Phase II study of hypofractionated image-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: Outcomes of 55Gy in 16 fractions at 3.4Gy per fraction

Cancer-associated fibroblasts, tumor and radiotherapy: interactions in the tumor micro-environment

Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) represent a group of genotypically non-malignant stromal cells in the tumor micro-environment (TME) of solid tumors that encompasses up to 80% of the tumor volume. Even though the phenotypic diversity and plasticity of CAFs complicates research, it is well-established that CAFs can affect many aspects of tumor progression, including growth, invasion and therapy resistance. Although anti-tumorigenic properties of CAFs have been reported, the majority of research demonstrates a pro-tumorigenic role for CAFs via (in)direct signaling to cancer cells, immunomodulation and extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling. Following harsh therapeutic approaches such as radio- and/or chemotherapy, CAFs do not die but rather become senescent. Upon conversion towards senescence, many pro-tumorigenic characteristics of CAFs are preserved or even amplified. Senescent CAFs continue to promote tumor cell therapy resistance, modulate the ECM, stimulate epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and induce immunosuppression. Consequently, CAFs play a significant role in tumor cell survival, relapse and potentially malignant transformation of surviving cancer cells following therapy. Modulating CAF functioning in the TME therefore is a critical area of research. Proposed strategies to enhance therapeutic efficacy include reverting senescent CAFs towards a quiescent phenotype or selectively targeting (non-)senescent CAFs. In this review, we discuss CAF functioning in the TME before and during therapy, with a strong focus on radiotherapy. In the future, CAF functioning in the therapeutic TME should be taken into account when designing treatment plans and new therapeutic approaches.

Long-Term Outcomes of a Prospective Study on Highly Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer for 3 Weeks

PURPOSE

Reports of radiation therapy for prostate cancer using dose fractions between moderate hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation are limited. This pilot study involved the application of highly hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in 15 fractions for 3 weeks and the number of fractions was intermediate between the 2 previously mentioned dose fractions. The long-term outcomes are reported.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From April 2014 to September 2015, patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer received 54 Gy in 15 fractions (3.6 Gy per fraction) for 3 weeks using IMRT without intraprostatic fiducial markers or a rectal hydrogel spacer. Neoadjuvant hormone therapy (HT) was administered for 4 to 8 months. Adjuvant HT was not administered to any patients. Rates of biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, overall survival, and the cumulative incidence of late grade ≥2 toxicities were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled in this prospective study; 24 of them were treated with highly hypofractionated IMRT (17% had low-risk and 83% had intermediate-risk disease). The median neoadjuvant HT duration was 5.3 months. The median follow-up period was 77 months (range, 57-87 months). Biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, and overall survival rates were 91.7%, 95.8%, and 95.8% at 5 years, and 87.5%, 86.3%, and 95.8% at 7 years, respectively. Neither grade ≥2 late gastrointestinal toxicity nor grade ≥3 late genitourinary toxicity was observed. The cumulative incidence rates of grade 2 genitourinary toxicity were 8.5% and 18.3% at 5 and 7 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Highly hypofractionated IMRT delivering 54 Gy in 15 fractions for 3 weeks for prostate cancer without intraprostatic fiducial markers facilitated favorable oncological outcomes without severe complications. This treatment approach may be a possible alternative to moderate hypofractionation, but further validation is needed.

The impact of the three degrees-of-freedom fiducial marker-based setup compared to soft tissue-based setup in hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Purpose

We evaluated the setup accuracy of a three‐degree‐of‐freedom fiducial marker (3DOF‐FM)‐based setup compared to a soft tissue (ST)‐based setup in hypofractionated intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer.

Materials and Methods

We analyzed the setup accuracy for 17 consecutive prostate cancer patients with three implanted FMs who underwent hypofractionated IMRT. The 3DOF‐ST‐based setup using cone‐beam computed tomography (CT) was performed after a six DOF‐bony structure (BS)‐based setup using an ExacTrac x‐ray system. The 3DOF‐FM‐based matching using the ExacTrac x‐ray system was done during the BS‐ and ST‐based setups. We determined the mean absolute differences and the correlation between the FM‐ and ST‐based translational shifts relative to the BS‐based setup position. The rotational mean shifts detected by the ExacTrac x‐ray system were also evaluated.

Results

The mean differences in the anterior‐posterior (AP), superior‐inferior (SI), and left‐right (LR) dimensions were 0.69, 0.0, and 0.30 mm, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients for both shifts were 0.92 for AP, 0.91 for SI, and 0.68 for LR. The percentages of shift agreements within 2 mm were 85% for AP, 93% for SI, and 99% for LR. The absolute values of rotational shifts were 0.1° for AP, 0.3°, and 1.2° for LR.

Conclusions

The setup accuracy of the 3DOF‐FM‐based setup has the potential to be interchangeable with a ST‐based setup. Our data are likely to be useful in clinical practice along with the popularization of the hypofractionated IMRT in prostate cancer.

Pelvic Complications After Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy and Their Management: An International Collaborative Narrative Review

CONTEXT

Radiotherapy used for treating localized prostate cancer is effective at prolonging cancer-specific and overall survival. Still, acute and late pelvic toxicities are a concern, with gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) sequelae being most common as well as other pelvic complications.

OBJECTIVE

To present a critical review of the literature regarding the incidence and risk factors of pelvic toxicity following primary radiotherapy for prostate cancer and to provide a narrative review regarding its management.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A collaborative narrative review of the literature from 2010 to present was conducted.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Regardless of the modality used, the incidence of acute high-grade pelvic toxicity is low following conventionally fractionated external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). After moderate hypofractionation, the crude cumulative incidences for late grade 3 or higher (G3+) GI and GU complications are as high as 6% and 7%, respectively. After extreme hypofractionation, the 5-yr incidences of G2+ GU and GI toxicities are 3-9% and 0-4%, respectively. Following brachytherapy monotherapy, crude rates of late G3+ GU toxicity range from 6% to 8%, while late GI toxicity is rare. With combination therapy (EBRT and brachytherapy), the cumulative incidence of late GU toxicity is high, between 18% and 31%; however, the prevalence is lower at 4-14%. Whole pelvic radiotherapy remains a controversial treatment option as there is increased G3+ GI toxicity compared with prostate-only treatment, with no overall survival benefit. Proton beam therapy appears to have similar toxicity to photon therapies currently in use. With respect to specific complications, urinary obstruction and urethral stricture are the most common severe urinary toxicities. Rectal and urinary bleeding can be recurrent long-term toxicities. The risk of hip fracture is also increased following prostate radiotherapy. The literature is mixed on the risk of in-field secondary pelvic malignancies following prostate radiotherapy. Urinary and GI fistulas are rare complications. Management of these toxicities may require invasive treatment and reconstructive surgery for refractory and severe symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been progress in the delivery of radiotherapy, enabling the administration of higher doses with minimal tradeoff in terms of slightly increased or equal toxicity. There is a need to focus future improvements in radiotherapy on sparing critical structures to reduce GU and GI morbidities. While complications such as fistulae, bone toxicity, and secondary malignancy are rare, there is a need for higher-quality studies assessing these outcomes and their management.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report, we review the literature regarding pelvic complications following modern primary prostate cancer radiotherapy and their management. Modern radiotherapy technologies have enabled the administration of higher doses with minimal increases in toxicity. Overall, high-grade long-term toxicity following prostate radiotherapy is uncommon. Management of late high-grade pelvic toxicities can be challenging, with patients often requiring invasive therapies for refractory cases.

A pilot study of highly hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy over 3 weeks for localized prostate cancer

The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility of highly hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in 15 fractions over 3 weeks for treating localized prostate cancer based on prostate position-based image-guided radiation therapy. Twenty-five patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) very low- to unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer were enrolled in this study from April 2014 to September 2015 to receive highly hypofractionated IMRT (without intraprostatic fiducial markers) delivering 54 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks. Patients with intermediate-risk disease underwent neoadjuvant androgen suppression for 4-8 months. Twenty-four patients were treated with highly hypofractionated IMRT, and one was treated with conventionally fractionated IMRT because the dose constraint of the small bowel seemed difficult to achieve during the simulation. Seventeen percent had very low- or low-risk, 42% had favorable intermediate-risk, and 42% had unfavorable intermediate-risk disease according to NCCN guidelines. The median follow-up period was 31 months (range, 24-42 months). No Grade ≥3 acute toxicity was observed, and the incidence rates of Grade 2 acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 21% and 4%, respectively. No Grade ≥2 late toxicity was observed. Biochemical relapse was observed in one patient at 15 months, and the biochemical relapse-free survival rate was 95.8% at 2 years. A prostate-specific antigen bounce of ≥0.4 ng/ml was observed in 11 patients (46%). The highly hypofractionated IMRT regimen is feasible in patients with localized prostate cancer and is more convenient than conventionally fractionated schedules for patients and health-care providers.

Rectal/urinary toxicity after hypofractionated vs conventional radiotherapy in low/intermediate risk localized prostate cancer: systematic review and meta analysis

Purpose

The aim of this review was to compare radiation toxicity in Localized Prostate Cancer (LPC) patients who underwent conventional fractionation (CV), hypofractionated (HYPO) or extreme hypofractionated (eHYPO) radiotherapy. We analyzed the impact of technological innovation on the management of prostate cancer, attempting to make a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Methods

PubMed database has been explored for studies concerning acute and late urinary/gastrointestinal toxicity in low/intermediate risk LPC patients after receiving radiotherapy. Studies were then gathered into 5 groups: detected acute and chronic toxicity data from phase II non randomized trials were analyzed and Odds Ratio (OR) was calculated by comparing the number of patients with G0-1 toxicity and those with toxicity > G2 in the studied groups. A meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials was also carried out.

Results

The initial search yielded 575 results, but only 32 manuscripts met all eligibility requirements: in terms of radiation-induced side effects, such as gastrointestinal and genitourinary acute and late toxicity, hypofractionated 3DCRT seemed to be more advantageous than 3DCRT with conventional fractionation as well as IMRT with conventional fractionation compared to 3DCRT with conventional fractionation; furthermore, IMRT hypofractionated technique appeared more advantageous than IMRT with conventional fractionation in late toxicities. Randomized trials meta-analysis disclosed an advantage in terms of acute gastrointestinal and late genitourinary toxicity for Hypofractionated schemes.

Conclusions

Although our analysis pointed out a more favorable toxicity profile in terms of gastrointestinal acute side effects of conventional radiotherapy schemes compared to hypofractionated ones, prospective randomized trials are needed to better understand the real incidence of rectal and urinary toxicity in patients receiving radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Hypofractionated radiation therapy versus conventional radiation therapy in prostate cancer: A systematic review of its safety and efficacy

CONTEXT

New therapeutic alternatives can improve the safety and efficacy of prostate cancer treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether hypofractionated radiation therapy results in better safety and efficacy in the treatment of prostate cancer.

ACQUISITION OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of the literature through searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, CRD, ClinicalTrials and EuroScan, collecting indicators of safety and efficacy.

SYNTHESIS OF THE EVIDENCE

We included 2 systematic reviews and a clinical trial. In terms of efficacy, there is considerable heterogeneity among the studies, and no conclusive results were found concerning the superiority of the hypofractionated option over the normal fractionated option. In terms of safety, there were no significant differences in the onset of acute genitourinary complications between the 2 treatments. However, one of the reviews found more acute gastrointestinal complications in patients treated with hypofractionated radiation therapy. There were no significant differences in long-term complications based on the type of radiation therapy used, although the studies did have limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there are no conclusive results that show that hypofractionated radiation therapy is more effective or safer than normal fractionated radiation therapy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

Prostate hypofractionated radiation therapy with injection of hyaluronic acid: acute toxicities in a phase 2 study

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) in prostate cancer can be developed only if the risk of rectal toxicity is controlled. In a multicenter phase 2 trial, hypofractionated irradiation was combined with an injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) to preserve the rectal wall. Tolerance of the injection and acute toxicity rates are reported.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The study was designed to assess late grade 2 toxicity rates. The results described here correspond to the secondary objectives. Acute toxicity was defined as occurring during RT or within 3 months after RT and graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. HA tolerance was evaluated with a visual analog scale during the injection and 30 minutes after injection and then by use of the Common Terminology Criteria at each visit.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2012, 36 patients with low-risk to intermediate-risk prostate cancer were included. The HA injection induced a mean pain score of 4.6/10 ± 2.3. Thirty minutes after the injection, 2 patients still reported pain (2/10 and 3/10), which persisted after the intervention. Thirty-three patients experienced at least 1 acute genitourinary toxicity and 20 patients at least 1 acute gastrointestinal toxicity. Grade 2 toxicities were reported for 19 patients with urinary obstruction, frequency, or both and for 1 patient with proctitis. No grade 3 or 4 toxicities were reported. At the 3-month visit, 4 patients described grade 2 obstruction or frequency, and no patients had any grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

The injection of HA makes it possible to deliver hypofractionated irradiation over 4 weeks with a dose per fraction of > 3 Gy, with limited acute rectal toxicity.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy induces miR-34a expression and enhances apoptosis in human nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a relatively radiosensitive disease. However, the therapeutic effects of radiotherapy are not always satisfactory due to radioresistance. The hypofractionated schema is currently widely used in clinical practice. In the present study, we investigated the effects of hypofractionated radiotherapy on NPC cells and explored the mechanisms involved. In addition, we aimed to determine the role of miR-34a in the effects of hypofractionated radiotherapy and whether these effects occur in a p53-dependent manner. For this purpose, we used CNE1 and CNE2 NPC cells which were subjected to hyperfractionated and hypofractionated radiotherapy. The viability of the cells was measured by MTT assay and acridine orange (AO) and ethidium bromide (EB) staining was used to observe morphological changes. In addition, Annexin V-propidium iodide (PI) staining and flow cytometry were used to determine the number of apoptotic cells and mRNA and protein expression was measured by qPCR and western blot analysis, respectively. The results revealed that hypofractionated radiotherapy enhanced apoptosis and increased the expression of miR-34a and p53 in the NPC cells. In addition, it stimulated p53 promoter activity and downregulated the protein expression of c-Myc in the human NPC cells. Furthermore, the knockdown of miR-34a suppressed the growth inhibitory effects induced by hypofractionated radiotherapy. Thus, our results suggest that the enhanced apoptosis of NPC cells may be associated with the miR-34a-mediated suppression of c-Myc in a p53-dependent manner.

Is biochemical relapse-free survival after profoundly hypofractionated radiotherapy consistent with current radiobiological models?

AIMS

The α/β ratio for prostate cancer is thought to be low and less than for the rectum, which is usually the dose-limiting organ. Hypofractionated radiotherapy should therefore improve the therapeutic ratio, increasing cure rates with less toxicity. A number of models for predicting biochemical relapse-free survival have been developed from large series of patients treated with conventional and moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy. The purpose of this study was to test these models when significant numbers of patients treated with profoundly hypofractionated radiotherapy were included.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature with regard to hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer was conducted, focussing on data recently presented on prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy. For the work described here, we have taken published biochemical control rates for a range of moderately and profoundly fractionated schedules and plotted these together with a range of radiobiological models, which are described.

RESULTS

The data reviewed show consistency between the various radiobiological model predictions and the currently observed data.

CONCLUSION

Current radiobiological models provide accurate predictions of biochemical relapse-free survival, even when profoundly hypofractionated patients are included in the analysis.

[Hypofractionated radiotherapy in prostate cancer]

Radiotherapy plays a central role in the management of localized prostate cancer, but the total duration of treatment of nearly 2 months poses not only problems of fatigue related to repetitive transports, especially for older patients, but also increases the overall cost of treatment including linear accelerators occupancy and patient transportation. To address this problem, various teams have developed hypofractionated radiotherapy protocols seeking to maintain the same efficacy and toxicity while reducing the total duration of treatment. These hypofractionated protocols require recent techniques such as image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Single centre series have validated the feasibility of "light" hypofractionation schemes at doses per fraction less than 6 Gy Similarly, different teams have shown the possibility of stereotactic irradiation for delivering "severe" hypofractionation schemes at doses greater than 6 Gy per fraction. Whatever the dose per fraction, the current clinical data support the conclusion that hypofractionated radiotherapy does not increase mid-term toxicity and could even improve biochemical control. Studies with the objective of demonstrating non-inferiority are expected to definitively validate the role of hypofractionated irradiation in the treatment of prostate cancer.

A criterion-based audit of the technical quality of external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the technical quality of external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer in Canada.

METHODS

This was a multi-institution, retrospective study of a random sample of patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer in Canada. Patterns of care were determined by abstracting details of the patients' management from original records. The quality of patient's technical care was measured against a previously published, comprehensive suite of quality indicators.

RESULTS

32 of the 37 RT centres participated. The total study population of 810 patients included 25% low-risk, 44% intermediate-risk, and 28% high-risk cases. 649 received external beam RT (EBRT) only, for whom compliance with 12 indicators of the quality of pre-treatment assessment ranged from 56% (sexual function documented) to 96% (staging bone scan obtained in high-risk patients). Compliance with treatment-related indicators ranged from 78% (dose to prostate ≥74 Gy in intermediate risk patients not receiving hormone therapy) to 100% (3DCRT or IMRT plan). Compliance varied among centres; no centre demonstrated 100% compliance on all indicators and every centre was 100% compliant on at least some indicators. The number of assessment-related indicators (n=13) with which a given centre was 100% compliant ranged from 4 to 11 (median 7) and the number of the treatment-specific indicators (n=8) with which a given centre was 100% compliant ranged from 6 to 8 (median 8). ADT therapy was utilised in most high-risk cases (191, 92.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

While patterns of prostate cancer care in Canada vary somewhat, compliance on the majority of quality indicators is very high. However, all centres showed room for improvement on several indicators and few individual patients received care that met target benchmarks on all quality measures. This variation is particularly important for indicators such as delivered dose where impact on disease outcome is known to exist, and suggests that quality improvement programmes have the potential to further improve quality of care.

Intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy and a hypofractionated radiation regimen with or without image guided radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HyRT) with or without image guided radiotherapy (IGRT) in intermediate risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

105 patients were treated with HyRT, 43,8 Gy and 54,75 Gy were delivered to the seminal vescicles and to the prostate, respectively; 3,65 Gy/fraction three times weekly. All patients underwent 9 months hormonal therapy. Patient position was verified with daily kV cone beam CT in 69 patients (IGRT group). Acute and late toxicities were evaluated according to RTOG scale. Biochemical relapse was defined using PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL. The data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the efficacy of IGRT.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 31 months the actuarial 3-year bNED was 93,7%. During RT, 10.5% and 7.6% of patients developed ≥Grade 2 rectal and urinary toxicities, respectively. The cumulative incidence of ≥Grade 2 late rectal and urinary toxicities at 3 years were 6,9%, and 10,8%, respectively. The incidence of ≥Grade 2 late rectal toxicities was significant reduced in the IGRT group (1,6% vs. 14,5%, p=0,021). Two patients developed Grade 3 urethral obstruction and one patient developed grade 3 rectal bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

HyRT represents a well-tolerated treatment able to achieve a high bNED. The use of daily IGRT is beneficial for reducing the incidence of late toxicities.

Spacer stability and prostate position variability during radiotherapy for prostate cancer applying a hydrogel to protect the rectal wall

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The aim was to evaluate the spacer dimensions and prostate position variability during the course of radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CT scans were performed in a group of 15 patients (G1) after the 10 ml injection of a hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR™) and 30 patients without a spacer (G2) before the beginning of treatment (CT1) and in the last treatment week, 10-12 weeks following spacer implantation (CT2). Spacer dimensions and displacements were determined and prostate displacements compared.

RESULTS

Mean volume of the hydrogel increased slightly (17%; p<0.01), in 4 of 15 patients >2 cm(3). The average displacement of the hydrogel center of mass was 0.6mm (87%≤ 2.2mm), -0.6mm (100% ≤ 2.2mm) and 1.4mm (87% ≤ 4.3mm) in the x-, y- and z-axes (not significant). The average distance between prostate and anterior rectal wall before/at the end of radiotherapy was 1.6 cm/1.5 cm, 1.2 cm/1.3 cm and 1.0 cm/1.1cm at the level of the base, middle and apex (G1). Prostate position variations were similar comparing G1 and G2, but significant systematic posterior displacements were only found in G2.

CONCLUSIONS

A stable distance between the prostate and anterior rectal wall results during the radiotherapy course after injection of the spacer before treatment planning. Larger posterior prostate displacements could be reduced.

Late gastrointestinal and urogenital side-effects after radiotherapy--incidence and prevalence. Subgroup-analysis within the prospective Austrian-German phase II multicenter trial for localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

In general late side-effects after prostate cancer radiotherapy are presented by the use of actuarial incidence rates. The aim of this analysis was to describe additional relevant aspects of late side effects after prostate cancer radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All 178 primary prostate-cancer patients were treated within the Austrian-German multicenter trial by three-dimensional radiotherapy up to a local dose of 70 Gy (low/intermediate-risk) or 74 Gy (high-risk), respectively. Late gastrointestinal/urogenital (GI/GU) side-effects were prospectively assessed by the use of EORTC/RTOG score. Maximum side-effects, actuarial incidence rate and prevalence rates, initial appearance and duration of ≥grade 2 toxicity were evaluated.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 74 months. Late GI/GU side-effects ≥grade 2 were detected in 15% (27/178) and 22% (40/178). The corresponding 5-year actuarial incidence rates for GI/GU side-effects were 19% and 23%, whereas the prevalence was 1-2% and 2-7% after 5 years, respectively. Late side effects ≥grade 2 appeared within 5 years after radiotherapy in all patients with GI side-effects (27/27) and in 85% (34/40) of the patients with GU side-effects, respectively and lasted for less than 3 years in 90% (GI) and 98% (GU).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the majority of late GI and GU side effects after primary external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer are transient. Using only actuarial incidence rates for reporting side effects may lead to misinterpretation or overestimation. The combination of incidence and prevalence rates provides a more comprehensive view on the complex issue of late side effects.