Adjuvant and Salvage Radiation Therapy After Prostatectomy: ASTRO/AUA Guideline Amendment, Executive Summary 2018

Socioeconomic Barriers to Receiving Early Salvage Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Prostate Adenocarcinoma: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

Purpose This study aimed to identify factors associated with delays in initiating early salvage radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure after prostatectomy. Methods We conducted a single-institution, retrospective study of patients receiving salvage radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy from 2011 to 2022. Patient demographics and clinical data were examined to identify factors that may have influenced the time to start of radiation therapy after surgery. Utilizing a PSA cut off of 0.25 ng/ml or less, we classified patients as receiving either early "PSA low" or late "PSA high" salvage therapy depending on their PSA at the time of initiating treatment. Results Of the 81 patients evaluated, the median age was 61.9 years (IQR 57.9 - 66.5), with most presenting with pT3 (65.4%), Grade Group 2 disease (35.8%), and positive margins 55%). Median PSA at salvage radiation therapy commencement was 0.30 ng/mL (0.18 - 0.48). 40 patients completed early salvage and 41 patients completed late salvage in the overall cohort. A significant association was found between patient insurance carrier and pre-radiation PSA levels. Patients with HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) or PPO (Preferred Provider Organization) insurance were more likely to complete late salvage radiation compared to non-managed Medicare patients (HMO OR 4.0, p <0.05 & PPO OR 3.3 p <0.05 vs non-managed Medicare). All uninsured patients in the cohort received late salvage radiation. Conclusions Insurance type was significantly associated with the timing of salvage radiation therapy post-prostatectomy, suggesting a relationship with providers requiring prior authorization (HMO and PPO coverage). This study supports proper PSA surveillance, in particular for those with HMO or PPO coverage.

Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy to the prostate bed with or without pelvic lymph nodes: a prospective trial

Background

Hypofractionated radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer has been widely studied. However, in the postoperative setting it has been less explored. The objective of this prospective study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated radiotherapy in postoperative prostate cancer.

Materials and methods

A prospective study was designed to include patients with prostate cancer with an indication of postoperative radiotherapy as adjuvant or salvage. A hypofractionated radiotherapy scheme of 51 Gy in 17 fractions was performed with the possibility of treating the pelvis at a dose of 36 Gy in 12 fractions sequentially. Safety was evaluated based on acute and late toxicity [according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale and Common Terminology Criteria Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.03], International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) over time, and quality of life.

Results

From August 2020 to June 2022, 31 patients completed treatment and were included in this report. 35.5% of patients received elective treatment of the pelvic nodal areas. Most patients reported minimal or low acute toxicity, with an acute gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) grade 3 or greater toxicity of 3.2% and 0%, respectively. The evolution in time of the IPSS remained without significant differences (p = 0.42). With the exception of a significant improvement in the domains of hormonal and sexual symptoms of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire, the rest of the domains [EPIC, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core quality of life questionnaire (C-30) and Prostate Cancer module (PR-25)] were maintained without significant differences over time. With a follow-up of 15.4 months, late GI and GU grade 2 toxicity was reported greater than 0% and 9.6%, respectively.

Conclusions

Hypofractionated radiotherapy in postoperative prostate cancer appears to be safe with low reports of relevant acute or late toxicity. Further follow-up is required to confirm these results.

Trial registration

The protocol was approved by the accredited Medical Ethical Committee of Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. All participants accepted and wrote informed consent.

Differences in Failure-Free Survival After Salvage Radiotherapy Guided by Conventional Imaging Versus 18F-Fluciclovine PET/CT in Postprostatectomy Patients: A Post Hoc Substratification Analysis of the EMPIRE-1 Trial

The EMPIRE-1 (Emory Molecular Prostate Imaging for Radiotherapy Enhancement 1) trial reported a survival advantage in recurrent prostate cancer salvage radiotherapy (SRT) guided by 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT versus conventional imaging. We performed a post hoc analysis of the EMPIRE-1 cohort stratified by protocol-specified criteria, comparing failure-free survival (FFS) between study arms. Methods: EMPIRE-1 randomized patients to SRT planning via either conventional imaging only (bone scanning plus abdominopelvic CT or MRI) (arm A) or conventional imaging plus 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT (arm B). Randomization was stratified by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (<2.0 vs. ≥ 2.0 ng/mL), adverse pathology, and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) intent. We subdivided patients in each arm using the randomization stratification criteria and compared FFS between patient subgroups across study arms. Results: Eighty-one and 76 patients received per-protocol SRT in study arms A and B, respectively. The median follow-up was 3.5 y (95% CI, 3.0-4.0). FFS was 63.0% and 51.2% at 36 and 48 mo, respectively, in arm A and 75.5% at both 36 and 48 mo in arm B. Among patients with a PSA of less than 2 ng/mL (mean, 0.42 ± 0.42 ng/mL), significantly higher FFS was seen in arm B than arm A at 36 mo (83.2% [95% CI, 70.0-91.0] vs. 66.5% [95% CI, 51.6-77.8], P < 0.001) and 48 mo (83.2% [95% CI, 70.0-91.0] vs. 56.2% [95% CI, 40.5-69.2], P < 0.001). No significant difference in FFS between study arms in patients with a PSA of at least 2 ng/mL was observed. Among patients with adverse pathology, significantly higher FFS was seen in arm B than arm A at 48 mo (68.9% [95% CI, 52.1-80.8] vs. 42.8% [95% CI, 26.2-58.3], P < 0.001) though not at the 36-mo follow-up. FFS was higher in patients without adverse pathology in arm B versus arm A (90.2% [95% CI, 65.9-97.5] vs. 73.1% [95% CI, 42.9-89.0], P = 0.006) at both 36 and 48 mo. Patients in whom ADT was intended in arm B had higher FFS than those in arm A, with the difference reaching statistical significance at 48 mo (65.2% [95% CI, 40.3-81.7] vs. 29.1 [95% CI, 6.5-57.2], P < 0.001). Patients without ADT intent in arm B had significantly higher FFS than patients in arm A at 36 mo (80.7% [95% CI, 64.9-90.0] vs. 68.0% [95% CI, 51.1-80.2]) and 48 mo (80.7% [95% CI, 64.9-90.0] vs. 58.6% [95% CI, 41.0-72.6]). Conclusion: The survival advantage due to the addition of 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT to SRT planning is maintained regardless of the presence of adverse pathology or ADT intent. Including 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT to SRT leads to survival benefits in patients with a PSA of less than 2 ng/mL but not in patients with a PSA of 2 ng/mL or higher.

Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer Influences Body Composition Increasing Risk of Sarcopenia

Computed tomography (CT) scans used in treatment response assessment in prostate cancer (PCa) patients are a useful tool for nutritional status evaluation. The aim of this study was to assess the nutritional status, including sarcopenia development based on CT scans, in PCa patients and its association with progression-free survival (PFS). Sixty-four PCa patients were included (group 1: 34 patients undergoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with docetaxel due to newly diagnosed, hormone-sensitive, metastatic PCa and group 2: 30 patients with castration-resistant metastatic PCa continuing ADT therapy with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate). Nutritional status was evaluated with anthropometrical parameters, Nutritional Risk Score (NRS), and CT scans at the L3 vertebrae. Survival analyses were performed. According to NRS, nutritional status was significantly related to PFS. In both groups, there was a significant reduction in muscle tissue (total muscle tissue and skeletal muscle index). A significant increase in the distribution of adipose tissue (subcutaneous fat, visceral fat, subcutaneous adipose tissue index, and visceral adipose tissue index) in group one was observed. Sarcopenia was diagnosed in patients but with no influence on PFS. Significant reduction in muscle mass and increase in fat mass was observed in patients treated for PCa with no impact on PFS. The NRS was related to PFS in PCa patients and associated with body composition, assessed by CT after the castration therapy. Long-term castration combined with abiraterone therapy with prednisone or enzalutamide significantly influenced muscle tissue and may lead to sarcopenia development.

Changes in Management After 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET in Patients Undergoing Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy, with Early Biochemical Response Outcomes

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) tracers have increased sensitivity in the detection of prostate cancer, compared with conventional imaging. We assessed the management impact of ¹⁸F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT in patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) and report early biochemical response in patients who underwent radiation treatment. Methods: One hundred patients were enrolled into a prospective study, with a prior RP for prostate cancer, a PSA of 0.2-2.0 ng/mL, and no prior treatment. All patients underwent diagnostic CT and PSMA PET/CT, and management intent was completed at 3 time points (original, post-CT, and post-PSMA) and compared. Patients who underwent radiotherapy with 6-mo PSA response data are presented. Results: Ninety-eight patients are reported, with a median PSA of 0.32 ng/mL (95% CI, 0.28-0.36), pT3a/b disease in 71.4%, and an International Society of Urological Pathology grade group of at least 3 in 59.2%. PSMA PET/CT detected disease in 46.9% of patients, compared with 15.5% using diagnostic CT (PSMA PET, 29.2% local recurrence and 29.6% pelvic nodal disease). A major change in management intent was higher after PSMA than after CT (12.5% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.010), as was a moderate change in intent (31.3% vs. 13.7%, P = 0.001). The most common change was an increase in the recommendation for elective pelvic radiation (from 15.6% to 33.3%), nodal boost (from 0% to 22.9%), and use of concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) (from 22.9% to 41.7%) from original to post-PSMA intent because of detection of nodal disease. Eighty-six patients underwent ¹⁸F-DCFPyL-guided radiotherapy. Fifty-five of 86 patients either did not receive ADT or recovered after ADT, with an 18-mo PSA response from 0.32 to 0.02 ng/mL; 94.5% of patients had a PSA of no more than 0.20 ng/mL, and 74.5% had a PSA of no more than 0.03 ng/mL. Conclusion: ¹⁸F-DCFPyL PET/CT has a significant impact on management intent in patients being considered for salvage radiotherapy after RP with PSA recurrence. Increased detection of disease, particularly in the pelvic lymph nodes, resulted in increased pelvic irradiation and concurrent ADT use. Early results in patients who are staged with ¹⁸F-DCFPyL PET/CT show a favorable PSA response.

Triple combination therapy for clinically nonmetastatic super‐high‐risk prostate cancer

Introduction

Patients with nonmetastatic but exceptionally high‐risk prostate cancer are liable to have biochemical failure and may even die. Triple combination therapy, which consists of surgery, radiotherapy, and androgen‐deprivation therapy, as first‐line treatment, may control the disease for a long period.

Case presentation

We treated a patient with super‐high‐risk, nonmetastatic prostate cancer, with triple combination therapy. He was biochemical relapse free at 60 months after the initiation of treatment.

Conclusion

Triple combination therapy may be an option for super‐high‐risk, nonmetastatic prostate cancer.

Comparison Between Dose-Escalated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and 3-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy for Salvage Radiation Therapy After Prostatectomy

Purpose

To compare long-term outcomes and late toxicity between patients treated with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and with dose-escalated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as salvage radiation therapy (SRT) after prostatectomy.

Methods and Materials

A total of 110 patients who had been treated at our institution between 2010 and 2018 with SRT for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy were included. The patients were treated either by 3D-CRT with 64 Gy (59 patients) or by IMRT with 70 Gy (51 patients). The irradiation target was the prostate bed only (106 patients) or the prostate bed and pelvic region (4 patients). Twelve patients (11%) received concurrent androgen deprivation therapy. The differences in clinical outcomes and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity between the 3D-CRT and IMRT groups were retrospectively assessed. Toxicities were recorded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression after SRT was defined as an increase in the serum PSA level of 0.2 ng/mL from the PSA nadir after SRT and confirmed by a second PSA measurement that was higher than the first.

Results

The median follow-up time was 7.8 years for 3D-CRT (range:,0.3-9.2 years) and 3.1 years for IMRT (range, 0.4-7.2 years). There was no significant difference in the 4-year biochemical no-evidence-of-disease (bNED) rate between the 3D-CRT and IMRT groups (43.5% vs 52.1%; P = .20). Toxicity analysis showed no significant difference in late GI or GU toxicities of grade 2 or greater between the 3D-CRT and IMRT groups. The respective 4-year cumulative rates of toxicity in the 3D-CRT and IMRT groups were as follows: grade ≥2 GI toxicity, 8.8% and 4.4% (P = .42); grade ≥2 GU toxicity, 19.1% and 20.3% (P = .93); and grade ≥2 hematuria, 5.3% and 8.0% (P = .67). In the 3D-CRT group, the 8-year cumulative rates of GI toxicity, GU toxicity, and hematuria of grade 2 or greater were 8.8%, 28.4%, and 12.6%, respectively.

Conclusions

Dose-escalated IMRT showed no improvements in bNED or late toxicity compared with 3D-CRT. In addition, the results suggest that GU toxicity can occur after a long period (even after 6 years), whereas GI toxicity is seldom newly observed after 4 years.

Salvage therapy for prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

More than 40% of men with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer will experience a biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Clinical guidelines for the management of these patients largely focus on the use of salvage radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy. However, not all patients with biochemical recurrence will go on to develop metastases or die from their disease. The optimal pre-salvage therapy investigational workup for patients who experience biochemical recurrence should, therefore, include novel techniques such as PET imaging and genomic analysis of radical prostatectomy specimen tissue, as well as consideration of more traditional clinical variables such as PSA value, PSA kinetics, Gleason score and pathological stage of disease. In patients without metastatic disease, the only known curative intervention is salvage radiotherapy but, given the therapeutic burden of this treatment, importance must be placed on accurate timing of treatment, radiation dose, fractionation and field size. Systemic therapy also has a role in the salvage setting, both concurrently with radiotherapy and as salvage monotherapy.

Time management: Improving the timing of post-prostatectomy radiotherapy, clinical trials, and knowledge translation

Background

Management of prostate cancer after surgery is controversial. Past studies on adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) for higher-risk features have had conflicting results. Through the collaborative conversations of the global radiation oncology Twitter-based journal club (#RadOnc #JC), we explored this complex topic to share recent advances, better understand what the global radiation oncology community felt was important and inspire next steps.

Methods

We selected the recent publication of a landmark international randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing immediate and salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer, RADICALS-RT, for discussion over the weekend of January 16 to 17, 2021. Coordination included open access to the article and an asynchronous portion to decrease barriers to participation, cooperation of study authors (CP, MS) who participated to share deeper insights including a live hour, and curation of related resources and tweet content through a blog post and Wakelet journal club summary.

Discussion of Results

Our conversations created 2,370,104 impressions over 599 tweets with 51 participants spanning 11 countries and 5 continents. A quarter of the participants were from the US (13/51) followed by 10% from the UK (5/51). Clinical or Radiation Oncologists comprised 59% of active participants (16/27) with 62% (18/29) reporting giving aRT within the last 5 years. Discussion was interdisciplinary with three urologists (11%), three trainees (11%), and two physiotherapists (7%). Four months after the journal club its article Altmetric score had increased by 7% (214 to 229). Thematic analysis of tweet content suggested participants wanted clarification on definitions of adjuvant (aRT) and salvage radiotherapy (sRT) including indications, timing, and decision-making tools including guidelines; more interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration including with patients for study design including survivorship and meaningful outcomes; more effective knowledge translation including faster clinical trials; and more data including mature results of current trials, particular high-risk features (Gleason Group 4+, pT4b+, and margin-positive disease), implications of newer technologies such as PSMA-PET and genomic classifiers, and better explanations for practice pattern variations including underutilization of radiotherapy. This was further explored in the context of relevant literature.

Conclusion

Together, this global collaborative review on the postoperative management of prostate cancer suggested a stronger signal for the uptake of early salvage radiation treatment with careful PSA monitoring, more sensitive PSA triggers, and expected access to radiotherapy. Questions still remain on potential exceptions and barriers to use. These require better decision-making tools for all practice settings, consideration of newer technologies, more pragmatic trials, and better use of social media for knowledge translation.

Pentz R. Prostate Cancer: Community Education and Disparities in Diagnosis and Treatment

Prostate cancer remains the leading diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of death among American men. Despite improvements in screening modalities, diagnostics, and treatment, disparities exist among Black men in this country. The primary objective of this systematic review is to describe the reported disparities in screening, diagnostics, and treatments as well as efforts to alleviate these disparities through community and educational outreach efforts. Critical review took place of retrospective, prospective, and socially descriptive data of English language publications in the PubMed database. Despite more advanced presentation, lower rates of screening and diagnostic procedures, and low rates of trial inclusion, subanalyses have shown that various modalities of therapy are quite effective in Black populations. Moreover, patients treated on prospective clinical trials and within equal-access care environments have shown similar outcomes regardless of race. Additional prospective studies and enhanced participation in screening, diagnostic and genetic testing, clinical trials, and community-based educational endeavors are important to ensure equitable progress in prostate cancer for all patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Notable progress has been made with therapeutic advances for prostate cancer, but racial disparities continue to exist. Differing rates in screening and utility in diagnostic procedures play a role in these disparities. Black patients often present with more advanced disease, higher prostate-specific antigen, and other adverse factors, but outcomes can be attenuated in trials or in equal-access care environments. Recent data have shown that multiple modalities of therapy are quite effective in Black populations. Novel and bold hypotheses to increase inclusion in clinical trial, enhance decentralized trial efforts, and enact successful models of patient navigation and community partnership are vital to ensure continued progress in prostate cancer disparities.

68Ga-PSMA-PET screening and transponder-guided salvage radiotherapy to the prostate bed alone for biochemical recurrence following prostatectomy: interim outcomes of a phase II trial

Purpose

To evaluate outcomes for men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer who were selected for transponder-guided salvage radiotherapy (SRT) to the prostate bed alone by ⁶⁸Ga-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-PET).

Methods

This is a single-arm, prospective study of men with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level rising to 0.1–2.5 ng/mL following radical prostatectomy. Patients were staged with ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-PET and those with a negative finding, or a positive finding localised to the prostate bed, continued to SRT only to the prostate bed alone with real-time target-tracking using electromagnetic transponders. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical relapse (FFBR, PSA > 0.2 ng/mL from the post-radiotherapy nadir). Secondary endpoints were time to biochemical relapse, toxicity and patient-reported quality of life (QoL).

Results

Ninety-two patients (median PSA of 0.18 ng/ml, IQR 0.12–0.36), were screened with ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-PET and metastatic disease was found in 20 (21.7%) patients. Sixty-nine of 72 non-metastatic patients elected to proceed with SRT. At the interim (3-year) analysis, 32 (46.4%) patients (95% CI 34.3–58.8%) were FFBR. The median time to biochemical relapse was 16.1 months. The rate of FFBR was 82.4% for ISUP grade-group 2 patients. Rates of grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were 0% and 15.2%, respectively. General health and disease-specific QoL remained stable.

Conclusion

Pre-SRT ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-PET scans detect metastatic disease in a proportion of patients at low PSA levels but fail to improve FFBR. Transponder-guided SRT to the prostate bed alone is associated with a favourable toxicity profile and preserved QoL.

Trial registration number

ACTRN12615001183572, 03/11/2015, retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03735-0.

Prostate Bed Delineation Guidelines for Postoperative Radiation Therapy: On Behalf Of The Francophone Group of Urological Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

Prostate bed (PB) irradiation is considered the standard postoperative treatment after radical prostatectomy (RP) for tumors with high-risk features or persistent prostate-specific antigen, or for salvage treatment in case of biological relapse. Four consensus guidelines have been published to standardize practices and reduce the interobserver variability in PB delineation but with discordant recommendations. To improve the reproducibility in the PB delineation, the Francophone Group of Urological Radiotherapy (Groupe Francophone de Radiothérapie Urologique [GFRU]) worked to propose a new and more reproducible consensus guideline for PB clinical target volume (CTV) definition.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A 4-step procedure was used. First, a group of 10 GFRU prostate experts evaluated the 4 existing delineation guidelines for postoperative radiation therapy (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer; the Faculty of Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group; the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group; and the Princess Margaret Hospital) to identify divergent issues. Second, data sets of 50 magnetic resonance imaging studies (25 after RP and 25 with an intact prostate gland) were analyzed to identify the relevant anatomic boundaries of the PB. Third, a literature review of surgical, anatomic, histologic, and imaging data was performed to identify the relevant PB boundaries. Fourth, a final consensus on PB CTV definition was reached among experts.

RESULTS

Definitive limits of the PB CTV delineation were defined using easily visible landmarks on computed tomography scans (CT). The purpose was to ensure a better reproducibility of PB definition for any radiation oncologist even without experience in postoperative radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

New recommendations for PB delineation based on simple anatomic boundaries and available as a CT image atlas are proposed by the GFRU. Improvement in uniformity in PB CTV definition and treatment homogeneity in the context of clinical trials are expected.

Intra-fraction displacement of the prostate bed during post-prostatectomy radiotherapy

Background

To measure intra-fraction displacement (IFD) in post-prostatectomy patients treated with anisotropic margins and daily soft tissue matching.

Methods

Pre-treatment cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were acquired daily and post-treatment CBCTs for the first week then weekly on 46 patients. The displacement between the scans was calculated retrospectively to measure IFD of the prostate bed (PB). The marginal miss (MM) rate, and the effect of time between imaging was assessed.

Results

A total of 392 post-treatment CBCT’s were reviewed from 46 patients. The absolute mean (95% CI) IFD was 1.5 mm (1.3–1.7 mm) in the AP direction, 1.0 mm (0.9–1.2 mm) SI, 0.8 mm (0.7–0.9 mm) LR, and 2.4 mm (2.2–2.5 mm) 3D displacement. IFD ≥  ± 3 mm and ≥  ± 5 mm was 24.7% and 5.4% respectively. MM of the PB was detected in 33 of 392 post-treatment CBCT (8.4%) and lymph nodes in 6 of 211 post-treatment CBCT images (2.8%). Causes of MM due to IFD included changes in the bladder (87.9%), rectum (66.7%) and buttock muscles (6%). A time ≥ 9 min between the pre and post-treatment CBCT demonstrated that movement ≥ 3 mm and 5 mm increased from 19.2 to 40.5% and 5 to 8.1% respectively.

Conclusions

IFD during PB irradiation was typically small, but was a major contributor to an 8.4% MM rate when using daily soft tissue match and tight anisotropic margins.

Moderate hypofractionated post-prostatectomy radiation therapy is feasible and well tolerated: experience from a single tertiary cancer centre

PURPOSE

Conventional post-prostatectomy radiation therapy comprises 6.5-8 weeks of treatment, therefore, hypofractionated and shortened schemes arouse increasing interest. We describe our experience regarding feasibility and clinical outcome of a post-prostatectomy moderate hypofractionated image-guided radiotherapy schedule MATERIALS AND METHODS: From Oct 2015-Mar 2020, 113 patients, median age of 62 years-old (range 45-76) and prostate adenocarcinoma of low risk (30%), intermediate risk (49%) and high risk (21%) were included for adjuvant (34%) or salvage radiation therapy (66%) after radical prostatectomy (RP). All patients underwent radiotherapy with image-guided IMRT/VMAT to a total dose of 62.5 Gy in 2.5 Gy/fraction in 25 fractions. Sixteen patients (14%) received concomitant androgen deprivation therapy.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 29 months (range 3-60 months) all patients but three are alive. Eleven patients (10%) developed exclusive biochemical relapse while 19 patients (17%) presented macroscopically visible relapse: prostatectomy bed in two patients (2%), pelvic lymph nodes in 13 patients (11.5%) and distant metastases in four patients (4%). The 3 years actuarial rates for OS, bFRS, and DMFS were 99.1, 91.1 and 91.2%, respectively. Acute and late tolerance was satisfactory. Maximal acute genitourinary (AGU) toxicity was G2 in 8% of patients; maximal acute gastrointestinal (AGI) toxicity was G2 in 3.5% of patients; maximal late genitourinary (LGU) toxicity was G3 in 1% of patients and maximal late gastrointestinal (LGI) toxicity was G2 in 2% of patients. There were no cases of severe acute or late toxicity. No relationship was found between acute or late GI/GU adverse effects and dosimetric parameters, age, presence of comorbidities or concomitant treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (62.5 Gy in 25 2.5 Gy fractions) is feasible and well tolerated with low complication rates allowing for a moderate dose-escalation that offers encouraging clinical results for biochemical control and survival in patients with prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.

Comparative Analysis of 5-Year Clinical Outcomes and Patterns of Failure of Proton Beam Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation therapy for Prostate Cancer in the Postoperative Setting

PURPOSE

Although proton beam therapy (PBT) is a rapidly expanding modality to treat prostate cancer compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), data comparing disease control outcomes and patterns of failure in the postprostatectomy setting remain substantially limited.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

All patients who underwent postoperative IMRT or PBT to the prostate bed only at a single institution were included (2009-2017). Endpoints included biochemical failure (BF; using institutional and recent cooperative group trial definitions), local failure (LF), regional failure (RF), distant failure (DF), and all-cause mortality. A case-matched cohort analysis was performed using 3-to-1 nearest-neighbor matching; multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling (MVA) estimated hazard ratios for disease-related outcomes by treatment modality.

RESULTS

Of 295 men, 260 were matched (n = 65 PBT, 195 IMRT); after matching, only age at diagnosis (P < .01) significantly differed between cohorts. At a median follow-up of 59 months, BF (institution-defined), LF, RF, DF, and mortality rates were 45% (n = 29), 2% (n = 1), 9% (n = 6), 9% (n = 6), and 2% (n = 1) for PBT, and 41% (n = 80), 3% (n = 5), 7% (n = 13), 9% (n = 18), and 5% (n = 9) for IMRT (all P > .05). RT modality was not significantly associated with BF on MVA using institutional or cooperative group definitions (all P > .05), nor with LF (P = .82), RF (P = .11), DF (P = .36), or all-cause mortality (P = .69). Patterns of failure were qualitatively similar between cohorts (DF: bone, retroperitoneal nodes, lung).

CONCLUSIONS

In this single institution, case-matched analysis, PBT yielded similar long-term disease-related outcomes and patterns of failure to IMRT in the postprostatectomy setting.

Adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy (TROG 08.03/ANZUP RAVES): a randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant radiotherapy has been shown to halve the risk of biochemical progression for patients with high-risk disease after radical prostatectomy. Early salvage radiotherapy could result in similar biochemical control with lower treatment toxicity. We aimed to compare biochemical progression between patients given adjuvant radiotherapy and those given salvage radiotherapy.

METHODS

We did a phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial across 32 oncology centres in Australia and New Zealand. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years and had undergone a radical prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate with pathological staging showing high-risk features defined as positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension, or seminal vesicle invasion; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and had a postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration of 0·10 ng/mL or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a minimisation technique via an internet-based, independently generated allocation to either adjuvant radiotherapy within 6 months of radical prostatectomy or early salvage radiotherapy triggered by a PSA of 0·20 ng/mL or more. Allocation sequence was concealed from investigators and patients, but treatment assignment for individual randomisations was not masked. Patients were stratified by radiotherapy centre, preoperative PSA, Gleason score, surgical margin status, and seminal vesicle invasion status. Radiotherapy in both groups was 64 Gy in 32 fractions to the prostate bed without androgen deprivation therapy with real-time review of plan quality on all cases before treatment. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical progression. Salvage radiotherapy would be deemed non-inferior to adjuvant radiotherapy if freedom from biochemical progression at 5 years was within 10% of that for adjuvant radiotherapy with a hazard ratio (HR) for salvage radiotherapy versus adjuvant radiotherapy of 1·48. The primary analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00860652.

FINDINGS

Between March 27, 2009, and Dec 31, 2015, 333 patients were randomly assigned (166 to adjuvant radiotherapy; 167 to salvage radiotherapy). Median follow-up was 6·1 years (IQR 4·3-7·5). An independent data monitoring committee recommended premature closure of enrolment because of unexpectedly low event rates. 84 (50%) patients in the salvage radiotherapy group had radiotherapy triggered by a PSA of 0·20 ng/mL or more. 5-year freedom from biochemical progression was 86% (95% CI 81-92) in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 87% (82-93) in the salvage radiotherapy group (stratified HR 1·12, 95% CI 0·65-1·90; p_{non-inferiority}=0·15). The grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity rate was lower in the salvage radiotherapy group (90 [54%] of 167) than in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (116 [70%] of 166). The grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity rate was similar between the salvage radiotherapy group (16 [10%]) and the adjuvant radiotherapy group (24 [14%]).

INTERPRETATION

Salvage radiotherapy did not meet trial specified criteria for non-inferiority. However, these data support the use of salvage radiotherapy as it results in similar biochemical control to adjuvant radiotherapy, spares around half of men from pelvic radiation, and is associated with significantly lower genitourinary toxicity.

FUNDING

New Zealand Health Research Council, Australian National Health Medical Research Council, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Council NSW, Auckland Hospital Charitable Trust, Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group Seed Funding, Cancer Research Trust New Zealand, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Cancer Institute NSW, Prostate Cancer Foundation Australia, and Cancer Australia.

[Oligorecurrent prostate cancer: current management and perspectives]

Oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is an intense area of research thanks to the development of novel PET tracers such as ¹⁸F-choline or ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA. Several retrospective studies in patients with hormone-sensitive oligorecurrent PCa (usually up to 5 metastases with a controlled primary tumor) showed PSA response and a low toxicity profile of metastasis-directed therapies (MDT) such as Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) or salvage lymph node dissection. More recently, randomized phase 2 studies showed that SBRT can delay the introduction of androgen deprivation, decrease biochemical relapses and increase overall survival. Regarding oligoprogressive metastatic castration-resistant PCa, limited data is however available. Based on these studies the European Association of Urology and the American Society of Radiotherapy EAU now recommend using MDT instead of observation. Several studies are undergoing in France and worldwide in order to confirm the exact role of MDT.

Transitioning from conformal radiotherapy to intensity-modulated radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: Clinical benefit, oncologic outcomes and incidence of gastrointestinal and urinary toxicities

Aim

The purpose of this study was to review genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity associated with high-dose radiotherapy (RT) delivered with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) following radical prostatectomy (RP).

Background

RP is a therapeutic option for the management of prostate cancer (PrCa). When assessing postoperative RT techniques for PrCa, the published literature focuses on patients treated with 2-dimensional conventional methods without reflecting the implementation of 3D-CRT, IMRT, or VMAT.

Materials and methods

A total of 83 patients were included in this analysis; 30 patients received 3D-CRT, and 53 patients received IMRT/VMAT. Acute and late symptoms of the GU and lower GI tract were retrospectively graded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer radiation toxicity grading systems. The relapse failure-free rate and overall survival were also evaluated.

Results

The rate of acute GU toxicity was 9.4% vs. 13.3% for the IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT groups (p = 0.583). The 5-year actuarial rates of late GI toxicity for IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT treatments were 1.9% and 6.7%, respectively. The rate of late GU toxicity for the IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT treatment groups was 7.5% and 16.6%, respectively (p = 0.199). We found no association between acute or late toxicity and the RT technique in univariate and multivariate analyses.

Conclusion

Postprostatectomy IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT achieved similar morbidity and cancer control outcomes. The clinical benefit of highly conformal techniques in this setting is unclear although formal analysis is needed.

Robust treatment planning in whole pelvis pencil beam scanning proton therapy for prostate cancer

Whole-pelvis pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy is utilized in both the intact and post-operative settings in patients with prostate cancer. As whole pelvis prostate radiotherapy has traditionally been delivered with standard photon beams, limited evidence and technical descriptions have been reported regarding the use of proton therapy. Here we present two robust three-field treatment planning approaches utilized to maximize target coverage in the presence of anatomic and delivery uncertainties. Both techniques, conventional optimization (CO) and robust optimization (RO), create treatment plans with acceptable target coverage and sparing of organs at risk (OAR). While the RO method is less time intensive and may theoretically allow for superior OAR sparing and improved robustness, the CO method can be implemented by institutions who do not have RO capabilities.

Association of Presalvage Radiotherapy PSA Levels After Prostatectomy With Outcomes of Long-term Antiandrogen Therapy in Men With Prostate Cancer

Importance

In men with recurrent prostate cancer, addition of long-term antiandrogen therapy to salvage radiotherapy (SRT) was associated with overall survival (OS) in the NRG/RTOG 9601 study. However, hormone therapy has associated morbidity, and there are no validated predictive biomarkers to identify which patients derive most benefit from treatment.

Objective

To examine the role of pre-SRT prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels to personalize hormone therapy use with SRT.

Interventions

Men were randomized to SRT plus high-dose nonsteroidal antiandrogen (bicalutamide, 150 mg/d) or placebo for 2 years.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this secondary analysis of the multicenter RTOG 9601 double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial conducted from 1998 to 2003 by a multinational cooperative group, men with a positive surgical margin or pathologic T3 disease after radical prostatectomy with pre-SRT PSA of 0.2 to 4.0 ng/mL were included. Analysis was performed between March 4, 2019, and December 20, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included distant metastasis (DM), other-cause mortality (OCM), and grades 3 to 5 cardiac and neurologic toxic effects. Subgroup analyses were performed using the protocol-specified PSA stratification variable (1.5 ng/mL) and additional PSA cut points, including test for interaction. Competing risk analyses were performed for DM and other-cause mortality (OCM).

Results

Overall, 760 men with PSA elevation after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were included. The median (range) age of particpants was 65 (40-83) years. Antiandrogen assignment was associated with an OS benefit in the PSA stratum greater than 1.5 ng/mL (n = 118) with a 25% 12-year absolute benefit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.25-0.81), but not in the PSA of 1.5 ng/mL or less stratum (n = 642) (1% 12-year absolute difference; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66-1.16). In a subanalysis of men with PSA of 0.61 to 1.5 (n = 253), there was an OS benefit associated with antiandrogen assignment (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.94). In those receiving early SRT (PSA ≤0.6 ng/mL, n = 389), there was no improvement in OS (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.79-1.70), an increased OCM hazard (subdistribution HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.17-3.20; P = .01), and an increased odds of late grades 3 to 5 cardiac and neurologic toxic effects (odds ratio, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.09-15.97; P = .05).

Conclusions and Relevance

These results suggest that pre-SRT PSA level may be a prognostic biomarker for outcomes of antiandrogen treatment with SRT. In patients receiving late SRT (PSA >0.6 ng/mL, hormone therapy was associated with improved outcomes. In men receiving early SRT (PSA ≤0.6 ng/mL), long-term antiandrogen treatment was not associated with improved OS. Future randomized clinical trials are needed to determine hormonal therapy benefit in this population.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00002874.