1
|
Ablative Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer: Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and High Dose Rate Brachytherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12123606. [PMID: 33276562 PMCID: PMC7761604 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12123606] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2020] [Revised: 11/29/2020] [Accepted: 11/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Radiation therapy is a standard of care treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer. Over the years, various radiation delivery modalities have contributed to the increased precision of radiation, employing radiobiological insights to shorten the overall treatment time with hypofractionation, while improving oncological control without increasing toxicities. Here, we discuss and compare two ablative radiation modalities, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT), in terms of oncological control, dose/fractionation and toxicities in men with localized prostate cancer. This review will highlight the levels of evidence available to support either modality as a monotherapy, will summarize safety and efficacy, help clinicians gain a deeper understanding of the safety and efficacy profiles of these two modalities, and highlight ongoing research efforts to address many unanswered questions regarding ablative prostate radiation. Abstract Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common noncutaneous solid organ malignancy among men worldwide. Radiation therapy is a standard of care treatment option that has historically been delivered in the form of small daily doses of radiation over the span of multiple weeks. PCa appears to have a unique sensitivity to higher doses of radiation per fraction, rendering it susceptible to abbreviated forms of treatment. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) are both modern radiation modalities that allow the precise delivery of ablative doses of radiation to the prostate while maximally sparing sensitive surrounding normal structures. In this review, we highlight the evidence regarding the radiobiology, oncological outcomes, toxicity and dose/fractionation schemes of SBRT and HDRBT monotherapy in men with low-and intermediate-risk PCa.
Collapse
|
2
|
Jadvar H, Ballas LK, Choyke PL, Fanti S, Gulley JL, Herrmann K, Hope TA, Klitzke AK, Oldan JD, Pomper MG, Rowe SP, Subramaniam RM, Taneja SS, Vargas HA, Ahuja S. Appropriate Use Criteria for Imaging Evaluation of Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Definitive Primary Treatment. J Nucl Med 2020; 61:552-562. [PMID: 32238495 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.119.240929] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2019] [Accepted: 12/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Hossein Jadvar
- Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Reston, Virginia
| | - Leslie K Ballas
- American Society for Radiation Oncology, Arlington, Virginia
| | - Peter L Choyke
- American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia
| | - Stefano Fanti
- European Association of Nuclear Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | - James L Gulley
- American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Ken Herrmann
- European Association of Nuclear Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | - Thomas A Hope
- Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Reston, Virginia
| | | | - Jorge D Oldan
- Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Reston, Virginia.,American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia
| | | | - Steven P Rowe
- Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Reston, Virginia
| | - Rathan M Subramaniam
- American College of Nuclear Medicine, Reston, Virginia.,American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia; and
| | - Samir S Taneja
- American Urological Association, Linthicum Heights, Maryland
| | | | - Sukhjeet Ahuja
- Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Reston, Virginia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Overall survival comparison between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) vs ADT plus EBRT with brachytherapy boost in clinically node-positive prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2020; 19:557-566. [PMID: 32624405 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2020.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2020] [Revised: 05/11/2020] [Accepted: 05/29/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Optimal therapy for clinically node-positive, nonmetastatic (cN1) prostate cancer (PC) patients remains controversial, ranging from aggressive local therapy to palliative systematic therapy alone. Despite guideline support, it is unclear if a brachytherapy (BT) boost should be considered for cN1 patients as these patients were excluded from randomized trials establishing its benefit. Herein, we compare definitive radiation therapy (RT) with or without a BT boost in cN1 PC. METHODS AND MATERIALS The National Cancer Database was used to identify men with cN1 PC treated with definitive RT and concomitant androgen deprivation therapy between 2004 and 2013. Overall survival (OS) was compared between those who received external beam RT (EBRT) or combination EBRT plus BT boost (EBRT + BT) using Kaplan-Meier with propensity score matching and Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS With a median followup of 48.5 months, 1,650 patients were eligible for this analysis, 103 (6.2%) of whom received EBRT + BT. Younger age, no medical comorbidities, and Gleason score of six were associated with higher likelihood of receiving EBRT + BT over EBRT alone. The mean (median) OS for EBRT and EBRT + BT was 99.0 (110.6) months vs 109.2 (not reached) months, respectively (p = 0.048). However, no significance difference in OS was observed between the groups after propensity score matching. On multivariable analysis, EBRT + BT was not significantly associated with improved OS (adjusted HR 0.67, 95% CI, 0.41-1.07, p = 0.098). CONCLUSIONS In this retrospective, observational study of patients with cN1 PC treated with definitive RT and concomitant androgen deprivation therapy, EBRT + BT had an unadjusted improvement in OS compared with EBRT alone that lost statistical significance after multivariable adjustment and propensity score matching.
Collapse
|
4
|
Qin H, Zhang V, Bok RA, Santos RD, Cunha JA, Hsu IC, Santos Bs JD, Lee JE, Sukumar S, Larson PEZ, Vigneron DB, Wilson DM, Sriram R, Kurhanewicz J. Simultaneous Metabolic and Perfusion Imaging Using Hyperpolarized 13C MRI Can Evaluate Early and Dose-Dependent Response to Radiation Therapy in a Prostate Cancer Mouse Model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 107:887-896. [PMID: 32339646 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.04.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2019] [Revised: 04/10/2020] [Accepted: 04/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate use of a novel imaging approach, hyperpolarized (HP) 13C magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for simultaneous metabolism and perfusion assessment, to evaluate early and dose-dependent response to radiation therapy (RT) in a prostate cancer mouse model. METHODS AND MATERIALS Transgenic Adenocarcinoma of Mouse Prostate (TRAMP) mice (n = 18) underwent single-fraction RT (4-14 Gy steep dose across the tumor) and were imaged serially at pre-RT baseline and 1, 4, and 7 days after RT using HP 13C MRI with combined [1-13C]pyruvate (metabolic active agent) and [13C]urea (perfusion agent), coupled with conventional multiparametric 1H MRI including T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced, and diffusion-weighted imaging. Tumor tissues were collected 4 and 7 days after RT for biological correlative studies. RESULTS We found a significant decrease in HP pyruvate-to-lactate conversion in tumors responding to RT, with concomitant significant increases in HP pyruvate-to-alanine conversion and HP urea signal; the opposite changes were observed in tumors resistant to RT. Moreover, HP lactate change was dependent on radiation dose; tumor regions treated with higher radiation doses (10-14 Gy) exhibited a greater decrease in HP lactate signal than low-dose regions (4-7 Gy) as early as 1 day post-RT, consistent with lactate dehydrogenase enzyme activity and expression data. We also found that HP [13C]urea MRI provided assessments of tumor perfusion similar to those provided by 1H dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in this animal model. However, apparent diffusion coefficien , a conventional 1H MRI functional biomarker, did not exhibit statistically significant changes within 7 days after RT. CONCLUSION These results demonstrate the ability of HP 13C MRI to monitor radiation-induced physiologic changes in a timely and dose-dependent manner, providing the basic science premise for further clinical investigation and translation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hecong Qin
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California; Graduate Program in Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Vickie Zhang
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Robert A Bok
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Romelyn Delos Santos
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - J Adam Cunha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - I-Chow Hsu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Justin Delos Santos Bs
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Jessie E Lee
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Subramaniam Sukumar
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Peder E Z Larson
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California; Graduate Program in Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Daniel B Vigneron
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California; Graduate Program in Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - David M Wilson
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Renuka Sriram
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - John Kurhanewicz
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, California; Graduate Program in Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco, California.
| |
Collapse
|