Sequence of hormonal therapy and radiotherapy field size in unfavourable, localised prostate cancer (NRG/RTOG 9413): long-term results of a randomised, phase 3 trial

Elective pelvic nodal irradiation in the setting of ultrahypofractionated versus moderately hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Outcomes from 3 prospective clinical trials

Background and purpose

Data is needed regarding the use of ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy (UHRT) in the context of prostate cancer elective nodal irradiation (ENI), and how this compares to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) ENI with CFRT or moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) to the prostate.

Materials and methods

Between 2011-2019, 3 prospective clinical trials of unfavourable intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer receiving CFRT (78 Gy in 39 fractions to prostate; 46 Gy in 23 fractions to pelvis), MHRT (68 Gy in 25 fractions to prostate; 48 Gy to pelvis), or UHRT (35-40 Gy in 5 fractions to prostate +/- boost to 50 Gy to intraprostatic lesion; 25 Gy to pelvis) were conducted. Primary endpoints included biochemical failure (Phoenix definition), and acute and late toxicities (CTCAE v3.0/4.0).

Results

Two-hundred-forty patients were enrolled: 90 (37.5 %) had CFRT, 90 (37.5 %) MHRT, and 60 (25 %) UHRT. Median follow-up time was 71.6 months (IQR 53.6-94.8). Cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (95 % CI) at 5-years was 11.7 % (3.5-19.8 %) for CFRT, 6.5 % (0.8-12.2 %) MHRT, and 1.8 % (0-5.2 %) UHRT, which was not significantly different between treatments (p = 0.38). Acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicity was significantly worse for UHRT versus CFRT and MHRT, but not for acute grade ≥ 3 genitourinary, or acute gastrointestinal toxicities. UHRT was not associated with worse late toxicities.

Conclusion

ENI with UHRT resulted in similar oncologic outcomes to CFRT ENI with prostate CFRT/MHRT, with worse acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity but no differences in late toxicity. Randomized phase 3 trials of ENI using UHRT techniques are much anticipated.

Whole pelvis vs. hemi pelvis elective nodal radiotherapy in patients with PSMA-positive nodal recurrence after radical prostatectomy - a retrospective multi-institutional propensity score analysis

PURPOSE

Despite growing evidence for bilateral pelvic radiotherapy (whole pelvis RT, WPRT) there is almost no data on unilateral RT (hemi pelvis RT, HPRT) in patients with nodal recurrent prostate cancer after prostatectomy. Nevertheless, in clinical practice HPRT is sometimes used with the intention to reduce side effects compared to WPRT. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography / computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) is currently the best imaging modality in this clinical situation. This analysis compares PSMA-PET/CT based WPRT and HPRT.

METHODS

A propensity score matching was performed in a multi-institutional retrospective dataset of 273 patients treated with pelvic RT due to nodal recurrence (214 WPRT, 59 HPRT). In total, 102 patients (51 in each group) were included in the final analysis. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) defined as prostate specific antigen (PSA) < post-RT nadir + 0.2ng/ml, metastasis-free survival (MFS) and nodal recurrence-free survival (NRFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log rank test.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 29 months. After propensity matching, both groups were mostly well balanced. However, in the WPRT group there were still significantly more patients with additional local recurrences and biochemical persistence after prostatectomy. There were no significant differences between both groups in BRFS (p = .97), MFS (p = .43) and NRFS (p = .43). After two years, BRFS, MFS and NRFS were 61%, 86% and 88% in the WPRT group and 57%, 90% and 82% in the HPRT group, respectively. Application of a boost to lymph node metastases, a higher RT dose to the lymphatic pathways (> 50 Gy EQD2α/β=1.5 Gy) and concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were significantly associated with longer BRFS in uni- and multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this analysis presents the outcome of HPRT in nodal recurrent prostate cancer patients and shows that it can result in a similar oncologic outcome compared to WPRT. Nevertheless, patients in the WPRT may have been at a higher risk for progression due to some persistent imbalances between the groups. Therefore, further research should prospectively evaluate which subgroups of patients are suitable for HPRT and if HPRT leads to a clinically significant reduction in toxicity.

Late Urinary Toxicity and Quality of Life With Pelvic Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Dose-Effect Relations in the POP-RT Randomized Phase 3 Trial

PURPOSE

The POP-RT phase 3 randomized trial showed improved biochemical failure-free survival and metastasis-free survival with whole pelvic radiation therapy versus prostate-only radiation therapy for high and very high-risk prostate cancer, albeit with worse RTOG late urinary toxicity. We report updated late urinary adverse effects and bladder dose-effect relations within this trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Late urinary toxicity and the cumulative severity of each symptom during the follow-up period were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 5.0. Bladder dosimetry in 5-Gy increments (V5, V10, V15, V65, V68Gy) in the approved radiation therapy plans was compared with urinary symptoms and overall grade 2+ toxicity. Potential factors influencing urinary toxicity were tested using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Updated urinary quality of life (QOL) scores were compared between the trial arms.

RESULTS

Complete combined data for late urinary symptoms and dosimetry was available for 193 of 224 patients. At a median follow-up of 75 months, cumulative late urinary CTCAE grade 3 toxicity was low and similar for whole pelvic radiation therapy and prostate-only radiation therapy (5.2% vs 4.1%, P = .49), and grade 2 toxicity was 31.3% versus 22.7%, respectively (P = .12). Cumulative rates of each urinary symptom were similar between both arms. Multivariable analysis with age at diagnosis, known diabetes, tumor stage, trial arm, prior transurethral resection of prostate, grade 2+ acute urinary toxicity, low bladder dose (V10Gy), and moderate bladder dose (V40Gy) did not identify any significant association with late urinary toxicity. Urinary QOL scores was similar between both the arms for all the symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

During long-term follow-up, whole pelvic radiation therapy resulted in low (∼5%) and similar grade 3 cumulative urinary toxicity as prostate-only radiation therapy. The long-term patient-reported QOL scores were similar. No causative factors affecting the late urinary toxicity were identified.

Hypofractionated Dose Escalation Radiotherapy for High-risk Prostate Cancer: The Survival Analysis of the Prostate Cancer Study 5, a Groupe de Radio-oncologie Génito-urinaire du Quebec-led Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Prostate Cancer Study 5 (PCS5) compared conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) with hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients, hypothesizing similar toxicity and survival outcomes. This report presents the efficacy analysis.

METHODS

PCS5 is a Canadian multicenter, open-label, phase 3 randomized control trial. Men with histologically proven, clinically localized PCa with one or more high-risk features (T3/T4, Gleason score ≥8, and prostate-specific antigen >20) were eligible. Patients were randomized 1:1 to CFRT (76 Gy/38 fractions [Fx] to the prostate and 46 Gy/23 Fx to the pelvic lymph nodes [PLNs]) or HFRT (68 Gy/25 Fx to the prostate and 45 Gy/25 Fx to the PLNs) and 28 mo of androgen suppression. The primary endpoint was toxicity; secondary endpoints included survival outcomes.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 329 patients, 164 were randomized to HFRT and 165 to CFRT, with 159 in the HFRT arm and 160 in the CFRT arm included in survival analyses. At the 5-yr median follow-up, there were no significant differences in overall survival (OS; 90.3% vs 89.7%; risk ratio [RR]: 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-1.09), PCa-specific survival (PCSS; 97.4% vs 97.5%; RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.93-1.07), biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS; 85.2% vs 85.2%; RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.91-1.10), or distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS; 87.1% vs 87.1%; RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.92-1.09). Hazard ratios were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.56-1.53) for OS, 1.31 (95% CI: 0.46-3.78) for PCSS, 0.85 (95% CI: 0.56-1.30) for BCRFS, and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.56-1.43) for DMFS. Sample size was a limiting factor.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

There were no differences in survival outcomes between HFRT (68 Gy/25 Fx) and CFRT (76 Gy/38 Fx). HFRT, including PLN radiotherapy and long-term androgen deprivation therapy, should be considered a new standard of care for high-risk PCa patients undergoing external beam radiotherapy.

Moderately hypofractionated prostate-only versus whole-pelvis radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer: A retrospective real-world single-center cohort study

Background

The benefit of prophylactic whole pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) in prostate cancer has been debated for decades, with evidence based mainly on conventional fractionation targeting pelvic nodes.

Aim

This retrospective cohort study aimed to explore the impact of adding moderately hypofractionated pelvic radiotherapy to prostate-only irradiation (PORT) on prognosis, toxicity, and quality of life in real-world settings.

Materials and methods

Patients with high-risk and conventionally staged prostate cancer (cT1-3N0M0) treated with moderately hypofractionated WPRT or PORT, using external beam radiotherapy alone or combined with high-dose-rate brachytherapy, at Örebro University Hospital between 2008 and 2021 were identified. Biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards. Toxicity and quality of life measures were also analysed.

Results

Among 516 patients (227 PORT, 289 WPRT), 5-year BFFS rates were 77 % (PORT) and 74 % (WPRT), adjusted HR=1.50 (95 % CI=0.88-2.55). No significant differences were found in MFS, PCSS, or OS in main analyses. WPRT was associated with a higher risk of acute grade ≥ 2 and 3 genitourinary toxicities whereas no differences in late toxicities or quality of life between PORT and WPRT were observed.

Conclusion

We found no significant differences in oncological outcomes or quality of life when comparing moderately hypofractionated PORT to WPRT. Some differences in toxicity patterns were observed. Despite caveats related to study design, our findings support the need for further research on WPRT's impact on treatment-related and patient-reported outcomes.

The risk of second malignancies following prostate cancer radiotherapy in the era of conformal radiotherapy: a statement of the Prostate Cancer Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO)

A significant number of prostate cancer patients are long-term survivors after primary definitive therapy, and the occurrence of late side effects, such as second primary cancers, has gained interest. The aim of this editorial is to discuss the most current evidence on second primary cancers based on six retrospective studies published in 2021-2024 using large data repositories not accounting for all possible confounding factors, such as smoking or pre-existing comorbidities. Overall, prostate cancer patients treated with curative radiotherapy have an increased risk (0.7-1%) of the development of second primary cancers compared to patients treated with surgery up to 25 years after treatment. However, current evidence suggests that the implementation of intensity modulated radiation therapy is not increasing the risk of second primary cancers compared to conformal 3D-planned radiotherapy. Furthermore, increasing evidence indicates that highly conformal radiotherapy techniques may not increase the probability of second primary cancers compared to radical prostatectomy. Consequently, future studies should consider the radiotherapy technique and other confounding factors to provide a more accurate estimation of the occurrence of second primary cancers.

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for High-Risk and Very High-Risk Locoregional Prostate Cancer in the Modern Era: Real-World Experience from an Asian Cohort

This study retrospectively evaluates the clinical outcomes of definitive volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for high-risk or very high-risk locoregional prostate cancer patients from an Asian institution. Consecutive patients who received VMAT (76 Gy in 38 fractions) between January 2017 and June 2022 were included. Whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) (46 Gy in 23 fractions) was employed for clinically node-negative disease (cN0) and a Roach estimated risk of ≥15%, as well as simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of 55-57.5 Gy to node-positive (cN1) disease. The primary endpoint was biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS). Secondary endpoints included radiographic relapse-free survival (RRFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS) and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS). A total of 209 patients were identified. After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, the 4-year actuarial BRFS, RRFS, MFS and PCSS were 85.2%, 96.8%, 96.8% and 100%, respectively. The incidence of late grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were 15.8% and 11.0%, respectively. No significant difference in cancer outcomes or toxicity was observed between WPRT and prostate-only radiotherapy for cN0 patients. SIB to the involved nodes did not result in increased toxicity. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) group 5 and cN1 stage were associated with worse RRFS (p < 0.05). PSMA PET-CT compared to conventional imaging staging was associated with better BRFS in patients with ISUP grade group 5 (p = 0.039). Five-year local experience demonstrates excellent clinical outcomes. PSMA PET-CT staging for high-grade disease and tailored pelvic irradiation based on nodal risk should be considered to maximize clinical benefit.

[Short- and medium-term tolerance of hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost]

PURPOSE

This retrospective study was conducted to ensure that irradiation of the pelvic lymph node areas associated with simultaneous hypofractionated boost to the prostate according to the protocol implemented at the university hospital of Tours (France) does not result in excess urinary and digestive toxicity in the short and medium term.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study population included patients with localized unfavourable intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer. The dose delivered was 65Gy in 25 fractions of 2.6Gy to the prostate and seminal vesicles, and 50Gy in 25 fractions of 2Gy to the pelvic lymph nodes. Acute toxicity events (between the start of radiotherapy and the first follow-up consultation) and medium-term toxicity events (after the first follow-up consultation) were assessed using the CTCAE version 5.0 classification.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were treated according to the protocol between January 1st, 2020, and October 31st, 2022. The majority of them had high-risk prostate cancer (79%). The median follow-up was 15 months. Very few patients reported grade 3-4 toxicity acutely (6% urinary and 0% digestive toxicity) or in the medium term (7% urinary and 0% and digestive toxicity).

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy of pelvic lymph node areas with simultaneous hypofractionated boost to the prostate is feasible, with low rates of severe acute and medium-term toxicity.

Pragmatic clinical trials for localized prostate cancer: lessons learned and "three sins"

In "Explanatory and Pragmatic Attitudes in Therapeutic Trials", Schwatrz and Lelouch describe two approaches to the design of trials, "… the first "explanatory", the second "pragmatic". They explained "… the biologist may be interested to know whether the drugs differ in their effects … the explanatory approach". Biologically endpoints might determine whether it was better to give androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) before or after external beam radiation (EBRT) (i.e., does the sequence of treatments matter). Alternatively, if the arms focus on a clinical endpoint, this is considered … "the pragmatic approach". An example of a clinically relevant endpoint is overall survival (OS). A real-world example of this are the two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the role of prophylactic whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) conducted by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG). RTOG 9413 evaluated possible interactions between the sequence of drugs and volume irradiated, while RTOG/NRG 0924 focuses on OS. There appears to be a common pattern of "what not to do", or "design errors" made by a number of investigators, that I call the "three sins". I posit that the prospects for a well-designed pragmatic RCT are likely to be high if these "three sins" are avoided/minimized. The "three sins" alluded to are: 1. You can't prove something doesn't work by treating people who don't need the treatment. 2. You can't prove something does not work if the treatment is not done properly. 3. You can't prove something does not work with an underpowered study.

Elective Pelvic Lymph Node Radiation Therapy and the Risk of Death in Patients With Unfavorable-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Postrandomization Analysis

PURPOSE

Although a contemporary randomized clinical trial has led to the use of whole-pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT), long-term data evaluating a potential reduction in mortality are lacking and are addressed in the current study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2005 to 2015, 350 men with localized, unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PC) were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and RT plus docetaxel versus ADT and RT. Treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes was at the discretion of the treating physician. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Grays regression analyses were performed to assess whether a significant association existed between radiation treatment volume and all-cause mortality (ACM) and PC-specific mortality (PCSM), respectively, adjusting for known PC prognostic factors and comorbidity. An interaction term between age (categorized by dichotomization at 65 years to enable clinical interpretation and applicability of the results and which approximates the median (66 years [IQR, 61-70]) and radiation treatment volume was included in the analysis.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 10.20 years (IQR, 7.96-11.41), 89 men died (25.43%); of these, 42 died of PC (47.19%). Of the 350 randomly assigned patients, 88 (25.14%) received WPRT. In men younger than 65 years, WPRT was associated with a significantly lower ACM risk (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11 to 0.97]; P = .04) and lower PCSM risk (AHR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.02 to 1.35]; P = .09) after adjusting for covariates, whereas this was not the case for men 65 years or older.

CONCLUSION

WPRT has the potential to reduce mortality in younger men with unfavorable-risk PC.

Is Ultrahypofractionated Whole Pelvis Radiation Therapy (WPRT) as Well Tolerated as Conventionally Fractionated WPRT in Patients With Prostate Cancer? Early Results From the HOPE Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work was to evaluate the acute toxicity and quality-of-life (QOL) impact of ultrahypofractionated whole pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) compared with conventional WPRT fractionation after high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDR-BT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The HOPE trial is a phase 2, multi-institutional randomized controlled trial of men with prostate-confined disease and National Comprehensive Cancer Network unfavorable intermediate-, high-, or very-high-risk prostate cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to receive conventionally fractionated WPRT (standard arm) or ultrahypofractionated WPRT (experimental arm) in a 1:1 ratio. All patients underwent radiation therapy with 15 Gy HDR-BT boost in a single fraction followed by WPRT delivered with conventional fractionation (45 Gy in 25 daily fractions or 46 Gy in 23 fractions) or ultrahypofractionation (25 Gy in 5 fractions delivered on alternate days). Acute toxicities measured during radiation therapy and at 6 weeks posttreatment were assessed using the clinician-reported Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0, and QOL was measured using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-50) and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS).

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients were enrolled and treated across 3 Canadian institutions, of whom 39 and 41 patients received external radiation therapy with conventionally fractionated and ultrahypofractionated WPRT, respectively. All patients received androgen deprivation therapy except for 2 patients treated in the ultrahypofractionated arm. The baseline clinical characteristics of the 2 arms were similar, with 51 (63.8%) patients having high or very-high-risk prostate cancer disease. Treatment was well tolerated with no significant differences in the rate of acute adverse events between arms. No grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths were reported. Ultrahypofractionated WPRT had a less detrimental impact on the EPIC-50 bowel total, function, and bother domain scores compared with conventional WPRT in the acute setting. By contrast, more patients treated with ultrahypofractionated WPRT reached the minimum clinical important difference on the EPIC-50 urinary domains. No significant QOL differences between arms were noted in the sexual and hormonal domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrahypofractionated WPRT after HDR-BT is a well-tolerated treatment strategy in the acute setting that has less detrimental impact on bowel QOL domains compared with conventional WPRT.

Artificial intelligence in radiotherapy: Current applications and future trends

Radiation therapy has dramatically changed with the advent of computed tomography and intensity modulation. This added complexity to the workflow but allowed for more precise and reproducible treatment. As a result, these advances required the accurate delineation of many more volumes, raising questions about how to delineate them, in a uniform manner across centers. Then, as computing power improved, reverse planning became possible and three-dimensional dose distributions could be generated. Artificial intelligence offers the opportunity to make such workflow more efficient while increasing practice homogeneity. Many artificial intelligence-based tools are being implemented in routine practice to increase efficiency, reduce workload and improve homogeneity of treatments. Data retrieved from this workflow could be combined with clinical data and omic data to develop predictive tools to support clinical decision-making process. Such predictive tools are at the stage of proof-of-concept and need to be explainatory, prospectively validated, and based on large and multicenter cohorts. Nevertheless, they could bridge the gap to personalized radiation oncology, by personalizing oncologic strategies, dose prescriptions to tumor volumes and dose constraints to organs at risk.

[Does radiation therapy for prostate cancer increase the risk of second cancers?]

PURPOSE

The increased risk of second cancer after prostate radiotherapy is a debated clinical concern. The objective of the study was to assess the risk of occurrence of second cancers after prostate radiation therapy based on the analysis the literature, and to identify potential factors explaining the discrepancies in results between studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the literature was carried out, comparing the occurrence of second cancers in patients all presenting with prostate cancer, treated or not by radiation.

RESULTS

This review included 30 studies reporting the occurrence of second cancers in 2,112,000 patients treated or monitored for localized prostate cancer, including 1,111,000 by external radiation therapy and 103,000 by brachytherapy. Regarding external radiation therapy, the average follow-up was 7.3years. The majority of studies (80%) involving external radiation therapy, compared to no external radiation therapy, showed an increased risk of second cancers with a hazard ratio ranging from 1.13 to 4.9, depending on the duration of the follow-up. The median time to the occurrence of these second cancers after external radiotherapy ranged from 4 to 6years. An increased risk of second rectal and bladder cancer was observed in 52% and 85% of the studies, respectively. Considering a censoring period of more than 10 years after irradiation, 57% and 100% of the studies found an increased risk of rectal and bladder cancer, without any impact in overall survival. Studies of brachytherapy did not show an increased risk of second cancer. However, these comparative studies, most often old and retrospective, had many methodological biases.

CONCLUSION

Despite numerous methodological biases, prostate external radiation therapy appears associated with a moderate increase in the risk of second pelvic cancer, in particular bladder cancer, without impacting survival. Brachytherapy does not increase the risk of a second cancer.

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells attenuate the antitumor efficacy of radiopharmaceutical therapy using 90Y-NM600 in combination with androgen deprivation therapy in murine prostate tumors

RATIONALE

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is pivotal in treating recurrent prostate cancer and is often combined with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for localized disease. However, for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, EBRT is typically only used in the palliative setting, because of the inability to radiate all sites of disease. Systemic radiation treatments that preferentially irradiate cancer cells, known as radiopharmaceutical therapy or targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT), have demonstrable benefits for treating metastatic prostate cancer. Here, we explored the use of a novel TRT, 90Y-NM600, specifically in combination with ADT, in murine prostate tumor models.

METHODS

6-week-old male FVB mice were implanted subcutaneously with Myc-CaP tumor cells and given a single intravenous injection of 90Y-NM600, in combination with ADT (degarelix). The combination and sequence of administration were evaluated for effect on tumor growth and infiltrating immune populations were analyzed by flow cytometry. Sera were assessed to determine treatment effects on cytokine profiles.

RESULTS

ADT delivered prior to TRT (ADT→TRT) resulted in significantly greater antitumor response and overall survival than if delivered after TRT (TRT→ADT). Studies conducted in immunodeficient NRG mice failed to show a difference in treatment sequence, suggesting an immunological mechanism. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) significantly accumulated in tumors following TRT→ADT treatment and retained immune suppressive function. However, CD4+ and CD8+ T cells with an activated and memory phenotype were more prevalent in the ADT→TRT group. Depletion of Gr1+MDSCs led to greater antitumor response following either treatment sequence. Chemotaxis assays suggested that tumor cells secreted chemokines that recruited MDSCs, notably CXCL1 and CXCL2. The use of a selective CXCR2 antagonist, reparixin, further improved antitumor responses and overall survival when used in tumor-bearing mice treated with TRT→ADT.

CONCLUSION

The combination of ADT and TRT improved antitumor responses in murine models of prostate cancer, however, this was dependent on the order of administration. This was found to be associated with one treatment sequence leading to an increase in infiltrating MDSCs. Combining treatment with a CXCR2 antagonist improved the antitumor effect of this combination, suggesting a possible approach for treating advanced human prostate cancer.

Hypofractionated radiation therapy combined with androgen deprivation therapy for high-risk localized prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to analyse the treatment outcomes of moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and the prognostic implications of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics in high-risk localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

The medical records of 140 patients who underwent definitive RT (70 Gy in 28 fractions) combined with ADT were retrospectively reviewed. ADT consists of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and an anti-androgen. Clinical outcomes included the biochemical failure rate (BFR), clinical failure rate (CFR), overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS). The BFR and CFR were stratified by the PSA nadir and the time to the PSA nadir, respectively. Acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal adverse events were also recorded.

RESULTS

The 5-year BFR, CFR, OS and PCSS rates were 9.8%, 4.5%, 90.2% and 98.7%, respectively. Ninety-five (67.9%) patients achieved a PSA nadir of 0.01 ng/mL. Patients with a PSA nadir >0.01 ng/mL had a significantly higher BFR and CFR (BFR, P = 0.001; CFR, P = 0.027), even after adjusting for other prognostic factors [per 0.1 ng/mL; BFR, hazard ratio (HR) 4.440, P < 0.001; CFR, HR 4.338, P = 0.001]. However, the time to the PSA nadir and pre-RT PSA were not significantly associated with the BFR and CFR. Six patients (4.3%) reported grade 3 late adverse events, mostly haematuria and haematochezia.

CONCLUSION

Definitive RT with moderate hypofractionation combined with long-term ADT showed good efficacy for high-risk localized prostate cancer. The lowest PSA nadir was significantly associated with a low recurrence rate, indicating the importance of PSA follow-up.

Treatment intensification strategies for men undergoing definitive radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Treatment intensification of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plays a crucial role in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

We performed a critical narrative review of the relevant literature and present new developments in evidence-based treatment intensification strategies.

RESULTS

For men with high-risk prostate cancer, there is strong evidence to support prolonging androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to 18-36 months and escalating the dose to the prostate using a brachytherapy boost. A potentially less toxic alternative to a brachytherapy boost is delivering a focal boost to dominant intraprostatic lesions using EBRT. In patients who meet STAMPEDE high-risk criteria, there is evidence to support adding a second-generation anti-androgen agent, such as abiraterone acetate, to long-term ADT. Elective pelvic lymph node irradiation may be beneficial in select patients, though more prospective data is needed to elucidate the group of patients who may benefit the most. Tumor genomic classifier (GC) testing and advanced molecular imaging will likely play a role in improving patient selection for treatment intensification as well as contribute to the evolution of treatment intensification strategies for future patients.

CONCLUSION

Treatment intensification using a combination of EBRT, advanced hormonal therapies, and brachytherapy may improve patient outcomes and survival in men with high-risk prostate cancer. Shared decision-making between patients and multidisciplinary teams of radiation oncologists, urologists, and medical oncologists is essential for personalizing care in this setting and deciding which strategies make sense for individual patients.

Prostate cancer and elective nodal radiation therapy for cN0 and pN0-a never ending story? : Recommendations from the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO)

For prostate cancer, the role of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) for cN0 or pN0 patients has been under discussion for years. Considering the recent publications of randomized controlled trials, the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) aimed to discuss and summarize the current literature. Modern trials have been recently published for both treatment-naïve patients (POP-RT trial) and patients after surgery (SPPORT trial). Although there are more reliable data to date, we identified several limitations currently complicating the definitions of general recommendations. For patients with cN0 (conventional or PSMA-PET staging) undergoing definitive radiotherapy, only men with high-risk factors for nodal involvement (e.g., cT3a, GS ≥ 8, PSA ≥ 20 ng/ml) seem to benefit from ENI. For biochemical relapse in the postoperative situation (pN0) and no PSMA imaging, ENI may be added to patients with risk factors according to the SPPORT trial (e.g., GS ≥ 8; PSA > 0.7 ng/ml). If PSMA-PET/CT is negative, ENI may be offered for selected men with high-risk factors as an individual treatment approach.

Assessing the toxicity after moderately hypofractionated prostate and whole pelvis radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities after moderately hypofractionated (HF) or conventionally fractionated (CF) primary whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT).

METHODS

Primary prostate-cancer patients treated between 2009 and 2021 with either 60 Gy at 3 Gy/fraction to the prostate and 46 Gy at 2.3 Gy/fraction to the whole pelvis (HF), or 78 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction to the prostate and 50/50.4 Gy at 1.8-2 Gy/fraction to the whole pelvis (CF). Acute and late GI and GU toxicities were retrospectively assessed.

RESULTS

106 patients received HF and 157 received CF, with a median follow-up of 12 and 57 months. Acute GI toxicity rates in the HF and CF groups were, respectively, grade 2: 46.7% vs. 37.6%, and grade 3: 0% vs. 1.3%, with no significant difference (p = 0.71). Acute GU toxicity rates were, respectively, grade 2: 20.0% vs. 31.8%, and grade 3: 2.9% vs. 0%, (p = 0.04). We compared prevalence of late GI and GU toxicities between groups after 3, 12, and 24 months and did not find any significant differences (respectively, p = 0.59, 0.22, and 0.71 for GI toxicity; p = 0.39, 0.58, and 0.90 for GU toxicity).

CONCLUSION

Moderate HF WPRT was well tolerated during the first 2 years. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Worsening of 2-year patient-reported intestinal functionality after radiotherapy for prostate cancer including pelvic node irradiation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To quantify patient-reported 2-year intestinal toxicity (IT) from pelvic nodal irradiation (PNI) for prostate cancer. The association between baseline/acute symptoms and 2-year worsening was investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient-reported IT was prospectively assessed through the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), filled in at baseline, radiotherapy mid-point and end, at 3 and 6 months and every 6 months until 5 years. Two-year deterioration of IBDQ scores relative to the Bowel Domain was investigated for 400 patients with no severe baseline symptoms and with questionnaires available at baseline, 2 years, RT mid-point and/or end and at least three follow-ups between 3 and 18 months. The significance of the 2-year differences from baseline was tested. The association between baseline values and ΔAcute (the worst decline between baseline and RT mid-point/end) was investigated.

RESULTS

In the IBDQ lower scores indicate worse symptoms. A significant (p < 0.0001) 2-year mean worsening, mostly in the range of -0.2/-0.4 points on a 1-7 scale, emerged excepting one question (IBDQ29, "nausea/feeling sick"). This decline was independent of treatment intent while baseline values were associated with 2-year absolute scores. The ΔAcute largely modulated 2-year worsening: patients with ΔAcute greater than the first quartile (Q1) and ΔAcute less or equal than Q1 showed no/minimal and highly significant (p < 0.0001) deterioration, respectively. Rectal incontinence, urgency, frequency and abdominal pain showed the largest mean changes (-0.5/-1): risk of severe worsening (deemed to be of clinical significance if ≤ 2) was 3-5 fold higher in the ΔAcute ≤ Q1 vs ΔAcute > Q1 group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

A modest but significant deterioration of two-year patient-reported intestinal symptoms from PNI compared to baseline was found. Patients experiencing more severe acute symptoms are at higher risk of symptom persistence at 2 years, with a much larger prevalence of clinically significant symptoms.

Whole-pelvic irradiation with boost to involved nodes and prostate in node-positive prostate cancer-long-term data from the prospective PLATIN-2 trial

PURPOSE

Node-positive prostate cancer is a potentially curable disease. Definitive radiotherapy to the prostate and lymphatic drainage is an effective treatment option but prospective long-term outcome data are scarce. Thus, the current study aimed to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of definitive radiation therapy for men with prostate cancer and nodal metastases using modern irradiation techniques.

METHODS

A total of 40 treatment-naïve men with node-positive prostate cancer were allocated to the trial. All patients received definitive radiation therapy at two German university hospitals between 2009 and 2018. Radiation was delivered as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with 51 Gy to the lymphatic drainage with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) up to 61.2 Gy to involved nodes and 76.5 Gy to the prostate in 34 fractions. Feasibility and safety, overall and progression-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life measurements were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 79 months, median overall survival was 107 months and progression-free survival was 78 months. Based on imaging follow-up, no infield relapse was reported during the first 24 months of follow-up. There were 3 (8%) potentially treatment-related grade 3 toxicities. Common iliac node involvement was associated with a higher risk of progression (HR 15.8; 95% CI 2.1-119.8; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Definitive radiation to the lymphatic drainage with SIB to the involved nodes and prostate is a safe and effective treatment approach for patients with treatment-naïve, node-positive prostate cancer with excellent infield tumor control rates and tolerable toxicity. Location rather than number of involved nodes is a major risk factor for progression.

Consensus Delineation Guidelines for Pelvic Lymph Node Radiation Therapy of Prostate Cancer: On Behalf of the Francophone Group of Urological Radiation Therapy (GFRU)

PURPOSE

Clinical target volume (CTV) delineation for pelvic lymph nodes in prostate cancer is currently based on 3 consensus guidelines with some inherent discrepancies. To improve the reproducibility in nodal delineation, the Francophone Group of Urological Radiotherapy (Groupe Francophone de Radiothérapie Urologique [GFRU]) worked toward proposing an easily applicable, reproducible, and practice-validated contouring guideline for pelvic nodal CTV.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The nodal CTV data sets of a high-risk node-negative prostate cancer clinical case contoured by 86 radiation oncologists participating in a GFRU contouring workshop were analyzed. CTV volumes were defined before and after a structured presentation of literature data on lymphatic drainage pathways and patterns of nodal involvement and relapse, illustrated using a reference contour (CRef) defined by 3 GFRU experts. The consistency between the participants' contours and CRef was assessed quantitively by means of the Simultaneous Truth and Performance Level Estimation (STAPLE) method, the Dice coefficient, and the Hausdorff distance and qualitatively using a count map. These results combined with the literature review were thoroughly discussed among GFRU experts to reach a consensus.

RESULTS

From the 86 workshop participants, the volume of the STAPLE CTV was 591 cc compared with 502 cc for CRef. The Dice coefficient of the STAPLE CTV compared with the experts' CRef was 0.736 (±0.084) before and 0.823 (±0.070) after the workshop; the standard deviation decreased from 11.5% to 8.5% over the workshop. The Hausdorff distance of the STAPLE CTV compared with the CRef was 34.5 mm (±12.4) before the workshop and 21.8 mm (±9.3) after the workshop. Four areas of significant interobserver variability were identified, and a consensus was reached.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a robust methodology, our cooperative group proposed an easily applicable, reproducible, and practice-validated guideline for the delineation of the pelvic CTV in prostate cancer, useful for implementation in daily practice and clinical trials.

A Dosimetric Correlation Between Radiation Dose to Bone and Reduction of Hemoglobin Levels After Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this work was to investigate the correlation between dose to pelvic bone marrow and anemia when treating prostate cancer (PC) with definitive radiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients were selected from a prospective institutional database of patients with PC treated between 2008 and 2021. Pelvic bone (L3/L4 interface through ischial tuberosities) was contoured, and the dose to this structure was calculated. Doses were converted to 2-Gy equivalent doses using an α/β of 10. Exploratory analysis suggested dichotomizing into low-volume exposures of ≤1000 cc (LVE) and high-volume exposures of >1000 cc (HVE). Nonparametric kernel regressions were performed evaluating the effects of time, dose, and androgen deprivation therapy use on hemoglobin (Hgb) values. Reoptimization of plans was performed to evaluate the feasibility of adjusting significant dose levels.

RESULTS

A total of 203 patients were included in the final analysis. Median baseline Hgb was 14.9 g/dL (interquartile range, 14.1-15.6). Patients with bone marrow HVE ≥15 Gy were found to have significantly lower predicted Hgb levels compared with those with LVE at day 90: 12.8 g/dL (95% CI, 12.4-13.3) versus 14.5 g/dL (95% CI, 14.0-14.9), respectively (P < .05). When normalizing starting Hgb levels, HVE patients still had significantly lower predicted Hgb levels than LVE at day 90: 86.1% (95% CI, 83.2%-89.7%) versus 96.2% (95% CI, 92.4%-100%), respectively. Reoptimizing 20 plans with high volume of bone marrow receiving 15 Gy resulted in a mean reduction from 1422 cc to 997 cc without compromise of other organs at risk or target coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with >1000 cc of bone marrow receiving ≥15 Gy had significantly lower predicted Hgb levels than those with ≤1000 cc. Reoptimization of plans demonstrated that this dose constraint is achievable without impairing plan quality. This dose constraint can be considered to limit acute marrow toxicity in patients with PC.

Prospective results for 5-year survival and toxicity of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in (very) high-risk prostate cancer

Purpose

High-risk (HR) prostate cancer patients usually receive high-dose radiotherapy (RT) using a two-phase sequential technique, but data on a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique are lacking. We prospectively evaluated the long-term results of urinary (GU) and digestive (GI) toxicity and survival data for high-dose RT using a SIB technique in HR and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer.

Methods

Patients were treated using an SIB technique in 34 fractions, at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and seminal vesicles and 74.8 Gy to the prostate, combined with 36 months of androgen-depriving therapy in a prospective multicenter study. Acute and late GU and GI toxicity data were collected. Overall survival (OS), biochemical-relapse-free survival (bRFS), loco-regional-relapse-free survival (LRRFS), metastasis-free-survival (MFS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were assessed.

Results

We recruited 114 patients. After a median follow-up of 62 months, very few patients experienced acute (M0-M3) (G3-4 GU = 3.7 %; G3-4 GI = 0.9 %) or late (M6-M60) severe toxicity (G3-4 GU = 5.6 %; G3-4 GI = 2.8 %). The occurrence of acute G2 + GU or GI toxicity was significantly related to the consequential late G2 + toxicity (p < 0.01 for both GU and GI). Medians of OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were not reached. At 60 months, OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were 88.2 % [82.1; 94.7], 86.0 % [79.4 %;93.2 %], 95.8 % [91.8 %;99.9 %], 87.2 % [80.9 %;94.0 %] and 84.1 % [77.2 %;91.6 %] respectively.

Conclusion

SIB RT at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and 74.8 Gy to the prostate is feasible, leading to satisfying tumor control and reasonable toxicity in HR and VHR prostate cancer.

Evaluation of the utility of rescans in the treatment of prostate and pelvic nodes with pencil beam scanning protons

To determine the necessity of the first week CT simulation rescan of pencil beam scanning (PBS) prostate patients requiring treatment to the pelvic lymph nodes. Patients were treated on a prospective registry trial sponsored by the Proton Collaborative Group (PCG-NCT01255748). A total of 42 patients with high-risk prostate cancer requiring treatment to the pelvic lymph nodes were evaluated in a single calendar year. The cohort consisted of a mix of intact prostate and postprostatectomy patients. Most of the patients were treated with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) approach for the majority of the plan. The radiation prescriptions varied depending on whether the patient had an intact prostate or prostate bed. The plan geometry consisted of two lateral beams and a single field optimization (SFO) dosimetric matching technique using pencil beam scanning proton therapy. An in-house protocol was established wherein all high-risk prostate patients had at least 1 rescan evaluation performed during the first 5 ± 2 fractions, which was used to determine whether the nominal approved plan was robust to daily setup uncertainties and anatomical variations. If the evaluation failed clinical analysis, an adaptive replan was created. If 5% or more of the evaluated rescans resulted in a qualified adaptive plan, the planning technique would be considered insufficient. Of the 42 patients investigated, five (11.9%) required an adaptive plan. As it turned out, all five of these patients would have been rescanned within the first 5 fractions of treatment, independent of the established rescan protocol, due to a physician, dosimetrist, or therapist requesting a rescan to investigate specific areas of concern regarding setup or anatomic changes. Of the 5 adaptive plans, only one (2.4%) meets the criteria of a qualified adaptive plan. Our findings substantiated that this policy of a planned rescan with the 5th fraction was no longer necessary, the dosimetric technique had proven to be robust, and moving forward we will only perform these rescans if there is a significant issue with daily setups or observed changes in anatomy.

Impact of sequencing of androgen receptor-signaling inhibition and radiotherapy in prostate cancer: importance of homologous recombination disruption

PURPOSE

The synergy of combining androgen receptor-signaling inhibition (ARSI) to radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer has been largely attributed to non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) inhibition. However, this mechanism is unlikely to explain recently observed trial results that demonstrated the sequencing of ARSI and RT significantly impacts clinical outcomes, with adjuvant ARSI following RT yielding superior outcomes to neoadjuvant/concurrent therapy. We hypothesized this is driven by differential effects on AR-signaling and alternative DNA repair pathway engagement based on ARSI/RT sequencing.

METHODS

We explored the effects of ARSI sequencing with RT (neoadjuvant vs concurrent vs adjuvant) in multiple prostate cancer cell lines using androgen-deprived media and validation with the anti-androgen enzalutamide. The effects of ARSI sequencing were measured with clonogenic assays, AR-target gene transcription and translation quantification, cell cycle analysis, DNA damage and repair assays, and xenograft animal validation studies.

RESULTS

Adjuvant ARSI after RT was significantly more effective at killing colony forming cells and decreasing the transcription and translation of downstream AR-target genes across all prostate cancer models evaluated. These results were reproduced in xenograft studies. The differential effects of ARSI sequencing were not fully explained by NHEJ inhibition alone, but by the additional disruption of homologous recombination specifically with adjuvant sequencing of ARSI.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that altered sequencing of ARSI and RT mediates differential anti-AR-signaling and anti-cancer effects, with the greatest benefit from adjuvant ARSI following RT. These results, combined with our prior clinical findings, support the superiority of an adjuvant-based sequencing approach when using ARSI with RT.

Computed Tomography-Based Radiomics for Long-Term Prognostication of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Patients Received Whole Pelvic Radiotherapy

Given the high death rate caused by high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) (>40%) and the reliability issues associated with traditional prognostic markers, the purpose of this study is to investigate planning computed tomography (pCT)-based radiomics for the long-term prognostication of high-risk localized PCa patients who received whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT). This is a retrospective study with methods based on best practice procedures for radiomics research. Sixty-four patients were selected and randomly assigned to training (n = 45) and testing (n = 19) cohorts for radiomics model development with five major steps: pCT image acquisition using a Philips Big Bore CT simulator; multiple manual segmentations of clinical target volume for the prostate (CTVprostate) on the pCT images; feature extraction from the CTVprostate using PyRadiomics; feature selection for overfitting avoidance; and model development with three-fold cross-validation. The radiomics model and signature performances were evaluated based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as well as accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. This study's results show that our pCT-based radiomics model was able to predict the six-year progression-free survival of the high-risk localized PCa patients who received the WPRT with highly consistent performances (mean AUC: 0.76 (training) and 0.71 (testing)). These are comparable to findings of other similar studies including those using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based radiomics. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of our radiomics signature that consisted of two texture features were 0.778, 0.833 and 0.556 (training) and 0.842, 0.867 and 0.750 (testing), respectively. Since CT is more readily available than MRI and is the standard-of-care modality for PCa WPRT planning, pCT-based radiomics could be used as a routine non-invasive approach to the prognostic prediction of WPRT treatment outcomes in high-risk localized PCa.

Proton therapy for the management of localized prostate cancer: Long-term clinical outcomes at a comprehensive cancer center

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Proton therapy (PT) has emerged as a standard-of-care treatment option for localized prostate cancer at our comprehensive cancer center. However, there are few large-scale analyses examining the long-term clinical outcomes. Therefore, this article aims to evaluate the long-term effectiveness and toxicity of PT in patients with localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of 2772 patients treated from May 2006 through January 2020. Disease risk was stratified according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines as low [LR, n = 640]; favorable-intermediate [F-IR, n = 850]; unfavorable-intermediate [U-IR, n = 851]; high [HR, n = 315]; or very high [VHR, n = 116]. Biochemical failure and toxicity were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariate models.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 66 years; the median follow-up time was 7.0 years. Pelvic lymph node irradiation was prescribed to 28 patients (1%) (2 [0.2%] U-IR, 11 [3.5%] HR, and 15 [12.9%] VHR). The median dose was 78 Gy in 1.8-2.0 Gy(RBE) fractions. Freedom from biochemical relapse (FFBR) rates at 5 years and 10 years were 98.2% and 96.8% for the LR group; 98.3% and 93.6%, F-IR; 94.2% and 90.2%, U-IR; 94.3% and 85.2%, HR; and 86.1% and 68.5%, VHR. Two patients died of prostate cancer. Overall rates of late grade ≥ 3 GU and GI toxicity were 0.87% and 1.01%.

CONCLUSIONS

Proton therapy for localized prostate cancer demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes in this large cohort, even among higher-risk groups with historically poor outcomes despite aggressive therapy.

A Randomized Feasibility Trial of Stereotactic Prostate Radiation Therapy With or Without Elective Nodal Irradiation in High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer (SPORT Trial)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial comparing SABR with prostate-only (P-SABR) or with prostate plus pelvic lymph nodes (PPN-SABR) in patients with unfavorable intermediate- or high-risk localized prostate cancer and to explore potential toxicity biomarkers.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Thirty adult men with at least 1 of the following features were randomized 1:1 to P-SABR or PPN-SABR: clinical magnetic resonance imaging stage T3a N0 M0, Gleason score ≥7 (4+3), and prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL. P-SABR patients received 36.25 Gy/5 fractions/29 days, and PPN-SABR patients received 25 Gy/5 fractions to pelvic nodes, with the final cohort receiving a boost to the dominant intraprostatic lesion of 45 to 50 Gy. Phosphorylated gamma-H2AX (γH2AX) foci numbers, citrulline levels, and circulating lymphocyte counts were quantified. Acute toxicity information (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03) was collected weekly at each treatment and at 6 weeks and 3 months. Physician-reported late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) toxicity was recorded from 90 days to 36 months postcompletion of SABR. Patient-reported quality of life (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and International Prostate Symptom Score) scores were recorded with each toxicity time point.

RESULTS

The target recruitment was achieved, and treatment was successfully delivered in all patients. A total of 0% and 6.7% (P-SABR) and 6.7% and 20.0% (PPN-SABR) experienced acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity, respectively. At 3 years, 6.7% and 6.7% (P-SABR) and 13.3% and 33.3% (PPN-SABR) had experienced late grade ≥2 GI and GU toxicity, respectively. One patient (PPN-SABR) had late grade 3 GU toxicity (cystitis and hematuria). No other grade ≥3 toxicity was observed. In addition, 33.3% and 60% (P-SABR) and 64.3% and 92.9% (PPN-SABR) experienced a minimally clinically important change in late Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite bowel and urinary summary scores, respectively. γH2AX foci numbers at 1 hour after the first fraction were significantly higher in the PPN-SABR arm compared with the P-SABR arm (P = .04). Patients with late grade ≥1 GI toxicity had significantly greater falls in circulating lymphocytes (12 weeks post-radiation therapy, P = .01) and a trend toward higher γH2AX foci numbers (P = .09) than patients with no late toxicity. Patients with late grade ≥1 bowel toxicity and late diarrhea experienced greater falls in citrulline levels (P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

A randomized trial comparing P-SABR with PPN-SABR is feasible with acceptable toxicity. Correlations of γH2AX foci, lymphocyte counts, and citrulline levels with irradiated volume and toxicity suggest potential as predictive biomarkers. This study has informed a multicenter, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial in the United Kingdom.

Elective Nodal Irradiation for Oligorecurrent Nodal Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Variability in the PEACE V-STORM Randomized Phase 2 Trial

Purpose

Consistency in delineation of pelvic lymph node regions for prostate cancer elective nodal radiation therapy is still challenging despite current guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the interobserver variability in elective lymph node delineation in the PEACE V - STORM randomized phase 2 trial for oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer.

Methods and Materials

Twenty-three centers were asked to delineate the elective pelvic nodal clinical target volume (CTV) of a postoperative oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer benchmark case using a modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 2009 template (upper limit at the L4/L5 interspace). Overall, intersection and overflow volumes, Dice coefficient, Hausdorff distance, and count maps merged with computed tomography images were analyzed.

Results

The mean volume including the 23 nodal CTVs was 430.4 ± 64.1 cm3, larger than the modified RTOG 2009 CTV reference volume (386.1 cm3). The intersection common volume between the modified reference RTOG 2009 and the 23 nodal CTVs was estimated at 83.9%, whereas the overflow volume was 23.4%, mainly located at the level of the presacral and the upper limit of the L4/L5 interspace. The mean Dice coefficient was 0.79 ± 0.02, whereas the mean Hausdorff distance was 27 ± 4.4 mm.

Conclusions

In salvage radiation therapy treatment of oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer, variations in elective lymph node volume delineation were mainly observed in the presacral and common iliac areas. Routine implementation and diffusion of available contouring guidelines together with a constant evaluation and evidence-based updating are expected to further decrease the existing variability in pelvic node contouring.

Outcomes after definitive radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer in a national health care delivery system

PURPOSE

Accurate information regarding real-world outcomes after contemporary radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer is important for shared decision-making. Clinically relevant end points at 10 years among men treated within a national health care delivery system were examined.

METHODS

National administrative, cancer registry, and electronic health record data were used for patients undergoing definitive radiation therapy with or without concurrent androgen deprivation therapy within the Veterans Health Administration from 2005 to 2015. National Death Index data were used through 2019 for overall and prostate cancer-specific survival and identified date of incident metastatic prostate cancer using a validated natural language processing algorithm. Metastasis-free, prostate cancer-specific, and overall survival using Kaplan-Meier methods were estimated.

RESULTS

Among 41,735 men treated with definitive radiation therapy, the median age at diagnosis was 65 years and median follow-up was 8.7 years. Most had intermediate (42%) and high-risk (33%) disease, with 40% receiving androgen deprivation therapy as part of initial therapy. Unadjusted 10-year metastasis-free survival was 96%, 92%, and 80% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease. Similarly, unadjusted 10-year prostate cancer-specific survival was 98%, 97%, and 90% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease. The unadjusted overall survival was lower across increasing disease risk categories at 77%, 71%, and 62% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide population-based 10-year benchmarks for clinically relevant end points, including metastasis-free survival, among patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing radiation therapy using contemporary techniques. The survival rates for high-risk disease in particular suggest that outcomes have recently improved.

Focal Boost in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy: A Review of Planning Studies and Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Focal boost radiotherapy was developed to deliver elevated doses to functional sub-volumes within a target. Such a technique was hypothesized to improve treatment outcomes without increasing toxicity in prostate cancer treatment.

PURPOSE

To summarize and evaluate the efficacy and variability of focal boost radiotherapy by reviewing focal boost planning studies and clinical trials that have been published in the last ten years.

METHODS

Published reports of focal boost radiotherapy, that specifically incorporate dose escalation to intra-prostatic lesions (IPLs), were reviewed and summarized. Correlations between acute/late ≥G2 genitourinary (GU) or gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity and clinical factors were determined by a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

By reviewing and summarizing 34 planning studies and 35 trials, a significant dose escalation to the GTV and thus higher tumor control of focal boost radiotherapy were reported consistently by all reviewed studies. Reviewed trials reported a not significant difference in toxicity between focal boost and conventional radiotherapy. Acute ≥G2 GU and late ≥G2 GI toxicities were reported the most and least prevalent, respectively, and a negative correlation was found between the rate of toxicity and proportion of low-risk or intermediate-risk patients in the cohort.

CONCLUSION

Focal boost prostate cancer radiotherapy has the potential to be a new standard of care.

Long-term outcomes of whole-pelvis radiation therapy using volumetric modulated arc therapy for high-risk prostate cancer†

This study investigated the outcomes of whole-pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for high-risk prostate cancer. We retrospectively analysed 112 patients with high-risk prostate cancer who started WPRT at our hospital between August 2011 and August 2015. The prescribed dose was 78 Gy in 39 fractions to the prostate and 46.8 Gy in 26 fractions to the pelvic lymph node (LN) area. All patients received long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We evaluated late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The median follow-up period for censored cases was 97 (interquartile range [IQR] = 85-108) months. The median age was 72 (IQR = 67-75) years. The high-risk and very-high-risk groups included 41 (36.6%) and 71 patients (63.4%), respectively. The median risk of LN invasion calculated by the Roach formula was 36.9 (IQR = 26.6-56.3) %. The 8-year overall survival, biochemical failure-free survival, disease-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 88.4, 91.9, 83.8 and 98.0%, respectively. Only one patient experienced common iliac LN recurrence, which was outside the pelvic irradiation area. All patients with recurrent disease were categorized into the very-high-risk group. The 8-year cumulative rates of ≥Grade 2 late GI and GU toxicities were 12.8 and 11.8%, respectively. No patients experienced Grade 4 or higher toxicities. WPRT using VMAT for high-risk prostate cancer was well tolerated and effective.

Androgen deprivation therapy in localized prostate cancer. Current status and future trends

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer (PCa) has been recognized as an androgen-sensitive disease since the investigations from Huggins and Hodges in 1941. Thanks to these findings, they received the Nobel Prize in 1966. This was the beginning of the development of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as treatment for patients with PCa.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the current indications of ADT in localized PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a comprehensive English and Spanish language literature research, focused on the main indications for ADT in localized PCa.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Nowadays, the indications for ADT as monotherapy in localized PCa have been limited to specific situations, to patients unwilling or unable to receive any form of local treatment if they have a PSA-DT < 12 months, and either a PSA > 50 ng/mL, a poorly differentiated tumor, or troublesome local disease-related symptoms. ADT can be used in combination with local treatment in different scenarios. Although neoadjuvant treatment with ADT prior to surgery with curative intent has no clear oncological impact, as a future sight, PCa is a heterogeneous disease, and there could be a group of patients with high-risk localized disease that could benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

We need to optimize the treatment with ADT in localized PCa, selecting the patients accordingly to their disease characteristics. Given that the therapeutic armamentarium evolves day by day, there is a need for the development of new clinical trials, as well as a molecular studies of patients to identify those who might benefit from an early multimodal treatment.

Safety of Radiation Therapy in Patients With Prostate Cancer and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has historically been considered a relative contraindication for pelvic radiation therapy (RT). To date, no systematic review has summarized the toxicity profile of RT for patients with prostate cancer and comorbid IBD.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A PRISMA-guided systematic search was conducted on PubMed/Embase for original investigations that reported gastrointestinal (GI; rectal/bowel) toxicity in patients with IBD undergoing RT for prostate cancer. The substantial heterogeneity in patient population, follow-up, and toxicity reporting practices precluded a formal meta-analysis; however, a summary of the individual study-level data and crude pooled rates was described.

RESULTS

Twelve retrospective studies with 194 patients were included: 5 examined predominantly low-dose-rate brachytherapy (BT) monotherapy, 1 predominantly high-dose-rate BT monotherapy, 3 mixed external beam RT (3-dimensional conformal or intensity modulated RT [IMRT]) + low-dose-rate BT, 1 IMRT + high-dose-rate BT, and 2 stereotactic RT. Among these studies, patients with active IBD, patients receiving pelvic RT, and patients with prior abdominopelvic surgery were underrepresented. In all but 1 publication, the rate of late grade 3+ GI toxicities was <5%. The crude pooled rate of acute and late grade 2+ GI events was 15.3% (n = 27/177 evaluable patients; range, 0%-100%) and 11.3% (n = 20/177 evaluable patients; range, 0%-38.5%), respectively. Crude rates of acute and late grade 3+ GI events were 3.4% (6 cases; range, 0%-23%) and 2.3% (4 cases; range, 0%-15%).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate RT in patients with comorbid IBD appears to be associated with low rates of grade 3+ GI toxicity; however, patients must be counseled regarding the possibility for lower-grade toxicities. These data cannot be generalized to the underrepresented subpopulations mentioned above, and individualize decision-making is recommended for those high-risk cases. Several strategies should be considered to minimize the probability of toxicity in this susceptible population, including careful patient selection, minimizing elective (nodal) treatment volumes, using rectal sparing techniques, and employing contemporary RT advancements to minimize exposure to GI organs at risk (eg, IMRT, magnetic resonance imaging-based target delineation, and high-quality daily image guidance).

Radiation Facility Volume and Survival for Men With Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated with Radiation and Androgen Deprivation Therapy

IMPORTANCE

Very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer is an aggressive substratum of high-risk prostate cancer, characterized by high prostate-specific antigen levels, high Gleason score, and/or advanced T category. Contemporary management paradigms involve advanced molecular imaging and multimodal treatment with intensified prostate-directed or systemic treatment-resources more readily available at high-volume centers.

OBJECTIVE

To examine radiation facility case volume and overall survival (OS) in men with VHR prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort study was performed from November 11, 2022, to March 4, 2023, analyzing data from US facilities reporting to the National Cancer Database. Patients included men diagnosed with nonmetastatic VHR prostate cancer by National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria (clinical T3b-T4 category, primary Gleason pattern 5, >4 cores with grade group 4-5, and/or 2-3 high-risk features) and treated with curative-intent radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy between January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2016.

EXPOSURES

Treatment at high- vs low-average cumulative facility volume (ACFV), defined as the total number of prostate radiotherapy cases at an individual patient's treatment facility from 2004 until the year of their diagnosis. The nonlinear association between a continuous ACFV and OS was examined through a Martingale residual plot; an optimal ACFV cutoff was identified that maximized the separation between high vs low ACFV via a bias-adjusted log rank test.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overall survival was assessed between high vs low ACFV using Kaplan-Meier analysis with and without inverse probability score weighted adjustment and multivariable Cox proportional hazards.

RESULTS

A total of 25 219 men (median age, 71 [IQR, 64-76] years; 78.7% White) with VHR prostate cancer were identified, 6438 (25.5%) of whom were treated at high ACFV facilities. Median follow-up was 57.4 (95% CI, 56.7-58.1) months. Median OS for patients treated at high ACFV centers was 123.4 (95% CI, 116.6-127.4) months vs 109.0 (95% CI, 106.5-111.2) months at low ACFV centers (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, treatment at a high ACFV center was associated with lower risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.95; P < .001). These results were also significant after inverse probability score weighted-based adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of patients with VHR prostate cancer who underwent definitive radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy, facility case volume was independently associated with longer OS. Further studies are needed to identify which factors unique to high-volume centers may be responsible for this benefit.

Salvage Whole-Pelvic Radiation and Long-Term Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in the Management of High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Update of the McGill 0913 Study

PURPOSE

To report the long-term outcomes of the McGill 0913 study and the potential benefits of combining prostate-bed radiotherapy (PBRT), pelvic-lymph-node radiotherapy (PLNRT), and long term ADT (LT-ADT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2010 to 2016, 46 high-risk prostate cancer patients who experienced biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) were enrolled in this single-arm phase II clinical trial. The patients were eligible if they had a Gleason score > 8, locally advanced disease (≥pT3), a preoperative PSA of >20 ng/mL, or positive lymph nodes (LN). The patients were treated with a combination of 24 months of ADT, PBRT, and PLNRT. The primary outcome was biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and the predefined secondary endpoints included distant-metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. In this update, we also report the median follow-up of 8.8 years and 10 years OS.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 8.8 years, 43 patients were eligible for analysis. The median pre-salvage PSA was 0.30 μg/L. Half (51%) of the patients (n = 22) had positive margins, 40% (n = 17) had Gleason scores > 8, 63% (n = 27) had extracapsular extension, 42% (n = 18) had seminal vesicle invasion, and 19% (n = 8) had LN involvement. The 10-year bPFS was 68.3 %. The 10-year DMFS was 72.9%. The 10-year OS was 97%. There were two non-cancer-related deaths. The first patient died of congestive heart failure while the other died of an unknown cause. No new toxicity was observed after the initial report.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that treatment escalation with PBRT, PLNRT, and LT-ADT improves long term outcomes. In view of the recently published SPPORT study, we conclude that this novel approach of treatment intensification in high-risk post-prostatectomy patients is safe and effective, and that it should be offered as the standard of care.

Bladder only versus bladder plus pelvic lymph node chemoradiation for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Bladder-sparing chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is a definitive first-line treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The optimal radiotherapy target volume, either bladder-only (BO) or bladder plus pelvic lymph nodes (BPN), remains unclear.

METHODS

We identified 2,104 patients in the National Cancer Database with cT2-4N0M0 urothelial cell carcinoma of the bladder treated with CRT following maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumor from 2004 to 2016. The exposure of interest was BO vs. BPN treatment volume. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), compared between groups using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards. Sensitivity analysis tested an interaction term for clinical T stage (T2 vs. T3-4) and radiation modality (3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy vs. intensity modulated radiotherapy or proton therapy). Annual use of BO vs. BPN from 2004 to 2016 was compared using Cochran-Armitage test.

RESULTS

A total of 578 patients were treated with BO and 1,526 patients treated with BPN CRT. There was a significant increase in BPN use from 2004 to 2016 (66.9%-76.8%, P < 0.0001). With a median follow-up of 6.2 years, there was no survival difference between groups: 5- and 10-year OS 27.4% (95% CI 23.4%-31.4%) in the BO group vs. 31.9% (95% CI 29.3%-34.6%) in the BPN group, and 13.1% (95% CI 9.7%-17.1%) in the BO group vs. 13.2% (95% CI 10.6%-16.0%) in the BPN group, respectively (log-rank P = 0.10). On multivariable analysis, there was no significant association between BPN and OS (adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.02, P = 0.09). On sensitivity analysis, we found no differential effect by T stage or radiation modality.

CONCLUSION

Use of pelvic lymph node radiation has risen in the US but may not impact long-term survival outcomes for patients with node-negative muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Optimizing radiation treatment volumes for CRT for MIBC will be important to study under prospective trials, such as the SWOG/NRG 1806.

Neoadjuvant versus Concurrent Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Localized Prostate Cancer Treated with Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing debate on the optimal sequencing of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa). Recent data favors concurrent ADT and RT over the neoadjuvant approach.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Databases assessing the combination and optimal sequencing of ADT and RT for Intermediate-Risk (IR) and High-Risk (HR) PCa.

FINDINGS

Twenty randomized control trials, one abstract, one individual patient data meta-analysis, and two retrospective studies were selected. HR PCa patients had improved survival outcomes with RT and ADT, particularly when a long-course Neoadjuvant-Concurrent-Adjuvant ADT was used. This benefit was seen in IR PCa when adding short-course ADT, although less consistently. The best available evidence indicates that concurrent over neoadjuvant sequencing is associated with better metastases-free survival at 15 years. Although most patients had IR PCa, HR participants may have been undertreated with short-course ADT and the absence of pelvic RT. Conversely, retrospective data suggests a survival benefit when using the neoadjuvant approach in HR PCa patients.

INTERPRETATION

The available literature supports concurrent ADT and RT initiation for IR PCa. Neoadjuvant-concurrent-adjuvant sequencing should remain the standard approach for HR PCa and is an option for IR PCa.

Dose outside of the prostate is associated with improved outcomes for high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with brachytherapy boost

Background

One in three high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with radiotherapy recur. Detection of lymph node metastasis and microscopic disease spread using conventional imaging is poor, and many patients are under-treated due to suboptimal seminal vesicle or lymph node irradiation. We use Image Based Data Mining (IBDM) to investigate association between dose distributions, and prognostic variables and biochemical recurrence (BCR) in prostate cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. We further test whether including dose information in risk-stratification models improves performance.

Method

Planning CTs, dose distributions and clinical information were collected for 612 high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with conformal hypo-fractionated radiotherapy, intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), or IMRT plus a single fraction high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost. Dose distributions (including HDR boost) of all studied patients were mapped to a reference anatomy using the prostate delineations. Regions where dose distributions significantly differed between patients that did and did-not experience BCR were assessed voxel-wise using 1) a binary endpoint of BCR at four-years (dose only) and 2) Cox-IBDM (dose and prognostic variables). Regions where dose was associated with outcome were identified. Cox proportional-hazard models with and without region dose information were produced and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was used to assess model performance.

Results

No significant regions were observed for patients treated with hypo-fractionated radiotherapy or IMRT. Regions outside the target where higher dose was associated with lower BCR were observed for patients treated with brachytherapy boost. Cox-IBDM revealed that dose response was influenced by age and T-stage. A region at the seminal vesicle tips was identified in binary- and Cox-IBDM. Including the mean dose in this region in a risk-stratification model (hazard ratio=0.84, p=0.005) significantly reduced AIC values (p=0.019), indicating superior performance, compared with prognostic variables only. The region dose was lower in the brachytherapy boost patients compared with the external beam cohorts supporting the occurrence of marginal misses.

Conclusion

Association was identified between BCR and dose outside of the target region in high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with IMRT plus brachytherapy boost. We show, for the first-time, that the importance of irradiating this region is linked to prognostic variables.

Treating Primary Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: A Scoping Review of Available Treatment Options

There is currently no consensus on the optimal treatment for patients with a primary diagnosis of clinically and pathologically node-positive (cN1M0 and pN1M0) hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa). The treatment paradigm has shifted as research has shown that these patients could benefit from intensified treatment and are potentially curable. This scoping review provides an overview of available treatments for men with primary-diagnosed cN1M0 and pN1M0 PCa. A search was conducted on Medline for studies published between 2002 and 2022 that reported on treatment and outcomes among patients with cN1M0 and pN1M0 PCa. In total, twenty-seven eligible articles were included in this analysis: six randomised controlled trials, one systematic review, and twenty retrospective/observational studies. For cN1M0 PCa patients, the best-established treatment option is a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) applied to both the prostate and lymph nodes. Based on most recent studies, treatment intensification can be beneficial, but more randomised studies are needed. For pN1M0 PCa patients, adjuvant or early salvage treatments based on risk stratification determined by factors such as Gleason score, tumour stage, number of positive lymph nodes, and surgical margins appear to be the best-established treatment options. These treatments include close monitoring and adjuvant treatment with ADT and/or EBRT.

Treatment-related toxicity using prostate bed versus prostate bed and pelvic lymph node radiation therapy following radical prostatectomy: A national population-based study

Purpose There is debate about the effectiveness and toxicity of pelvic lymph node (PLN) irradiation in addition to prostate bed radiotherapy when used to treat disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy. We compared toxicity from radiation therapy (RT) to the prostate bed and pelvic lymph nodes (PBPLN-RT) with prostatebed only radiation therapy (PBO-RT) following radical prostatectomy. Methods and Materials Patients with prostate cancer who underwent post-prostatectomy RT between 2010 and 2016 were identified by using the National Prostate Cancer Audit (NPCA) database. Follow-up data was available up to December 31, 2018. Validated outcome measures, based on a framework of procedural and diagnostic codes, were used to capture ≥Grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity. An adjusted competing-risks regression analysis estimated subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR). A sHR > 1 indicated a higher incidence of toxicity with PBPLN-RT than with PBO-RT. Results 5-year cumulative incidences in the PBO-RT (n = 5,087) and PBPLNRT (n = 593) groups was 18.2% and 15.9% for GI toxicity, respectively. For GU toxicity it was 19.1% and 20.7%, respectively. There was no evidence of difference in GI or GU toxicity after adjustment between PBO-RT and PBPLN-RT (GI: adjusted sHR, 0.90, 95% CI, 0.67-1.19; P = 0.45); (GU: adjusted sHR, 1.19, 95% CI, 0.99-1.44; P = 0.09). Conclusions This national population-based study found that including PLNs in the radiation field following radical prostatectomy is not associated with a significant increase in rates of ≥Grade 2 GI or GU toxicity at 5 years.

Management of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer in Catalonia: an expert Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND

To reach a consensus on recommendations for the management of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer by a group of Radiation Oncologists in Catalonia dedicated to prostate cancer.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was employed to reach consensus on controversial topics in Radiation Oncology on high-risk non-metastatic (eight questions) and post-operative (eight questions) prostate cancer. An agreement of at least 75% was considered as consensus. The survey was electronically sent 6 weeks before an expert meeting where topics were reviewed and discussed. A second-round survey for the controversial questions only was sent and answered by participants after the meeting.

RESULTS

After the first round of the survey, 19 experienced Radiation Oncologists attended the meeting and 74% fulfilled the second-round online questionnaire. An agreement of 9 of the 16 questions was accounted for the first round. After the meeting, an additional agreement was reached in 3 questions leading to a final consensus on 12 of the 16 questions. There are still controversial topics like the use of PET for staging of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer and the optimal dose to the prostate bed in the salvage setting.

CONCLUSION

This consensus contributes to establish recommendations and a framework to help in prostate cancer radiation therapy and pharmacological management in daily clinical practice of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer.

Proton therapy for high-risk prostate cancer: Results from the Proton Collaborative Group PCG 001-09 prospective registry trial

BACKGROUND

Data for proton therapy in high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) are limited. Using the Proton Collaborative Group prospective registry, we evaluated outcomes for HRPC patients treated with proton therapy.

METHODS

A totsl of 605 men with localized HRPC treated with proton therapy from 8/2009 to 3/2019 at nine institutions were selected. Outcomes examined included freedom from progression (FFP), metastasis free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Multivariable cox/binomial regression models were used to assess predictors of FFP and toxicity.

RESULTS

Median age was 71 years. Gleason grade groups 4 (49.4%) and 5 (31.7%) were most common, as were clinical stage T1c (46.1%) and cT2 (41.3%). The median pretreatment prostate specific antigen (PSA) was 9.18 and median International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 6. Androgen deprivation therapy was given in 63.6%. Median dose was 79.2 GyE in 44 fractions. Pelvic lymph nodes were treated in 58.2% of cases. Pencil beam scanning was used in 54.5%, uniform scanning in 38.8%, and a rectal spacer in 14.2%. At a median followup of 22 months, the 3- and 5-year FFP were 90.7% and 81.4%, respectively. Five-year MFS and OS were 92.8% and 95.9%, respectively. Independent correlates of FFP included Gleason ≥8, PSA > 10, and cT2 (all p < 0.05). No grade 4 or 5 adverse events were reported. There were 23 (5%) grade 2 and 0 grade 3 gastrointestinal events. Prevalence of late grade 3, late grade 2, acute grade 3, and acute grade 2 genitourinary toxicity was 1.7%, 5.8%, 0%, and 21.8%, respectively. Prevalence of grade 2 and 3 erectile dysfunction at 2 years was 48.4% and 8.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In the largest series published to date, our results suggest early outcomes using proton therapy for HRPC are encouraging for both safety and efficacy. Further evaluation is needed to determine if an advantage exists to use protons over other radiation techniques in this population.

Toxicity of dose-escalated radiotherapy up to 84 Gy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The outcome of radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PCA) depends on the delivered dose. While the evidence for dose-escalated RT up to 80 gray (Gy) is well established, there have been only few studies examining dose escalation above 80 Gy. We initiated the present study to assess the safety of dose escalation up to 84 Gy.

METHODS

In our retrospective analysis, we included patients who received dose-escalated RT for PCA at our institution between 2016 and 2021. We evaluated acute genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity as well as late GU and GI toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 86 patients could be evaluated, of whom 24 patients had received 80 Gy and 62 patients 84 Gy (35 without pelvic and 27 with pelvic radiotherapy). Regarding acute toxicities, no > grade 2 adverse events occurred. Acute GU/GI toxicity of grade 2 occurred in 12.5%/12.5% of patients treated with 80 Gy, in 25.7%/14.3% of patients treated with 84 Gy to the prostate only, and in 51.9%/12.9% of patients treated with 84 Gy and the pelvis included. Late GU/GI toxicity of grade ≥ 2 occurred in 4.2%/8.3% of patients treated with 80 Gy, in 7.1%/3.6% of patients treated with 84 Gy prostate only, and in 18.2%/0% of patients treated with 84 Gy pelvis included (log-rank test p = 0.358).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that dose-escalated RT for PCA up to 84 Gy is feasible and safe without a significant increase in acute toxicity. Further follow-up is needed to assess late toxicity and survival.

Utilizing clinical, pathological and radiological information to guide postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

A detectable and rising PSA following radical prostatectomy is indicative of recurrent prostate cancer. Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) with/without androgen deprivation therapy represents the main treatment option for these patients and has been historically associated with a biochemical control rate of ~70%. To determine the optimal timing, diagnostic workup, radiotherapy dosefractionation, treatment volume, and use of systemic therapy, several informative studies have been conducted in the last decade.

AREAS COVERED

This review examines the recent evidence to guide radiotherapy decision making in the SRT setting. Key topics include adjuvant vs salvage RT, utilization of molecular imaging and genomic classifiers, length of androgen deprivation therapy, inclusion of elective pelvic volume, and emerging role for hypofractionation.

EXPERT OPINION

Recently reported trials, conducted in an era prior to the routine use of molecular imaging and genomic classifiers, have been pivotal in establishing the current standard of care for SRT in prostate cancer. However, decisions about radiation treatment and systemic therapy may be tailored based on available prognostic and predictive biomarkers. Data from contemporary clinical trials are awaited to define and establish individualized, biomarker-driven approaches for SRT.

Sentinel Node Procedure to Select Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Patients with Occult Nodal Metastases for Whole Pelvis Radiotherapy

Background

Accurate identification of men who harbor nodal metastases is necessary to select patients who most likely benefit from whole pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT). Limited sensitivity of diagnostic imaging approaches for the detection of nodal micrometastases has led to the exploration of the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).

Objective

To evaluate whether SLNB can be used as a tool to select pathologically node-positive patients who likely benefit from WPRT.

Design setting and participants

We included 528 clinically node-negative primary prostate cancer (PCa) patients with an estimated nodal risk of >5% treated between 2007 and 2018.

Intervention

A total of 267 patients were directly treated with prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT; non-SLNB group), while 261 patients underwent SLNB to remove lymph nodes directly draining from the primary tumor prior to radiotherapy (SLNB group); pN0 patients were treated with PORT, while pN1 patients were offered WPRT.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) and radiological recurrence-free survival (RRFS) were compared using propensity score weighted (PSW) Cox proportional hazard models.

Results and limitations

The median follow-up was 71 mo. Occult nodal metastases were found in 97 (37%) SLNB patients (median metastasis size: 2 mm). Adjusted 7-yr BCRFS rates were 81% (95% confidence interval [CI] 77-86%) in the SLNB group and 49% (95% CI 43-56%) in the non-SLNB group. The corresponding adjusted 7-yr RRFS rates were 83% (95% CI 78-87%) and 52% (95% CI 46-59%), respectively. In the PSW multivariable Cox regression analysis, SLNB was associated with improved BCRFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.38, 95% CI 0.25-0.59, p < 0.001) and RRFS (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.69, p < 0.001). Limitations include the bias inherent to the study's retrospective nature.

Conclusions

SLNB-based selection of pN1 PCa patients for WPRT was associated with significantly improved BCRFS and RRFS compared with (conventional) imaging-based PORT.

Patient summary

Sentinel node biopsy can be used to select patients who will benefit from the addition of pelvis radiotherapy. This strategy results in a longer duration of prostate-specific antigen control and a lower risk of radiological recurrence.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

BACKGROUND

Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management.

OBJECTIVE

To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.