1
|
Cury FL, Viani GA, Gouveia AG, Moraes FY. In reply to Niu et al: Meta-analysis of 5-day preoperative radiotherapy for soft tissue sarcoma (5D-PREORTS). Radiother Oncol 2024; 195:110255. [PMID: 38522598 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2024] [Accepted: 03/21/2024] [Indexed: 03/26/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Fabio L Cury
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
| | - Gustavo A Viani
- Ribeirao Preto Medical School, Department of Medical Imagings, Hematology and Oncology of University of São Paulo (FMRP-USP), Ribeirão Preto, Brazil
| | - Andre G Gouveia
- Department of Oncology - Division of Radiation Oncology, Juravinski Cancer Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Fabio Y Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Glicksman RM, Loblaw A, Morton G, Vesprini D, Szumacher E, Chung HT, Chu W, Liu SK, Tseng CL, Correa R, Deabreu A, Mamedov A, Zhang L, Cheung P. Randomized Trial of Concomitant Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Boost Versus Conventionally Fractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Boost for Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer (pHART2-RCT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:100-109. [PMID: 37979707 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.11.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2023] [Revised: 10/15/2023] [Accepted: 11/02/2023] [Indexed: 11/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this work is to report on the results of a phase 2 randomized trial of moderately hypofractionated (MH) versus conventionally fractionated (CF) radiation therapy to the prostate with elective nodal irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS This was a single-center, prospective, phase 2 randomized study. Patients with high-risk disease (cT3, prostate-specific antigen level >20 ng/mL, or Gleason score 8-10) were eligible. Patients were randomized to either MH using a simultaneous integrated boost (68 Gy in 25 fractions to prostate; 48 Gy to pelvis) or CF (46 Gy in 23 fractions with a sequential boost to the prostate of 32 Gy in 16 fractions), with long-term androgen deprivation therapy. The primary endpoint was grade ≥2 acute gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0). Secondary endpoints included late GI and GU toxicity, quality of life, and oncologic outcomes. RESULTS One-hundred eighty patients were enrolled; 90 were randomized to and received MH and 90 to CF. The median follow-up was 67.4 months. Seventy-five patients (41.7%) experienced a grade ≥2 acute GI and/or GU toxicity, including 34 (37.8%) in the MH and 41 (45.6%) in the CF arms, respectively (P = .29). Late grade ≥2 GI (P = .07) and GU (P = .25) toxicity was not significantly different between arms; however, late grade ≥3 GI toxicity was worse in the MH group (P = .01). There were no statistically significant quality-of-life differences between the 2 treatments. There were no statistically significant differences observed in cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (P = .71) or distant metastasis (P = .31) and overall survival (P = .46). CONCLUSIONS MH to the prostate and pelvis with androgen deprivation therapy for men with high-risk localized prostate cancer was not significantly different than CF with regard to acute toxicity, quality of life, and oncologic efficacy. However, late grade ≥3 GI toxicity was more common in the MH arm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Glicksman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Gerard Morton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Danny Vesprini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Ewa Szumacher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Hans T Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - William Chu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Stanley K Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Chia-Lin Tseng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Andrea Deabreu
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Alexandre Mamedov
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Liying Zhang
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Patrick Cheung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mohamad O, Zamboglou C, Zilli T, Murthy V, Aebersold DM, Loblaw A, Guckenberger M, Shelan M. Safety of Ultrahypofractionated Pelvic Nodal Irradiation in the Definitive Management of Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:998-1010. [PMID: 37863241 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.09.053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 10/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the evidence for ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation in patients with prostate cancer, with a focus on reported acute and late toxicities. METHODS AND MATERIALS A comprehensive search was conducted in 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception until March 23, 2023. Eligible publications included patients with intermediate- and high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer who underwent elective or therapeutic ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation. Primary outcomes included the presence of grade ≥2 rates of acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scales. Quality assessment was performed using National Institutes of Health tools for noncontrolled beforeand after (single arm) clinical trials, as well as single-arm observational studies. Because all outcomes were categorical variables, proportion was calculated to estimate the effect size and compare the outcomes after the intervention. RESULTS We identified 16 publications that reported the use of ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy to treat the pelvis in prostate cancer. Seven publications met our criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, including 417 patients. The median total dose to the pelvic lymph nodes was 25 Gy (range, 25-28.5 Gy), with a median of 5 fractions. The prostate received a median dose of 40 Gy (range, 35-47.5 Gy). All studies used androgen deprivation therapy for a median duration of 18 months. The median follow-up period was 3 years (range, 0.5-5.6 years). The rates of acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were 8% (95% CI, 1%-15%) and 29% (95% CI, 18%-41%), respectively. For late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity, the rates were 13% (95% CI, 5%-21%) and 29% (95% CI, 17%-42%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation appears to be a safe approach in terms of acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - Uwniversity of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ACTREC, Tata Memorial Centre and Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, India
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Moll M, Goldner G. Assessing the toxicity after moderately hypofractionated prostate and whole pelvis radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:188-194. [PMID: 37341774 PMCID: PMC10876811 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02104-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/19/2023] [Indexed: 06/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities after moderately hypofractionated (HF) or conventionally fractionated (CF) primary whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT). METHODS Primary prostate-cancer patients treated between 2009 and 2021 with either 60 Gy at 3 Gy/fraction to the prostate and 46 Gy at 2.3 Gy/fraction to the whole pelvis (HF), or 78 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction to the prostate and 50/50.4 Gy at 1.8-2 Gy/fraction to the whole pelvis (CF). Acute and late GI and GU toxicities were retrospectively assessed. RESULTS 106 patients received HF and 157 received CF, with a median follow-up of 12 and 57 months. Acute GI toxicity rates in the HF and CF groups were, respectively, grade 2: 46.7% vs. 37.6%, and grade 3: 0% vs. 1.3%, with no significant difference (p = 0.71). Acute GU toxicity rates were, respectively, grade 2: 20.0% vs. 31.8%, and grade 3: 2.9% vs. 0%, (p = 0.04). We compared prevalence of late GI and GU toxicities between groups after 3, 12, and 24 months and did not find any significant differences (respectively, p = 0.59, 0.22, and 0.71 for GI toxicity; p = 0.39, 0.58, and 0.90 for GU toxicity). CONCLUSION Moderate HF WPRT was well tolerated during the first 2 years. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Moll
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Gregor Goldner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Masson I, Larriviere L, Mahé MA, Azria D, Pommier P, Mesgouez-Nebout N, Giraud P, Peiffert D, Chauvet B, Dudouet P, Salem N, Noël G, Khalifa J, Latorzeff I, Guérin-Charbonnel C, Supiot S. Prospective results for 5-year survival and toxicity of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in (very) high-risk prostate cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 44:100702. [PMID: 38111609 PMCID: PMC10726239 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2023] [Revised: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose High-risk (HR) prostate cancer patients usually receive high-dose radiotherapy (RT) using a two-phase sequential technique, but data on a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique are lacking. We prospectively evaluated the long-term results of urinary (GU) and digestive (GI) toxicity and survival data for high-dose RT using a SIB technique in HR and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer. Methods Patients were treated using an SIB technique in 34 fractions, at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and seminal vesicles and 74.8 Gy to the prostate, combined with 36 months of androgen-depriving therapy in a prospective multicenter study. Acute and late GU and GI toxicity data were collected. Overall survival (OS), biochemical-relapse-free survival (bRFS), loco-regional-relapse-free survival (LRRFS), metastasis-free-survival (MFS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were assessed. Results We recruited 114 patients. After a median follow-up of 62 months, very few patients experienced acute (M0-M3) (G3-4 GU = 3.7 %; G3-4 GI = 0.9 %) or late (M6-M60) severe toxicity (G3-4 GU = 5.6 %; G3-4 GI = 2.8 %). The occurrence of acute G2 + GU or GI toxicity was significantly related to the consequential late G2 + toxicity (p < 0.01 for both GU and GI). Medians of OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were not reached. At 60 months, OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were 88.2 % [82.1; 94.7], 86.0 % [79.4 %;93.2 %], 95.8 % [91.8 %;99.9 %], 87.2 % [80.9 %;94.0 %] and 84.1 % [77.2 %;91.6 %] respectively. Conclusion SIB RT at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and 74.8 Gy to the prostate is feasible, leading to satisfying tumor control and reasonable toxicity in HR and VHR prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingrid Masson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Department of Radiataion oncology, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France
| | - Laurène Larriviere
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Marc-André Mahé
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Department of Radiation Oncology, François Baclesse Cancer Center, Caen, France
| | - David Azria
- Fédération Universitaire d’Oncologie Radiothérapie FOROM, ICM, Institut régional du Cancer Montpellier, Université de Montpellier, IRCM, Montpellier, France
| | - Pascal Pommier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Léon Bérard Center, Lyon, France
| | - Nathalie Mesgouez-Nebout
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest Paul Papin, Angers, France
| | - Philippe Giraud
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Didier Peiffert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lorraine Cancer Institute, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Bruno Chauvet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sainte Catherine Institute, Avignon, France
| | - Philippe Dudouet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pont de chaume Clinic, Montauban, France
| | - Naji Salem
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France
| | - Georges Noël
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ICANS (Cancerology Institute of Strasbourg-Europe), Strasbourg, France
| | - Jonathan Khalifa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IUCT Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Igor Latorzeff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pasteur Clinic, Toulouse, France
| | - Catherine Guérin-Charbonnel
- Clinical Trial Sponsor Unit/Biometry, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Nantes Université, CNRS US2B, Nantes, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Choo R, Hillman DW, Mitchell C, Daniels T, Vargas C, Rwigema JC, Corbin K, Keole S, Vora S, Merrell K, Stish B, Pisansky T, Davis BJ, Amundson A, Wong W. Late Toxicity of Moderately Hypofractionated Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Treating the Prostate and Pelvic Lymph Nodes for High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:1085-1094. [PMID: 36427645 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.11.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 11/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity of moderately hypofractionated intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) targeting the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. METHODS AND MATERIALS A target accrual of 56 patients with high-risk or unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer were enrolled into a prospective study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02874014) of moderately hypofractionated IMPT. IMPT with pencil beam scanning was used to deliver 6750 and 4500 cGy relative biological effectiveness in 25 daily fractions simultaneously to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes, respectively. All received androgen deprivation therapy. Late GI and GU toxicity was prospectively assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0, at baseline, weekly during radiation therapy, 3-month postradiation therapy, and then every 6 months. Actuarial rates of late GI and GU toxicity were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Median age was 75.5 years. Fifty-four patients were available for late toxicity evaluation. Median follow-up was 43.9 months (range, 16-66). The actuarial rate of late grade ≥2 GI toxicity at both 2 and 3 years was 7.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2%-14.2%). The actuarial rate of late grade 3 GI toxicity at both 2 and 3 years was 1.9% (95% CI, 0%-5.4%). One patient experienced grade 3 GI toxicity with proctitis. The actuarial rate of late grade ≥2 GU toxicity was 20.5% (95% CI, 8.9%-30.6%) at 2 years, and 29.2 % (95% CI, 15.5%-40.7%) at 3 years. None had grade 3 GU toxicity. The presence of baseline GU symptoms was associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing late grade 2 GU toxicity. CONCLUSIONS A moderately hypofractionated IMPT targeting the prostate and regional pelvic lymph nodes was generally well tolerated. Patients with pre-existing GU symptoms had a higher rate of late grade 2 GU toxicity. A phase 3 study is needed to assess any therapeutic gain of IMPT, in comparison with photon-based radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard Choo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
| | - David W Hillman
- Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Cecilia Mitchell
- Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Thomas Daniels
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Carlos Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Jean Claude Rwigema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Kimberly Corbin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sameer Keole
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Sujay Vora
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Kenneth Merrell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Bradley Stish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Thomas Pisansky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Brian J Davis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Adam Amundson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - William Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| |
Collapse
|