Radiation Therapy Did Not Induce Long-Term Changes in Rectal Mucosa: Results From the Randomized Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 7 Trial

High-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy as primary treatment of prostate cancer: genitourinary/gastrointestinal toxicity and outcomes, a single-institution experience

PURPOSE

Prostatectomy, radiotherapy and watchful waiting are the main therapeutic options available for local stage of prostate cancer (PCa). We report our experience on 394 patients affected by prostate cancer primarily treated with high-dose, image-guided, IMRT, focusing on gastrointestinal, genitourinary toxicities and biochemical control.

METHODS

From July 2003 to August 2014, 394 patients were treated with radical high-dose radiotherapy (HDRT) for prostate cancer; the mean total radiation dose was 79 Gy in standard fractions. Hormonal therapy (HT) was administered to 7.6% of low-risk patients, to 20.3% of intermediate-risk patients and to 72% of high-risk patients. Patients were evaluated for biochemical failure, local recurrence (LR) and metastases.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients (26.65%) developed acute GU toxicity at the medium dose of 25.4 Gy, grade 1 (G1) or grade 2 (G2) in 94 cases. Only 16 patients (4.06%) reported chronic GU toxicity (G1 or G2), and one case developed G3 cystitis. No G3 GI acute and late toxicity were detected. Fifty-six (14.2%) patients experienced LR, 26 (6.6%) developed metastases and 70 patients (17.8%) were deceased. Gleason sum score > 7 was predictive for worse overall survival (GS = 7 was borderline) and for metastasis. No factors resulted predictive for local relapse. HT pre-RT had been demonstrated as a negative predictor for OS and DFS-DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Data confirm the safety of HDRT for PCa. Treatment was efficient with low toxicity profile. Moreover, continued technologic advancements, as image-guided radiotherapy, could lead to further reduction in toxicity, thus increasing the therapeutic index.

Dosimetric comparison of rectal-sparing capabilities of rectal balloon vs injectable spacer gel in stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer: lessons learned from prospective trials

This study aimed to compare the rectal-sparing capabilities of rectal balloons vs absorbable injectable spacer gel in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer. Patient samples included in this analysis were obtained from 2 multi-institutional prospective trials of SBRT for prostate cancer using a rectal balloon (n = 36 patients) and injectable spacer gel (n = 36). Treatment prescription dose was 45 Gy in 5 fractions in 42 patients; for equal comparison, the remaining 30 patients were rescaled to 45 Gy from 47.5 Gy prescription (n = 6) and 50 Gy prescription (n = 24). The median prostate volumes and body mass index in the 2 patient samples were not statistically significantly different (p= 0.67 and 0.45, respectively), supporting anatomic similarity between cohorts. The injectable spacer gel achieved dosimetric superiority over the rectal balloon with respect to the maximum dose to the rectum (42.3 vs 46.2 Gy, p < 0.001), dose delivered to 33% of the rectal circumference (28 vs 35.1 Gy, p < 0.001), and absolute volume of rectum receiving 45 Gy (V45_Gy), V40_Gy, and V30_Gy (0.3 vs 1.7 cc, 1 vs 5.4 cc, and 4.1 vs 9.6 cc, respectively; p < 0.001 in all cases). There was no difference between the 2 groups with respect to the V50_Gy of the rectum or the dose to 50% of the rectal circumference (p= 0.29 and 0.06, respectively). The V18.3_Gy of the bladder was significantly larger with the rectal balloon (19.9 vs 14.5 cc, p= 0.003). In this analysis of patients enrolled on 2 consecutive multi-institutional prospective trials of SBRT for prostate cancer, the injectable spacer gel outperformed the rectal balloon in the majority of the examined and relevant dosimetric rectal-sparing parameters. The rectal balloon did not outperform the injectable spacer gel in any measured rectal dose parameter.