be radiobiologically favorable to the conventional low-dose external beam fractions. The urinary toxicity associated with SBRT, however, remains unclear in patients with a high IPSS (1). We report our experience using SBRT for localized prostate cancer in patients with pretreatment IPSS ≥ 15.

Methods: Localized prostate cancer patients with a pre-treatment IPSS ≥ 15 treated with SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital from 2009 to 2016 were included in this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. These patients were treated to 35–36.25 Gy in five fractions delivered via CyberKnife (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). Urinary toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v4). Urinary quality of life was assessed using validated questionnaires (IPSS and EPIC-26).

Results: 53 patients at a median age of 71 years (range 57–89 years) received SBRT with a minimum follow up of 3 years. The median prostate size was 37 cm³ (range 12–100 cm³) and 30.2% patients received ADT. The 3-years incidence rate of Grade 3 urinary toxicity was 7.5% with median time to toxicity of 2.9 years. There were no Grade 4 or 5 toxicities. A mean baseline IPSS score of 19.8 significantly decreased to 12.9 at 3 months post-SBRT (p = 0.002) and remained stable at 36 months (13.7). A mean baseline EPIC-26 obstructive/irritative score of 64.1 significantly improved to 80.2 at 3 months (p = 0.002). This improvement was maintained to 36 months. There was no significant change from the mean baseline EPIC-26 urinary incontinence score at any point during follow up.

Conclusions: SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer was well-tolerated in men with baseline IPSS ≥ 15 (1). Grade 3 toxicities occurred but resolved with time. Our data suggest that poor baseline urinary function does not worsen following SBRT and may even improve. High baseline IPSS score should not be considered a contraindication to SBRT.

Harnessing the potential of multimodal radiotherapy in prostate cancer

Radiotherapy in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a standard treatment option for men with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, emerging clinical evidence suggests that radiotherapy can be incorporated into multimodality therapy regimens beyond ADT, in combinations that include chemotherapy, radiosensitizing agents, immunotherapy and surgery for the treatment of men with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer, and those with oligometastatic disease, in whom the low metastatic burden in particular might be treatable with these combinations. This multimodal approach is increasingly recognized as offering considerable clinical benefit, such as increased antitumour effects and improved survival. Thus, radiotherapy is becoming a key component of multimodal therapy for many stages of prostate cancer, particularly oligometastatic disease.

Gantry-Mounted Linear Accelerator-Based Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose

To establish the safety and efficacy of gantry-mounted linear accelerator-based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Methods

We pooled 921 patients enrolled on 7 single-institution prospective phase II trials of gantry-based SBRT from 2006 to 2017. The cumulative incidences of biochemical recurrence (defined by the Phoenix definition) and physician-scored genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities (defined per the original trials using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were estimated using a competing risk framework. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between late toxicity and prespecified covariates: biologically effective dose, every other day versus weekly fractionation, intrafractional motion monitoring, and acute toxicity.

Results

Median follow-up was 3.1 years (range, 0.5-10.8 years). In addition, 505 (54.8%) patients had low-risk disease, 236 (25.6%) had favorable intermediate-risk disease, and 180 (19.5%) had unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Intrafractional motion monitoring was performed in 78.0% of patients. The 3-year cumulative incidence of biochemical recurrence was 0.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-1.7%), 2.2% (95% CI, 0-4.3%), and 5.1% (95% CI, 1.0-9.2%) for low-, favorable intermediate-, and unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Acute grade ≥2 GU and GI toxicity occurred in 14.5% and 4.6% of patients, respectively. Three-year cumulative incidence estimates of late grade 2 GU and GI toxicity were 4.1% (95% CI, 2.6-5.5%) and 1.3% (95% CI, 0.5-2.1%), respectively, with late grade ≥3 GU and GI toxicity estimates of 0.7% (95% CI, 0.1-1.3%) and 0.4% (95% CI, 0-0.8%), respectively. The only identified significant predictors of late grade ≥2 toxicity were acute grade ≥2 toxicity (P < .001) and weekly fractionation (P < .01), although only 12.4% of patients were treated weekly.

Conclusions

Gantry-based SBRT for prostate cancer is associated with a favorable safety and efficacy profile, despite variable intrafractional motion management techniques. These findings suggest that multiple treatment platforms can be used to safely deliver prostate SBRT.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective trials

Background: Despite the increasing worldwide utilization of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer, there are no known summative data regarding its safety and efficacy. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a PRISMA-guided systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective prostate SBRT trials. Results: Fourteen trials with a total of 2,038 patients were included. Median follow-up was 37 months (range 6-55 months). Most patients had cT1-T2a, Gleason ≤7 disease with median pre-treatment PSAs of 5-10; 1,042 (51%) were low-risk, 744 (37%) were intermediate-risk, 158 (8%) were high-risk, and the remainder were unreported. Doses ranged from 33.5-50.0 Gy, most typically in 5 fractions, with nearly all studies delivering nondaily fractionation with some type of daily image guidance. Outcomes were converted into counts at the end of one year. The pooled rate of FFBF was 98% [95% confidence interval, 97-98%]. The pooled rate of late grade ≥3 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were 1% [0-5%] and 2% [1-3%], respectively. Methods: PubMed and Google Scholar were queried for prospective studies evaluating survival and/or toxicity outcomes in SBRT (≤5 fractions) for localized prostate cancer. Pooled rates of freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) and late grades ≥3 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were assessed. Meta-analysis of proportions was logit transformed and pooled using generalized linear mixed models (both fixed and random effects) and subsequently back transformed to standard proportions. Conclusions: Despite the lack of long-term follow-up and heterogeneity of the available evidence, prostate SBRT affords appropriate biochemical control with few high-grade toxicities. These data have implications for ongoing worldwide utilization of prostate SBRT as well as ongoing prospective investigations.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Over 6,000 Patients Treated On Prospective Studies

PURPOSE

Utilization of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for treatment of localized prostate cancer is increasing. Guidelines and payers variably support the use of prostate SBRT. We therefore sought to systematically analyze biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), physician-reported toxicity, and patient-reported outcomes after prostate SBRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic search leveraging Medline via PubMed and EMBASE for original articles published between January 1990 and January 2018 was performed. This was supplemented by abstracts with sufficient extractable data from January 2013 to March 2018. All prospective series assessing curative-intent prostate SBRT for localized prostate cancer reporting bRFS, physician-reported toxicity, and patient-reported quality of life with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Meta-analyses were performed with random-effect modeling. Extent of heterogeneity between studies was determined by the I2 and Cochran's Q tests. Meta-regression was performed using Hartung-Knapp methods.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight unique prospective series were identified comprising 6116 patients. Median follow-up was 39 months across all patients (range, 12-115 months). Ninety-two percent, 78%, and 38% of studies included low, intermediate, and high-risk patients. Overall, 5- and 7-year bRFS rates were 95.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.3%-97.5%) and 93.7% (95% CI, 91.4%-95.5%), respectively. Estimated late grade ≥3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity rates were 2.0% (95% CI, 1.4%-2.8%) and 1.1% (95% CI, 0.6%-2.0%), respectively. By 2 years post-SBRT, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite urinary and bowel domain scores returned to baseline. Increasing dose of SBRT was associated with improved biochemical control (P = .018) but worse late grade ≥3 GU toxicity (P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate SBRT has substantial prospective evidence supporting its use, with favorable tumor control, patient-reported quality of life, and levels of toxicity demonstrated. SBRT has sufficient evidence to be supported as a standard treatment option for localized prostate cancer while ongoing trials assess its potential superiority.

Early Tolerance Outcomes of Stereotactic Hypofractionated Accelerated Radiation Therapy Concomitant with Pelvic Node Irradiation in High-risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the toxicity of prostate and pelvic lymph node stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for high-risk prostate cancer.

Methods and Materials

Twenty-three patients with high-risk or lymph node-positive prostate cancer were treated with SBRT that delivered 37.5 to 40 Gy in 5 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles, with concomitant treatment of the pelvic nodes to 25 Gy. In general, patients received neoadjuvant, concurrent, and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy for a duration of 18 months. Toxicities were evaluated with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0. The median follow-up was 19 months (range, 3-48 months).

Results

Acute grade 1 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were noted in 2 patients (9.1%). No patient experienced acute grade ≥2 GI toxicity. Acute genitourinary (GU) grade 1, 2, and 3 toxicities were observed in 7 patients (31.8%), 8 patients (36.4%), and 1 patient (4.5%), respectively. Late grade 2 GI and GU toxicities were observed in 2 patients (9.1%) and 6 patients (27.3%), respectively. No late grade ≥3 GI toxicity was noted. Late grade ≥3 GU (hemorrhagic cystitis) was noted in 1 patient (4.5%), which responded to laser fulguration.

Conclusions

SBRT with pelvic lymph node radiation therapy was feasible and well tolerated. The incidence of grade ≥3 GU and GI toxicities was uncommon. Continued follow-up will be required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of this approach for high-risk patients.

Brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer in the modern era: a comparison of patient-reported quality of life outcomes among different techniques

Purpose

To report our institutional quality of life (QOL) data for low-dose-rate (LDR) monotherapy (LDR mono), high-dose-rate (HDR) monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost).

Material and methods

The charts of 165 patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated with LDR monotherapy (LDR mono), HDR monotherapy (HDR mono), and EBRT with an HDR brachytherapy boost (HDR boost) at a single institution between 2012 and 2015 were reviewed. All patients completed the American Urological Association symptom score (AUASS) and Expanded Prostate Index for Prostate Cancer - Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) quality of life assessments prior to treatment and at least one follow-up survey. Time points included baseline, ≤ 2 months, 2-≤ 6 months, 6-≤ 12 months, 12-≤ 18 months, 18-≤ 24 months, 24-≤ 30 months, and > 30 months. Linear mixed models were performed to test for significant changes and differences in each outcome over time.

Results

Mean follow-up was 19.5 months. All major functional QOL domains were affected after treatment with brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. All domains improved over time, with the exception of sexual function scores for all groups and urinary incontinence scores for the HDR mono group. Patients treated with LDR did have higher AUA, irritability/obstructive symptoms, incontinence, bowel, and QOL scores acutely compared to the HDR and HDR + boost groups. Vitality scores were significantly worse in the HDR boost group both acutely and at the > 30-month time point.

Conclusions

Patients receiving HDR brachytherapy had lower acute urinary and rectal toxicity compared to the patients receiving LDR, even when combined with EBRT. However, long-term toxicity was similar.

Long-term results and PSA kinetics after robotic SBRT for prostate cancer: multicenter retrospective study in Korea (Korean radiation oncology group study 15-01)

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the treatment outcome and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) change after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

Patients with localized prostate cancer treated with SBRT at three academic hospitals were enrolled. Treatment was delivered using Cyberknife with dose range from 35 to 37.5 Gy in 5 fractions. Biochemical failure (BCF) was assessed with Phoenix definition and toxicities were scored with Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) toxicity criteria. The PSA kinetics were analyzed in patients who received no androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and showed no recurrence.

RESULTS

Of the total 88 patients, 14 patients (15.9%) received ADT. After median follow-up of 63.8 months, the 5-year BCF free survival (BCFFS) was 94.7%. Two patients experienced late grade ≥ 3 GI toxicities (2.2%). The median nadir PSA was 0.12 ng/mL (range, 0.00-2.62 ng/mL) and the median time to nadir was 44.8 months (range, 0.40-85.7 months). Patients who reached nadir before 24 months showed poorer BCFFS than the others. The rate of PSA decline was maximum in the first year after treatment and gradually decreased with time. The pattern of PSA change was significantly different according to the risk groups (p = 0.011) with the slope of - 0.139, - 0.161 and - 0.253 ng/mL/month in low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

SBRT for localized prostate cancer showed favorable efficacy with minimal toxicities. The time to PSA nadir was significantly associated with treatment outcome. PSA revealed rapid initial decline and slower decrease with longer follow-up and the patterns of PSA changes were different according to the risk groups.

50-Gy Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy to the Dominant Intraprostatic Nodule: Results From a Phase 1a/b Trial

PURPOSE

Although localized prostate cancer (PCa) is multifocal, the dominant intraprostatic nodule (DIN) is responsible for disease progression after radiation therapy. PCa expresses antigens that could be recognized by the immune system. We therefore hypothesized that stereotactic dose escalation to the DIN is safe, may increase local control, and may initiate tumor-specific immune responses.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with localized PCa were treated with stereotactic extreme hypofractionated doses of 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions to the whole prostate while simultaneously escalating doses to the magnetic resonance image-visible DIN (45 Gy, 47.5 Gy, and 50 Gy in 5 fractions). The phase 1a part was designed to determine the recommended phase 1b dose in a "3 + 3" cohort-based, dose-escalation design. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicities defined as ≥grade 3 gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity (or both) by National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4) up to 90 days after the first radiation fraction. The secondary endpoints were prostate-specific antigen kinetics, quality of life (QoL), and blood immunologic responses.

RESULTS

Nine patients were treated in phase 1a. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed at either level, and therefore the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Further characterization of tolerability, efficacy, and immunologic outcomes was conducted in the subsequent 11 patients irradiated at the highest dose level (50 Gy) in the phase 1b expansion cohort. Toxicity was 45% and 25% for grades 1 and 2 GU, and 20% and 5% for grades 1 and 2 GI, respectively. No grade 3 or worse toxicity was reported. The average (±standard error of the mean) of the QoL assessments at baseline and at 3-month posttreatment were 0.8 (±0.8) and 3.5 (±1.5) for the bowel (mean difference, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-5), and 6.4 (±0.8) and 7.27 (±0.9) for the International Prostate Symptom Score (mean difference, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-1.9), respectively. A subset of patients developed antigen-specific immune responses against prostate-specific membrane antigen (n = 2), prostatic acid phosphatase (n = 1), prostate stem cell antigen (n = 4), and prostate-specific antigen (n = 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Irradiation of the whole prostate with 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions and dose escalation to 50 Gy to the DIN was tolerable and determined as the recommended phase 1b dose. This treatment has promising antitumor activity, which will be confirmed by the ongoing phase 2 part. Preliminary QoL analysis showed minimal impact in GU, GI, and sexual domains. Stereotactic irradiation induced antigen-specific immune responses in a subset of patients.

Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer delays time-to-next systemic treatment

PURPOSE

Local ablative treatment to oligometastatic patients can result in long-term disease-free survival in some cancer patients. The importance of this treatment paradigm in prostate cancer is a rapidly evolving field. Herein, we report on the safety and preliminary clinical outcomes of a modern cohort of oligometastatic prostate cancer (OPC) patients treated with consolidative stereotactic ablative radiation (SABR).

METHODS

Records of men with OPC who underwent consolidative SABR at our institution were reviewed. SABR was delivered in 1-5 fractions of 5-18 Gray. Kaplan-Meier estimates of local progression-free survival (LPFS), biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS; PSA nadir + 2), distant progression-free survival (DPFS), and time-to-next intervention (TTNI) were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 66 OPC patients were identified with consolidative SABR delivered to 134 metastases: 89 bone, 40 nodal, and 5 viscera. The majority of men (49/66) had hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC). Crude grade 1 and 2 acute toxicities were 36% and 11%, respectively, with no ≥ grade 3 toxicity. At 1 year, LPFS was 92% and bPFS and DPFS were 69%. Of the 18 men with HSPC who had deferred hormone therapy , 11 (56%) remain disease free following SABR (1-year ADT-FS was 78%). In 17 castration-resistant men, 11 had > 50% prostate-specific antigen (PSA) declines with 1-year TTNI of 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

Consolidative SABR in OPC is feasible and well tolerated. The heterogeneity and small size of our series limit extrapolation of clinically meaningful outcomes following consolidative SABR in OPC, but our preliminary data suggest that this approach warrants continued prospective study.

Phase 1-2 Study of Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy Including Regional Lymph Node Irradiation in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer (SATURN): Early Toxicity and Quality of Life

PURPOSE

Five-fraction stereotactic ablative radiation therapy appears to be gaining popularity in treatment of prostate cancer, but it has not been extensively tested in the context of pelvic radiation. The objective of this prospective prostate and pelvic SABR study is to report the acute toxicity, late toxicity, and quality of life (QoL) after study completion.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A phase 1/2 study was conducted for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Radiation therapy was planned to deliver 25 Gy to pelvis and seminal vesicles (SV) and a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of up to 40 Gy to the prostate in 5 fractions, weekly, over 29 days. Androgen deprivation therapy was used for 12 to 18 months. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 was used to assess worst acute and late toxicities. QoL data was captured using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite questionnaire (EPIC).

RESULTS

Thirty patients completed the planned treatment with a median follow-up of 25.7 months (range, 18.5-30.7 months). The following "worst" acute and late toxicities were observed: grade 2 genitourinary toxicity, 46.7% and 52%, respectively; grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity, 3.3% and 32%, respectively. No grade 3 or higher toxicities were noted. Mean (95% confidence interval) EPIC urinary QoL scores were 86.6 (81.9-91.3), 87.1 (81.4-92.6), and 87.9 (80.1-95.7) at baseline, 3 months and 24 months; bowel scores were 94.1 (91.3-97.0), 93.2 (89.1-97.2), and 92.4 (87.7- 97.1), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This gantry-based novel fractionation schedule incorporating pelvic radiation for high-risk prostate cancer in combination with androgen deprivation therapy is feasible and well tolerated.

Prostate irradiation with focal dose escalation to the intraprostatic dominant nodule: a systematic review

Radiation therapy (RT) is a curative treatment option for localized prostate cancer. Prostate irradiation with focal dose escalation to the intraprostatic dominant nodule (IDN) is an emerging treatment option that involves the prophylactic irradiation of the whole prostate while increasing RT doses to the visible prostatic tumor. Because of the lack of large multicentre trials, a systematic review was performed in an attempt to get an overview on the feasibility and efficacy of focal dose escalation to the IDN.

A bibliographic search for articles in English, which were listed in MEDLINE from 2000 to 2016 to identify publications on RT with focal directed boost to the IDN, was performed. The review was completed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.

Twenty-two articles describing 1,378 patients treated with RT using focal boost were identified and fulfilled the selection criteria. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was used in 720 patients (52.3%), volumetric modulated arc therapy was used in 45 patients (3.3%), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in 113 patients (8.2%), and low–dose rate and high–dose rate brachytherapy (BT) were used in 305 patients (22.1%) and 195 patients (14.1%), respectively. Use of androgen deprivation therapy varied substantially among series. Biochemical disease-free survival at 5 years was reported for a cohort of 812 (58.9%) patients. The combined median biochemical disease-free survival for this group of patients was 85% (range: 78.8–100%; 95% confidence interval: 77.1–82.7%).

The average occurrence of grade III or worse gastrointestinal and genitourinary late toxicity was, respectively, 2.5% and 3.1% for intensity-modulated RT boost, 10% and 6% for stereotactic body RT, 6% and 2% for low–dose rate BT, and 4% and 4.3% for high–dose rate BT.

This review shows encouraging results for focal dose escalation to the IDN with acceptable short- to medium-term side effects and biochemical disease control rates. However, owing to the heterogeneity of patient population and the short follow-up, the results should be interpreted with caution. Considering that the clinical endpoint in the studies was biochemical recurrence, the use and duration of androgen deprivation therapy administration should be carefully considered before driving definitive conclusions. Randomized trials with long-term follow-up are needed before this technique can be generally recommended.

Changes in prostate orientation due to removal of a Foley catheter

PURPOSE

Investigate the impact on prostate orientation caused by use and removal of a Foley catheter, and the dosimetric impact on men prospectively treated with prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

METHODS

Twenty-two men underwent a CT simulation with a Foley in place (FCT), followed immediately by a second treatment planning simulation without the Foley (TPCT). The change in prostate orientation was determined by rigid registration of three implanted transponders between FCT and TPCT and compared to measured orientation changes during treatment. The impact on treatment planning and delivery was investigated by analyzing the measured rotations during treatment relative to both CT scans, and introducing rotations of ±15° in the treatment plan to determine the maximum impact of allowed rotations.

RESULTS

Removing the Foley caused a statistically significant prostate rotation (P < 0.0028) compared to normal biological motion in 60% of patients. The largest change in rotation due to removing a Foley occurs about the left-right axis (tilt) which has a standard deviation two to five times larger than changes in rotation about the Sup-Inf (roll) and Ant-Post (yaw) axes. The change in tilt due to removing a Foley for prone and supine patients was -1.1° ± 6.0° and 0.3° ± 7.4°, showing no strong directional bias. The average tilt during treatment was -1.6° ± 7.1° compared to the TPCT and would have been -2.0° ± 7.1° had the FCT been used as the reference. The TPCT was a better or equivalent representation of prostate tilt in 82% of patients, vs 50% had the FCT been used for treatment planning. However, 92.7% of fractions would still have been within the ±15° rotation limit if only the FCT were used for treatment planning. When rotated ±15°, urethra V_{105% = 38.85Gy}  < 20% was exceeded in 27% of the instances, and prostate (CTV) coverage was maintained above D_95%  > 37 Gy in all but one instance.

CONCLUSIONS

Removing a Foley catheter can cause large prostate rotations. There does not appear to be a clear dosimetric benefit to obtaining the CT scan with a Foley catheter to define the urethra given the changes in urethral position from removing the Foley catheter. If urethral sparing is desired without the use of a Foley, utilization of an MRI to define the urethra may be necessary, or a pseudo-urethral planning organ at risk volume (PRV) may be used to limit dosimetric hot spots.

Early Results of Extreme Hypofractionation Using Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for High-risk, Very High-risk and Node-positive Prostate Cancer

AIMS

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer has shown encouraging results. However, its use in high-risk patients is limited due to lack of data regarding adequate radiotherapy dose, need for pelvic nodal treatment and androgen deprivation therapy. Herein we report our experience of SBRT in this subgroup.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of a prospectively maintained database of 68 consecutive patients of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk, very high-risk and node-positive adenocarcinoma prostate treated with SBRT was undertaken. All patients were treated with rotational intensity-modulated radiotherapy with daily image guidance. The dose delivered to the prostate and gross node was 35-37.5 Gy in 5 alternate day fractions. Node-positive patients received 25 Gy to pelvic nodal regions until the common iliac nodes. Treatment was delivered in 7-10 days. All patients received long-term androgen deprivation therapy (79% medical and 21% surgical).

RESULTS

Most patients (65%) had a Gleason score ≥ 8. The median prostate-specific antigen was 42. Twenty patients were high risk (30%), 11 (16%) very high risk and 37 (54%) node positive. No acute Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade ≥ 3 genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity was noted. Acute grade 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were 12% and 3%, respectively. Late grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity was 3% and 0%, respectively. There was no increase in acute or late gastrointestinal toxicity with prophylactic pelvic nodal radiotherapy. Prior transurethral resection of prostate (n = 11) did not increase toxicity. At a median follow-up of 18 months, 97% patients were alive and 94% were biochemically controlled.

CONCLUSION

SBRT is safe in the treatment of high-risk, very high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer, even with prophylactic pelvic radiotherapy or prior transurethral resection of prostate. Longer follow-up is required to determine efficacy.

Volumetric-based image guidance is superior to marker-based alignments for stereotactic body radiotherapy of prostate cancer

Purposes

The aim of this study was to evaluate a dual marker‐based and soft‐tissue based image guidance for inter‐fractional corrections in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of prostate cancer.

Methods/Materials

We reviewed 18 patients treated with SBRT for prostate cancer. An endorectal balloon was inserted at simulation and each treatment. Planning margins were 3 mm/0 mm posteriorly. Prior to each treatment, a dual image guidance protocol was applied to align three makers using stereoscopic x ray images and then to the soft tissue using kilo‐voltage cone beam CT (kV‐CBCT). After treatment, prostate (CTV), rectal wall, and bladder were delineated on each kV‐CBCT, and delivered dose was recalculated. Dosimetric endpoints were analyzed, including V_{36.25 Gy} for prostate, and D_{0.03 cc} for bladder and rectal wall.

Results

Following initial marker alignment, additional translational shifts were applied to 22 of 84 fractions after kV‐CBCT. Among the 22 fractions, ten fractions exceeded 3 mm shifts in any direction, including one in the left‐right direction, four in the superior‐inferior direction, and five in the anterior‐posterior direction. With and without the additional kV‐CBCT shifts, the average V_{36.25 Gy} of the prostate for the 22 fractions was 97.6 ± 2.6% with the kV x ray image alone, and was 98.1 ± 2.4% after applying the additional kV‐CBCT shifts. The improvement was borderline statistical significance using Wilcoxon signed‐rank test (P = 0.007). D_{0.03 cc} was 45.8 ± 6.3 Gy vs. 45.1 ± 4.9 Gy for the rectal wall; and 49.5 ± 8.6 Gy vs. 49.3 ± 7.9 Gy for the bladder before and after applying kV‐CBCT shifts.

Conclusions

Marker‐based alignment alone is not sufficient. Additional adjustments are needed for some patients based kV‐CBCT.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

With over a decade׳s worth of clinical experience to guide stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa), sufficient data exist for robust conclusions to be made regarding its efficacy and the toxicities associated with this treatment. We briefly review the fundamental radiobiological basis of SBRT for PCa and provide a comprehensive synthesis of the medical literature to date, focusing on clinical outcomes and toxicities. When possible, we draw comparisons to comparable data for conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Finally, a brief overview of technical considerations is presented. Although randomized clinical trials comparing SBRT with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy are underway, the current body of evidence supports the efficacy and safety of SBRT for PCa.

Emerging Technologies and Techniques in Radiation Therapy

The past decade has brought an improved ability to precisely target and deliver radiation as well as other focal prostate-directed therapy. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), proton beam radiation, high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy, as well as nonradiotherapy treatments such as cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound are several therapeutic modalities that have been investigated for the treatment of prostate cancer in an attempt to reduce toxicity while improving cancer control. However, high-risk prostate cancer requires a comprehensive treatment of the prostate as well as areas at risk for cancer spread. Therefore, most new radiation treatment (SBRT, HDR, and proton beam radiation) modalities have been largely investigated in combination with regional radiation therapy. Though the evidence is evolving, the use of SBRT, HDR, and proton beam radiation is promising. Nonradiation focal therapy has been proposed mainly for partial gland treatment in men with low-risk disease, and its use in high-risk prostate cancer patients remains experimental.

Evolving Paradigm of Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Current Consensus and Continuing Controversies

High-risk prostate cancer is an aggressive form of the disease with an increased risk of distant metastasis and subsequent mortality. Multiple randomized trials have established that the combination of radiation therapy and long-term androgen deprivation therapy improves overall survival compared to either treatment alone. Standard of care for men with high-risk prostate cancer in the modern setting is dose-escalated radiotherapy along with 2-3 years of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). There are research efforts directed towards assessing the efficacy of shorter ADT duration. Current research has been focused on assessing hypofractionated and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) techniques. Ongoing randomized trials will help assess the utility of pelvic lymph node irradiation. Research is also focused on multimodality therapy with addition of a brachytherapy boost to external beam radiation to help improve outcomes in men with high-risk prostate cancer.