Fractionation in prostate cancer – Is it time after all?

Ultrahypofractionation of localized prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group prostate cancer

Due to its low fractionation sensitivity, also known as “alpha/beta ratio,” in relation to its surrounding organs at risk, prostate cancer is predestined for hypofractionated radiation schedules assuming an increased therapeutic ratio compared to normofractionated regimens. While moderate hypofractionation (2.2–4 Gy) has been proven to be non-inferior to normal fractionation in several large randomized trials for localized prostate cancer, level I evidence for ultrahypofractionation (>4 Gy) was lacking until recently. An accumulating body of non-randomized evidence has recently been strengthened by the publication of two randomized studies comparing ultrahypofractionation with a normofractionated schedule, i.e., the Scandinavian HYPO-RT trial by Widmark et al. and the first toxicity results of the PACE‑B trial. In this review, we aim to give a brief overview of the current evidence of ultrahypofractionation, make an overall assessment of the level of evidence, and provide recommendations and requirements that should be followed before introducing ultrahypofractionation into routine clinical use.

Efficacy of PSMA ligand PET-based radiotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and salvage radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

A substantial number of patients will develop further biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RP) and salvage radiotherapy (sRT). Recently published data using prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography (PSMA - PET) for re-staging suggest that those recurrences are often located outside the prostate fossa and most of the patients have a limited number of metastases, making them amenable to metastasis-directed treatment (MDT).

METHODS

We analyzed 78 patients with biochemical progression after RP and sRT from a retrospective European multicenter database and assessed the biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS; PSA < nadir + 0.2 ng/ml or no PSA decline) as well as the androgen deprivation therapy- free survival (ADT-FS) using Kaplan-Meier curves. Log-rank test and multivariate analysis was performed to determine influencing factors.

RESULTS

A total of 185 PSMA - PET positive metastases were detected and all lesions were treated with radiotherapy (RT). Concurrent ADT was prescribed in 16.7% (13/78) of patients. The median PSA level before RT was 1.90 ng/mL (range, 0.1-22.1) and decreased statistically significantly to a median PSA nadir level of 0.26 ng/mL (range, 0.0-12.25; p < 0.001). The median PSA level of 0.88 ng/mL (range, 0.0-25.8) at the last follow-up was also statistically significantly lower (p = 0.008) than the median PSA level of 1.9 ng/mL (range, 0.1-22.1) before RT. The median bRFS was 17.0 months (95% CI, 14.2-19.8). After 12 months, 55.3% of patients were free of biochemical progression. Multivariate analyses showed that concurrent ADT was the most important independent factor for bRFS (p = 0.01). The median ADT-FS was not reached and exploratory statistical analyses estimated a median ADT-FS of 34.0 months (95% CI, 16.3-51.7). Multivariate analyses revealed no significant parameters for ADT-FS.

CONCLUSIONS

RT as MDT based on PSMA - PET of all metastases of recurrent prostate cancer after RP and sRT represents a viable treatment option for well-informed and well-selected patients.

[Hypofractionated irradiation of prostate cancer: What is the radiobiological understanding in 2017?]

For prostate cancer, hypofractionation has been based since 1999 on radiobiological data, which calculated a very low alpha/beta ratio (1.2 to 1.5Gy). This suggested that a better local control could be obtained, without any toxicity increase. Consequently, two types of hypofractionated schemes were proposed: "moderate" hypofractionation, with fractions of 2.5 to 4Gy, and "extreme" hypofractionation, utilizing stereotactic techniques, with fractions of 7 to 10Gy. For moderate hypofractionation, the linear-quadratic (LQ) model has been used to calculate the equivalent doses of the new protocols. The available trials have often shown a "non-inferiority", but no advantage, while the equivalent doses calculated for the hypofractionated arms were sometimes very superior to the doses of the conventional arms. This finding could suggest either an alpha/beta ratio lower than previously calculated, or a negative impact of other radiobiological parameters, which had not been taken into account. For "extreme" hypofractionation, the use of the LQ model is discussed for high dose fractions. Moreover, a number of radiobiological questions are still pending. The reduced overall irradiation time could be either a positive point (better local control) or a negative one (reduced reoxygenation). The prolonged duration of the fractions could lead to a decrease of efficacy (because allowing for reparation of sublethal lesions). Finally, the impact of the large fractions on the microenvironment and/or immunity remains discussed. The reported series appear to show encouraging short to mid-term results, but the results of randomized trials are still awaited. Today, it seems reasonable to only propose those extreme hypofractionated schemes to well-selected patients, treating small volumes with high-level stereotactic techniques.

Protons, Photons, and the Prostate - Is There Emerging Evidence in the Ongoing Discussion on Particle Therapy for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer?

Proton therapy is actively and repeatedly discussed within the framework of particle therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer (PC). The argument in favor of treating the prostate with protons is partly financial: given that small volumes are treated, treatment times are low, resulting in a hypothetical high patient throughput. However, such considerations should not form the basis of medical decision-making. There are also physical and biological arguments which further support the use of particle therapy for PC. The only relevant randomized data currently available is the study by Zietman and colleagues, comparing a high to a low proton boost, resulting in a significant increase in PSA-free survival in the experimental (high dose) arm (1). With modern photon treatments and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), equally high doses can be applied with photons and, thus, a randomized trial comparing high-end photons to protons is warranted. For high-linear energy transfer (LET) particles, such as carbon ions, the increase in relative biological effectiveness could potentially convert into an improvement in outcome. Additionally, through the physical differences of protons and carbon ions, the steeper dose gradient with carbon ions and the lack of beam broadening in the carbon beam lead to a superior dose distribution supporting the idea of hypofractionation. Biological and clinical data are emerging, however, has practice-changing evidence already arrived?

Meta-analysis of the alpha/beta ratio for prostate cancer in the presence of an overall time factor: bad news, good news, or no news?

PURPOSE

To present a novel method for meta-analysis of the fractionation sensitivity of tumors as applied to prostate cancer in the presence of an overall time factor.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic search for radiation dose-fractionation trials in prostate cancer was performed using PubMed and by manual search. Published trials comparing standard fractionated external beam radiation therapy with alternative fractionation were eligible. For each trial the α/β ratio and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were extracted, and the data were synthesized with each study weighted by the inverse variance. An overall time factor was included in the analysis, and its influence on α/β was investigated.

RESULTS

Five studies involving 1965 patients were included in the meta-analysis of α/β. The synthesized α/β assuming no effect of overall treatment time was -0.07 Gy (95% CI -0.73-0.59), which was increased to 0.47 Gy (95% CI -0.55-1.50) if a single highly weighted study was excluded. In a separate analysis, 2 studies based on 10,808 patients in total allowed extraction of a synthesized estimate of a time factor of 0.31 Gy/d (95% CI 0.20-0.42). The time factor increased the α/β estimate to 0.58 Gy (95% CI -0.53-1.69)/1.93 Gy (95% CI -0.27-4.14) with/without the heavily weighted study. An analysis of the uncertainty of the α/β estimate showed a loss of information when the hypofractionated arm was underdosed compared with the normo-fractionated arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The current external beam fractionation studies are consistent with a very low α/β ratio for prostate cancer, although the CIs include α/β ratios up to 4.14 Gy in the presence of a time factor. Details of the dose fractionation in the 2 trial arms have critical influence on the information that can be extracted from a study. Studies with unfortunate designs will supply little or no information about α/β regardless of the number of subjects enrolled.