Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for low- and intermediate risk prostate cancer: High-dose-rate brachytherapy vs stereotactic ablative radiotherapy

Radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer: a multicenter analysis evaluating tumor control and late toxicity after brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy in 1293 patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Comparing oncological outcomes and toxicity after primary treatment of localized prostate cancer using HDR- or LDR-mono-brachytherapy (BT), or conventionally (CF) or moderately hypofractionated (HF) external beam radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospectively, patients with low- (LR) or favorable intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer treated between 03/2000 and 09/2022 in two centers were included. Treatment was performed using either CF with total doses between 74 and 78 Gy, HF with 2.4-2.6 Gy per fraction in 30 fractions, or LDR- or HDR-BT. Biochemical control (BC) according to the Phoenix criteria, and late gastrointestinal (GI), and genitourinary (GU) toxicity according to RTOG/EORTC criteria were assessed.

RESULTS

We identified 1293 patients, 697 with LR and 596 with IR prostate cancer. Of these, 470, 182, 480, and 161 were treated with CF, HF, LDR-BT, and HDR-BT, respectively. For BC, we did not find a significant difference between treatments in LR and IR (p = 0.31 and 0.72). The 5‑year BC for LR was between 93 and 95% for all treatment types. For IR, BC was between 88% in the CF and 94% in the HF group. For CF and HF, maximum GI and GU toxicity grade ≥ 2 was between 22 and 27%. For LDR-BT, we observed 67% grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity. Maximum GI grade ≥ 2 toxicity was 9%. For HDR-BT, we observed 1% GI grade ≥ 2 toxicity and 19% GU grade ≥ 2 toxicity.

CONCLUSION

All types of therapy were effective and well received. HDR-BT caused the least late toxicities, especially GI.

Prostate high dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer: Efficacy results from a randomized phase II clinical trial of one fraction of 19 Gy or two fractions of 13.5 Gy: A 9-year update

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

High dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy as a monotherapy is an accepted treatment for localized prostate cancer, but the optimal dose and fractionation schedule remain unknown. We report on the efficacy of a randomized Phase II trial comparing HDR monotherapy delivered as 27 Gy in 2 fractions vs. 19 Gy in 1 fraction with a median follow-up of 9 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Enrolled patients had low or intermediate-risk disease, <60 cc prostate volume and no androgen deprivation use. Patients were randomized to 27 Gy in 2 fractions delivered one week apart vs a single fraction of 19 Gy.

RESULTS

170 patients were randomized: median age 65 years, median follow-up 107 months and median baseline PSA 6.35 ng/ml. NCCN risk categories comprised low (19 %), favourable (51 %), and unfavourable intermediate risk (30 %). The median PSA at 8 years was 0.08 ng/ml in the 2-fraction arm vs. 0.89 ng/ml in the single-fraction arm. The cumulative incidence of local failure at 8 years was 11.2 % in the 2-fraction arm vs. 35.9 % in the single-fraction arm (p < 0.001). The incidence of distant failure at 8 years was 3.8 % in the 2-fraction arm and 2.5 % in the single-fraction arm (p = 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

HDR monotherapy delivered in two fractions of 13.5 Gy demonstrated a persistent cancer control rate at 8 years and was well-tolerated. Single-fraction monotherapy yielded poor oncologic control and is not recommended. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on optimal HDR monotherapy strategies for low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies).

RESULTS

A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.

Long-term outcomes of ultra-hypofractionated 2 fractions single day HDR brachytherapy in localized prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

We previously published the toxicity and initial results of a prospective cohort of patients treated with 2 fractions HDR-BRT administered in a single day. In the present analysis we report the long-term cancer control results of our prospective trial and investigate the relationship between PSA nadir and biochemical control.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 120 patients were treated with HDR Brachytherapy monotherapy administered in two fractions in a single day. Between November 2010 and February 2016, 84 patients with low-risk and 36 patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer in accordance with the NCCN practice guidelines.

RESULTS

Median age was 66 years (range 45-84) and median PSA was 7.5 ng/ml (range 0.01-16 ng/ml). Overall, 84.2% had Gleason score 6 and 15.8% Gleason 7. Thirty-one percent of patients received ADT.After a median follow-up of the cohort was 123 months. Actuarial rates of no biochemical evidence of disease (bNED), overall survival, local control and metastasis-free survival for all patients were 93.3%, 86.7%, 95.2% and 96.1%, respectively.The median time to achieve PSA nadir was 80.5 months. Patients who attained a PSA Nadir ≤ 0.20 ng/mL exhibited a 10-year bNED survival rate of 96.9%, whereas thosewho failed to reach this PSA level had a survival rate of only 40%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with favorable localized prostate cancer, 2 fractions HDR-BT monotherapy is a highly curative radiation technique that attains PSA nadir levels < 0.2 ng/mL in 95% of cases.

Safety and efficacy associated with single-fraction high-dose-rate brachytherapy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although single-fraction high-dose-rate brachytherapy (SFHDR) for localized prostate cancer has been tried in clinical trials, relevant medical evidence is currently lacking. It is necessary to systematically analyze the safety and efficacy of SFHDR.

METHODS

Comprehensive and systematic searches for eligible studies were performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. The primary endpoints included safety and efficacy, represented by toxic effects and biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), respectively. The proportion rates were used as the effect measure for each study and were presented with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) and related 95% prediction interval (PI). Restricted maximum-likelihood estimator (REML) and the Hartung-Knapp method were used in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis, including 1440 patients. The median age of patients was 66.9 years old (62-73 years old) and the median follow-up was 47.5 months (12-75 months). The estimates of cumulative occurrence for severe gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxic effects were 0.1% (95% CI 0-0.2%) and 0.4% (95% CI 0-1.2%), and for grade 2 toxic effects were 1.6% (95% CI 0.1-4.7%) and 17.1% (95% CI 5.4-33.5%), respectively. The estimate of 3‑year bRFS was 87.5% (95% CI 84.4-90.3%) and 71.0% (95% CI 63.0-78.3%) for 5‑year bRFS. The pooled bRFS rates for low-risk patients were 99.0% (95% CI 85.2-100.0%) at 3 years and 80.9% (95% CI 75.4-85.9%) at 5 years, and the risk group was found to be statistically correlated with bRFS (3-year bRFS, P < 0.01; 5‑year bRFS, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

SFHDR is associated with favorable tolerability and suboptimal clinical benefit in patients with localized prostate cancer. Ongoing and planned high-quality prospective studies are necessary to verify its safety and efficacy.

Treatment planning comparison of high-dose-rate brachytherapy vs. robotic and conventional stereotactic body radiotherapy for ultrahypofractionated treatment of prostate cancer

Background and purpose

Ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy is increasingly used in the treatment of prostate cancer. High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are representative methods of ultrahypofractionation. This study was performed to compare clinically applied treatment plans for patients who had been treated using HDR-BT vs. conventional or robotic SBRT.

Materials and methods

Calculated dose-volume indices between HDR-BT without a perirectal spacer (n = 20), robotic SBRT without a spacer (n = 40), and conventional (non-robotic) SBRT with a spacer (n = 40) were compared. Percentages against the prescription dose regarding the planning target volume (PTV), bladder, rectum, and urethra were statistically compared.

Results

The D50% of the PTV with HDR-BT (140.5% ± 4.9%) was significantly higher than that with robotic or conventional SBRT (116.2% ± 1.6%, 101.0% ± 0.4%, p < 0.01). The D2cm³ of the bladder with HDR-BT (65.6% ± 6.4%) was significantly lower than those with SBRT (105.3% ± 2.9%, 98.0% ± 1.3%, p < 0.01). The D2cm³ of the rectum with HDR-BT (60.6% ± 6.2%) was also significantly lower than those with SBRT (85.1% ± 8.8%, 70.4% ± 9.6%, p < 0.01). By contrast, the D0.1cm³ of the urethra with HDR-BT (117.1% ± 3.6%) was significantly higher than those with SBRT (100.2% ± 0.7%, 104.5% ± 0.6%, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

HDR-BT could administer a higher dose to the PTV and a lower dose to the bladder and rectum, at the cost of a slightly higher dose to the urethra compared with SBRT.

Single fraction of HDR brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Results of the SiFEPI phase II prospective trial

•

LDR brachytherapy is a validated therapy for low-risk prostate cancer.

•

HDR brachytherapy aims to decrease urinary side effects.

•

A single fraction of 20 Gy HDR brachytherapy leads to sub-optimal biochemical control.

•

No Grade 3 urinary/digestive toxicity after a single fraction of HDR brachytherapy.

•

2 fractions of HDR brachytherapy constitute a promising approach.

Purpose

To report the results of the Single Fraction Early Prostate Irradiation (SiFEPI) phase 2 prospective trial.

Materials/Methods

The SiFEPI trial (NCT02104362) evaluated a single fraction of high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDB) for low- (LR) and favorable-intermediate (FIR) risk prostate cancers. After rectal spacer placement, a single fraction of 20 Gy was delivered to the prostate. Oncological outcome (biochemical (bRFS) and local (lRFS) relapses, disease-free (DFS) and overall (OS) survivals and toxicity (acute/late genito-urinary (GU), gastro-intestinal (GI) and sexual (S) toxicities were investigated.

Results

From 03/2014 to 10/2017, 35 pts were enrolled, of whom 33 were evaluable. With a median age of 66 y [46–79], 25 (76 %) and 8 (24 %) pts were LR and FIR respectively. With a MFU of 72.8 months [64–86], 6y-bRFS, lRFS and mRFS were 62 % [45–85], 61 % [44–85] and 93 % [85–100] respectively while 6y-DFS, CSS and OS were 54 % [37–77], 100 % and 89 % [77–100] respectively. Late GU, GI and S toxicities were observed in 11 pts (33 %;18G1), 4 pts (12 %;4G1) and 7 pts (21 %;1G1,5G2,1G3) respectively. Biochemical relapse (BR) was observed in 11 pts (33 %;7LR,4FIR) with a median time interval between HDB and BR of 51 months [24–69]. Nine of these pts (82 %) presented a histologically proven isolated local recurrence.

Conclusions

Long-term results of the SiFEPI trial show that a single fraction of 20 Gy leads to sub-optimal biochemical control for LR/FIR prostate cancers. The late GU and GI toxicity profile is encouraging, leading to consideration of HDB as a safe irradiation technique.

Ultra-Hypofractionated Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Clinical Outcomes, Patterns of Recurrence, Feasibility of Definitive Salvage Treatment, and Competing Oncological Risk

A cohort of 650 patients treated for localized prostate cancer (PCa) with CyberKnife^TM ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy between 2011 and 2018 was retrospectively analyzed in terms of survival, patterns of failure, and outcomes of second-line definitive salvage therapies. The analysis was performed using survival analysis including the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis. At a median follow-up of 49.4 months, the main pattern of failure was local-regional failure (7.4% in low-, and 13% in intermediate/high-risk group at five years), followed by distant metastases (3.6% in low-, and 6% in intermediate/high-risk group at five years). Five-year likelihood of developing a second malignancy was 7.3%; however, in the vast majority of the cases, the association with prior irradiation was unlikely. The 5-year overall survival was 90.2% in low-, and 88.8% in intermediate/high-risk patients. The independent prognostic factors for survival included age (HR 1.1; 95% CI 1.07-1.14) and occurrence of a second malignancy (HR 3.67; 95% CI 2.19-6.15). Definitive local salvage therapies were feasible in the majority of the patients with local-regional failure, and uncommonly in patients with distant metastases, with an estimated second-line progression free survival of 67.8% at two years. Competing oncological risks and age were significantly more important for patients' survival compared to primary disease recurrence.

SBRT for Localized Prostate Cancer: CyberKnife vs. VMAT-FFF, a Dosimetric Study

In recent years, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has gained popularity among clinical methods for the treatment of medium and low risk prostate cancer (PCa), mainly as an alternative to surgery. The hypo-fractionated regimen allows the administration of high doses of radiation in a small number of fractions; such a fractionation is possible by exploiting the different intrinsic prostate radiosensitivity compared with the surrounding healthy tissues. In addition, SBRT treatment guaranteed a better quality of life compared with surgery, avoiding risks, aftermaths, and possible complications. At present, most stereotactic prostate treatments are performed with the CyberKnife (CK) system, which is an accelerator exclusively dedicated for stereotaxis and it is not widely spread in every radiotherapy centre like a classic linear accelerator (LINAC). To be fair, a stereotactic treatment is achievable also by using a LINAC through Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), but some precautions must be taken. The aim of this work is to carry out a dosimetric comparison between these two methodologies. In order to pursue such a goal, two groups of patients were selected at Instituto Nazionale Tumori—IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale: the first group consisting of ten patients previously treated with a SBRT performed with CK; the second one was composed of ten patients who received a hypo-fractionated VMAT treatment and replanned in VMAT-SBRT flattening filter free mode (FFF). The two SBRT techniques were rescaled at the same target coverage and compared by normal tissue sparing, dose distribution parameters and delivery time. All organs at risk (OAR) constraints were achieved by both platforms. CK exhibits higher performances in terms of dose delivery; nevertheless, the general satisfying dosimetric results and the significantly shorter delivery time make VMAT-FFF an attractive and reasonable alternative SBRT technique for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

Comparison of toxicities between ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy versus brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

To compare gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy (UHF) or brachytherapy [BT; low dose rate, LDR or high dose rate (HDR) with or without external beam radiotherapy (EBRT)]. We compared 253 UHF and 1664 BT ± EBRT groups. The main outcomes were the incidence and severity of acute and late GU and GI toxicities. The secondary endpoint was biochemical control rate. Cumulative late actuarial GU toxicity did not differ for grade ≥ 2 (8.6% at 5-years in UHF and 13.3% in BT ± EBRT, hazard ratio [HR], 0.7066; 95% CI, 0.4093–1.22, p = 0.2127). Actuarial grade ≥ 2 late GI toxicity was higher in UHF (5.8% at 5-years, HR: 3.619; 95% CI, 1.774–7.383, p < 0.001) than in BT ± EBRT (1.1%). In detailed subgroup analyses, the high-dose UHF group (H-UHF) using BED ≥ 226 Gy_1.5, showed higher GI toxicity profiles than the other subgroups (HDR + EBRT, LDR + EBRT, and LDR monotherapy, and L-UHF BED < 226 Gy_1.5) with equivalent GU toxicity to other modalities. With a median follow-up period of 32 months and 75 months, the actuarial biochemical control rates were equivalent between the UHF and BT ± EBRT groups. UHF showed equivalent efficacy, higher GI and equivalent GU accumulated toxicity to BT ± EBRT, and the toxicity of UHF was largely dependent on the UHF schedule.

Ultrahypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: How Far Can We Go?

Following adoption of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy as a standard for localised prostate cancer, ultrahypofractioned radiotherapy delivered in five to seven fractions is rapidly being embraced by clinical practice and international guidelines. However, the question remains: how low can we go? Can radiotherapy for prostate cancer be delivered in fewer than five fractions? The current review summarises the evidence that radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer can be safely and effectively delivered in fewer than five fractions using high dose rate brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy. We also discuss important lessons learned from the single-fraction high dose rate brachytherapy experience.

Bibliometric Analysis of the Top-Cited Publications and Research Trends for Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Objective

This study aims to analyze the 100 most cited papers and research trends on stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

Methods

We used Web of Science to identify the 100 most frequently cited papers on SBRT on September 29, 2021 and extracted the following data: publication year, source title, country/region, organization, total citations, and average number of citations per year. The research type and research domain were classified independently by the authors. Then we carried out a bibliometric analysis to determine the trends in research on SBRT.

Results

These 100 papers were cited a total of 26,540 times, and the median number of citations was 190 (range, 138-1688). “Stereotactic body radiation therapy for inoperable early stage lung cancer” by Timmerman et al. had the highest number of total citations (1688 times). International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics published the largest number of papers (37 papers), followed by Journal of Clinical Oncology (13 papers). The USA contributed the most papers (67 papers), followed by Canada (18 papers). Primary lung cancer (33 papers, 10,683 citations) and oligometastases (30 papers, 7,147 citations) were the most cited research areas.

Conclusions

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first bibliometric analysis of the most frequently cited papers on SBRT. Our results provide insight into the historical development of SBRT and important advances in its application to cancer treatment. Early-stage non–small-cell lung cancer and oligometastases were the most cited research areas in the top 100 publications on SBRT, and SBRT combined with immunotherapy was a hot topic in the past few years. This study is helpful for researchers to identify the most influential papers and current research hotspots on SBRT.

Brachytherapy: An emblematic example of extreme hypofractionated regimen

In order to provide more convenient irradiation regimens for patient comfort, radiation facility organization and health expenses, new hypofractionated protocols have been evaluated. Moderately (dose/fraction: 2.3 to 3Gy), then ultra (dose/fraction: 5.2 to 6.1Gy) hypofractionated irradiations were first validated. The current question is: is it possible to go forward using extreme hypofractionated regimens (EHR) based on 1 to 3 fractions. Different irradiation techniques are under investigation. However, brachytherapy remains the smartest way to deliver a high dose in a small volume. We report prospective and retrospective study results which evaluated EHR for breast and prostate brachytherapy. While oncological outcome and toxicity profile appear extremely encouraging for low-risk breast cancer after a 1 to 4 fractions (6.25 to 20Gy/fraction), the use of a single fraction of 19 to 23Gy appears debatable for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy represents an emblematic example of EHR but longer follow-up and more mature results are awaited in order to specify the right indications and refine the EQD2 calculation method including new biological and technical factors.

Extreme Hypofractionation with SBRT in Localized Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men around the world. Radiotherapy is a standard of care treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer. Over the years, radiation delivery modalities have contributed to increased precision of treatment, employing radiobiological insights to shorten the overall treatment time, improving the control of the disease without increasing toxicities. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) represents an extreme form of hypofractionated radiotherapy in which treatment is usually delivered in 1–5 fractions. This review assesses the main efficacy and toxicity data of SBRT in non-metastatic prostate cancer and discusses the potential to implement this scheme in routine clinical practice.

Does the sequence of high-dose rate brachytherapy boost and IMRT for prostate cancer impact early toxicity outcomes? Results from a single institution analysis

•

The optimal sequence of HDR-BT boost and EBRT for prostate cancer is unclear.

•

We compared early toxicity based on the timing of HDR-BT boost.

•

The timing of HDR-BT was not based on any specific patient or clinical factors.

•

We found no difference in early GI/GU toxicity between the two groups.

•

Longer follow-up is needed to evaluate late toxicity and long-term disease control.

Background

We present the first report comparing early toxicity outcomes with high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost upfront versus intensity modulated RT (IMRT) upfront combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as definitive management for intermediate risk or higher prostate cancer.

Methods and Materials

We reviewed all non-metastatic prostate cancer patients who received HDR-BT boost from 2014 to 2019. HDR-BT boost was offered to patients with intermediate-risk disease or higher. ADT use and IMRT target volume was based on NCCN risk group. IMRT dose was typically 45 Gy in 25 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles ± pelvic lymph nodes. HDR-BT dose was 15 Gy in 1 fraction, delivered approximately 3 weeks before or after IMRT. The sequence was based on physician preference. Biochemical recurrence was defined per ASTRO definition. Gastrointestinal (GI) and Genitourinary (GU) toxicity was graded per CTCAE v5.0. Pearson Chi-squared test and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare toxicity rates. P-value < 0.05 was significant.

Results

Fifty-eight received HDR-BT upfront (majority 2014–2016) and 57 IMRT upfront (majority 2017–2018). Median follow-up was 26.0 months. The two cohorts were well-balanced for baseline patient/disease characteristics and treatment factors. There were differences in treatment sequence based on the year in which patients received treatment. Overall, rates of grade 3 or higher GI or GU toxicity were <1%. There was no significant difference in acute or late GI or GU toxicity between the two groups.

Conclusion

We found no significant difference in GI/GU toxicity in intermediate-risk or higher prostate cancer patients receiving HDR-BT boost upfront versus IMRT upfront combined with ADT. These findings suggest that either approach may be reasonable. Longer follow-up is needed to evaluate late toxicity and long-term disease control.