Multimodality therapy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer: current status and future directions

Impact of age on treatment response in men with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy

Objective

To analyse the effect of age at diagnosis on clinical outcomes of localized prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radiation therapy.

Subjects and methods

We identified 12 784 patients with intermediate‐ or high‐risk localized PCa treated with radiation therapy (RT) and neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) between 2000 and 2015 from nationwide Veterans Affairs data. Patients were grouped into three age categories (≤59, 60–69, and ≥70 years old). Outcomes included immediate PSA response (3‐month post‐RT PSA and 2‐year PSA nadir, grouped into <0.10 ng/ml, 0.10–0.49 ng/ml, and ≥0.50 ng/ml), biochemical recurrence, and PCa‐specific mortality. Multivariable regression models included ordinal logistic regression for short‐term PSA outcomes, Cox regression for biochemical recurrence, and Fine‐Gray competing risks regression for PCa‐specific mortality.

Results

A total of 2136 patients (17%) were ≤59 years old at diagnosis, 6107 (48%) were 60–69 years old, and 4541 (36%) were ≥70 years old. Median follow‐up was 6.3 years. Younger age was associated with greater odds of higher 3‐month PSA group (≤59 vs. ≥70: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.90, 95% CI 1.64–2.20; p < 0.001) and higher 2‐year PSA nadir group (≤59 vs. ≥70: aOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.62–2.19, p < 0.001). Younger age was associated with greater risk of biochemical recurrence (≤59 vs. ≥70: adjusted hazard ratio 1.45, 95% CI 1.26–1.67, p < 0.001) but not PCa‐specific mortality (p = 0.16).

Conclusion

In a large nationwide sample of US veterans treated with ADT and RT for localized PCa, younger age was associated with inferior short‐term PSA response and higher risk of biochemical recurrence.

SAbR for High-Risk Prostate Cancer-A Prospective Multilevel MRI-Based Dose Escalation Trial

PURPOSE

Radiation dose intensification improves outcome in men with high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa). A prospective trial was conducted to determine safety, feasibility, and maximal tolerated dose of multilevel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based 5-fraction SAbR in patients with HR-PCa.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This phase I clinical trial enrolled patients with HR-PCa with grade group ≥4, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥20 ng/mL, or radiographic ≥T3, and well-defined prostatic lesions on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) into 4 dose-escalation cohorts. The initial cohort received 47.5 Gy to the prostate, 50 Gy to mpMRI-defined intraprostatic lesion(s), and 22.5 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes in 5 fractions. Radiation doses were escalated for pelvic nodes to 25 Gy and mpMRI lesion(s) to 52.5 Gy and then 55 Gy. Escalation was performed sequentially according to rule-based trial design with 7 to 15 patients per cohort and a 90-day observation period. All men received peri-rectal hydrogel spacer, intraprostatic fiducial placement, and 2 years of androgen deprivation. The primary endpoint was maximal tolerated dose according to a 90-day acute dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate <33%. DLT was defined as National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events ≥grade 3 treatment-related toxicity. Secondary outcomes included acute and delayed gastrointestinal (GI)/genitourinary (GU) toxicity graded with Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events.

RESULTS

Fifty-five of the 62 enrolled patients were included in the analysis. Dose was escalated through all 4 cohorts without observing any DLTs. Median overall follow-up was 18 months, with a median follow-up of 42, 24, 12, and 7.5 months for cohorts 1 to 4 respectively. Acute and late grade 2 GU toxicities were 25% and 20%, while GI were 13% and 7%, respectively. Late grade 3 GU and GI toxicities were 2% and 0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SAbR dose for HR-PCa was safely escalated with multilevel dose painting of 47.5 Gy to prostate, 55 Gy to mpMRI-defined intraprostatic lesions, and 25 Gy to pelvic nodal region in 5 fractions. Longer and ongoing follow-up will be required to assess late toxicity.

Salvage therapy for prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

More than 40% of men with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer will experience a biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Clinical guidelines for the management of these patients largely focus on the use of salvage radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy. However, not all patients with biochemical recurrence will go on to develop metastases or die from their disease. The optimal pre-salvage therapy investigational workup for patients who experience biochemical recurrence should, therefore, include novel techniques such as PET imaging and genomic analysis of radical prostatectomy specimen tissue, as well as consideration of more traditional clinical variables such as PSA value, PSA kinetics, Gleason score and pathological stage of disease. In patients without metastatic disease, the only known curative intervention is salvage radiotherapy but, given the therapeutic burden of this treatment, importance must be placed on accurate timing of treatment, radiation dose, fractionation and field size. Systemic therapy also has a role in the salvage setting, both concurrently with radiotherapy and as salvage monotherapy.

Targeting the androgen receptor (AR) with AR degradation enhancer ASC-J9® led to increase docetaxel sensitivity via suppressing the p21 expression

Chemotherapy with docetaxel remains the effective therapy to suppress castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in some patients. However, most chemotherapy with docetaxel eventually fails with the development of docetaxel resistance after 18-weeks of treatment. Here we found docetaxel treatment might have an adverse effect of increasing the androgen receptor (AR) protein level in the CRPC cells, and combining docetaxel with anti-AR therapy using AR-shRNA or the AR degradation enhancer ASC-J9® may increase docetaxel sensitivity to better suppress the CRPC cell growth. Mechanism dissection found docetaxel might have the adverse effect of increasing the AR protein stability via suppressing the AR ubiquitination due to the increased AR phosphorylation. The consequence of such increased AR protein may then lead to increase p21 expression via transcriptional regulation. Preclinical studies with in vitro cells lines also demonstrated that targeting AR with ASC-J9® led to suppressing the AR-increased p21 expression to improve the docetaxel sensitivity in the CRPC cells that already developed docetaxel resistance. Together, these results suggest that a combined therapy of docetaxel and ASC-J9® is a novel therapy to better suppress CRPC in patients that already developed docetaxel resistance.

The effect of radiotherapy in liver-confined but non-resectable Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C large hepatocellular carcinoma

Background and aims

Clinical trials to determine the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) in liver-confined but non-resectable Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are scarce. We aimed to determine the benefit of RT in such tumors and investigated large HCC tumors.

Methods

HCC data from the Korea Central Cancer Registry recorded from 2008 to 2010 were used. A total of 593 patients met our inclusion criteria; 67 were treated with RT while the remainder made up the non-RT group. Fifty-two RT recipients underwent combination treatments within 4 weeks after the first RT treatment, and were defined as the combination RT group. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) to compare the RT or combination RT groups with the non-RT group. The endpoint was overall survival (OS).

Results

Median follow-up time for surviving patients was 48 months. After PSM, there was no difference in OS between the RT and non-RT groups or between the combination RT and non-RT groups. However, the combination RT group had a longer median survival time (MST) (10.7 vs. 6.9 months, respectively). Next, we conducted PSM between the combination RT and non-RT groups in patients with tumor sizes ≥10 cm; MST was significantly longer in the former group (10.1 vs. 5.4 months, respectively; bootstrap 95% confidence interval of the difference in MST: 0.2-11.8).

Conclusions

As a combined modality, RT is a plausible therapeutic option for liver-confined but non-resectable BCLC stage C large HCC patients.

The Missing Pieces in Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials of External Beam Radiation Therapy Dose Escalation for Prostate Cancer

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the most rigorous way of determining whether a cause-effect relation exists between treatment and outcome and for assessing the cost-effectiveness of a treatment. For many patients, cancer is a chronic illness; RCTs evaluating treatments for indolent cancers must evolve to facilitate medical decision-making, as "concrete" patient outcomes (eg, survival) will likely be excellent independent of the intervention, and detecting a difference between trial arms may be impossible. In this commentary, we articulate 9 recommendations that we hope future clinical trialists and funding agencies (including those under the National Cancer Institute) will take into consideration when planning RCTs to help guide subsequent interpretation of results and clinical decision making, based on RCTs of external beam radiation therapy dose escalation for the most common indolent cancer in men, that is, prostate cancer. We recommend routinely reporting: (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics (eg, number of centers involved, type of facilities, yearly hospital volumes). We discuss how these factors independently affect patient outcomes and toxicities; future clinicians and governing organizations should consider this information to plan RCTs accordingly (to maximize patient accrual and total n), select appropriate endpoints (eg, toxicity, quality of life, sexual function), actively monitor RCTs, and report results so as to identify the optimal treatment among subpopulations.

The evolution of brachytherapy for prostate cancer

Brachytherapy (BT), using low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent seed implantation or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary source implantation, is an acceptable treatment option for select patients with prostate cancer of any risk group. The benefits of HDR-BT over LDR-BT include the ability to use the same source for other cancers, lower operator dependence, and - typically - fewer acute irritative symptoms. By contrast, the benefits of LDR-BT include more favourable scheduling logistics, lower initial capital equipment costs, no need for a shielded room, completion in a single implant, and more robust data from clinical trials. Prospective reports comparing HDR-BT and LDR-BT to each other or to other treatment options (such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or surgery) suggest similar outcomes. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure rates for patients with low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease are >85%, 69-97%, and 63-80%, respectively. Brachytherapy with EBRT (versus brachytherapy alone) is an appropriate approach in select patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease. The 10-year rates of overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer-specific mortality are >85%, <10%, and <5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated with HDR-BT and LDR-BT are rare, at <4% in most series, and quality of life is improved in patients who receive brachytherapy compared with those who undergo surgery.

Men's health supplement use and outcomes in men receiving definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed cancer patients start taking dietary supplements. Men's health supplements (MHSs), which we define as supplements that are specifically marketed with the terms men's health and prostate health (or similar permutations), are often mislabeled as having potential anticancer benefits.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effects of MHSs on patient outcomes and toxicities in patients who were undergoing definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer.

DESIGN

This retrospective analysis included patients who were being treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and consented to have information stored in a prospective database. MHSs were queried online. Outcome measures were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) (biochemical failure was defined with the use of the prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2-ng/mL definition), freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as well as toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, Fine and Gray competing-risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), and Cox models were used.

RESULTS

From 2001 to 2012, 2207 patients were treated with IMRT with a median dose of 78 Gy, and a median follow-up of 46 mo. Of these patients, 43% were low risk, 37% were intermediate risk, and 20% were high risk; 10% used MHSs. MHSs contained a median of 3 identifiable ingredients (range: 0-78 ingredients). Patients who were taking an MHS compared with those who were not had improved 5-y OS (97% compared with 92%, respectively; P = 0.01), but there were no differences in the FFBF (94% compared with 89%, respectively; P = 0.12), FFDM (96% compared with 97%, respectively; P = 0.32), or CSS (100% compared with 99%, respectively; P = 0.22). The unadjusted association between MHS use and improved OS was attenuated after adjustment for patient lifestyle factors and comorbidities. There was no difference in toxicities between the 2 groups (late-grade 3-4 genitourinary <3%; gastrointestinal <4%).

CONCLUSION

The use of MHSs is not associated with outcomes or toxicities.

Prostate Cancer Patients With Unmanaged Diabetes or Receiving Insulin Experience Inferior Outcomes and Toxicities After Treatment With Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on outcomes and toxicities among men with localized prostate cancer receiving definitive radiation therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 3217 patients, from 1998 to 2013, subdivided into 5 subgroups: (I) no T2DM; (II) T2DM receiving oral antihyperglycemic agent that contains metformin, no insulin; (III) T2DM receiving nonmetformin oral agent alone, no insulin; (IV) T2DM receiving any insulin; and (V) T2DM not receiving medication. Outcome measures were overall survival, freedom from biochemical failure (BF), freedom from distant metastasis, cancer-specific survival, and toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log rank tests, Fine and Gray competing risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), Cox models, and subdistribution hazard ratios (sHRs) were used.

RESULTS

Of the 3217 patients, 1295 (40%) were low-risk, 1192 (37%) were intermediate-risk, and 652 (20%) were high risk. The group I to V distribution was 81%, 8%, 5%, 3%, and 4%. The median dose was 78 Gy, and the median follow-up time was 50 (range, 1-190) months. Group V had increased mortality (sHR, 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.54), BF (sHR, 2.14; 0.88-1.83), and cause-specific mortality (sHR, 3.87; 95% CI, 1.31-11). Acute toxicities were higher in group IV versus group I (genitourinary: 38% vs. 26%; P = .01; gastrointestinal: 21% vs. 5%; P = 001). Late toxicities were higher in groups IV and V versus group I (12%-14% vs. 2%-6%; P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Men with T2DM not receiving medication and men with T2DM receiving insulin had worse outcomes and toxicities compared to other patients.

A comparison of robotic arm versus gantry linear accelerator stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer diagnosed in men in the United States besides skin cancer. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT; 6–15 Gy per fraction, up to 45 minutes per fraction, delivered in five fractions or less, over the course of approximately 2 weeks) is emerging as a popular treatment option for prostate cancer. The American Society for Radiation Oncology now recognizes SBRT for select low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. SBRT grew from the notion that high doses of radiation typical of brachytherapy could be delivered noninvasively using modern external-beam radiation therapy planning and delivery methods. SBRT is most commonly delivered using either a traditional gantry-mounted linear accelerator or a robotic arm-mounted linear accelerator. In this systematic review article, we compare and contrast the current clinical evidence supporting a gantry vs robotic arm SBRT for prostate cancer. The data for SBRT show encouraging and comparable results in terms of freedom from biochemical failure (>90% for low and intermediate risk at 5–7 years) and acute and late toxicity (<6% grade 3–4 late toxicities). Other outcomes (eg, overall and cancer-specific mortality) cannot be compared, given the indolent course of low-risk prostate cancer. At this time, neither SBRT device is recommended over the other for all patients; however, gantry-based SBRT machines have the abilities of treating larger volumes with conventional fractionation, shorter treatment time per fraction (~15 minutes for gantry vs ~45 minutes for robotic arm), and the ability to achieve better plans among obese patients (since they are able to use energies >6 MV). Finally, SBRT (particularly on a gantry) may also be more cost-effective than conventionally fractionated external-beam radiation therapy. Randomized controlled trials of SBRT using both technologies are underway.

Comparison of outcomes and toxicities among radiation therapy treatment options for prostate cancer

We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics.

Clinical Benefit of Hepatic Arterial Infusion Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether hepatic arterial infusion concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) could improve overall survival (OS) in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (LAHCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two databases were reviewed from Yonsei Cancer Center (YCC) and Korean Liver Cancer Study Group (KLCSG) nationwide multi-center hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cohort. The CCRT group included 106 patients, with stage III-IV, Child-Pugh classification A, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, who underwent definitive CCRT as the initial treatment at YCC. We used propensity score matching to adjust for seven clinical factors, including age, tumor size, TNM stage by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan, T stage, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, etiology of HCC, and portal vein invasion, which all differed significantly in the two databases. From the KLCSG cohort enrolled at 32 institutions, 106 patients for the non-CCRT group were defined.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, all patient characteristics were balanced between the two groups. The CCRT group had better OS (median, 11.4) than the non-CCRT group (6.6 months, p=0.02). In multivariate analyses for all patients, CCRT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 1.97; p=0.007), tumor size (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12; p < 0.001), and BCLC stage (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.8; p=0.003) were independent prognostic factors for OS.

CONCLUSION

CCRT showed better OS for LAHCC patients. In LAHCC patients with a good performance and normal liver function, CCRT could be a feasible treatment option. All of these findings need to be validated in prospective clinical trials.

Topoisomerase inhibitors modulate gene expression of B-cell translocation gene 2 and prostate specific antigen in prostate carcinoma cells

Camptothecin (CPT) and doxorubicin (DOX) have been demonstrated to have potent anti-tumor activity. The B-cell translocation gene 2 (BTG2) is involved in the regulation of cell cycle progression. We evaluated the molecular mechanisms of CPT and DOX on cell proliferation and the expressions of BTG2 and prostate specific antigen (PSA) in prostate carcinoma cells. Our results indicated that CPT or DOX treatments induced Go/G1 cell cycle arrest in LNCaP cells and apoptosis at higher dosage. Immunoblot and transient gene expression assay indicated that CPT or DOX treatments induced p53 and BTG2 gene expression, with the later effect dependent on the p53 response element within BTG2 promoter area since mutation of the p53 response element from GGGAAAGTCC to GGAGTCC or from GGCAGAGCCC to GGCACC by site-directed mutagenesis abolished the stimulation of CPT or DOX on the BTG2 promoter activity, which is also supported by our results that cotreatments of pifithrin-α, an inhibitor of p53 dependent transcriptional activation, blocked the induction of CPT or DOX on BTG2 gene expression. CPT or DOX also downregulated the protein expressions of androgen receptor (AR) and PSA. Transient gene expression assays suggested that CPT or DOX’s attenuation of PSA promoter activity is dependent on both the androgen and p53 response elements within of the PSA promoter. Our results indicated that CPT and DOX attenuate cell proliferation via upregulation of BTG2 gene expression through the p53-dependent pathway. The CPT and DOX block the PSA gene expression by upregulation of p53 activity and downregulation of androgen receptor activity.

The Molecular Crosstalk between the MET Receptor Tyrosine Kinase and the DNA Damage Response-Biological and Clinical Aspects

Radiation therapy remains an imperative treatment modality for numerous malignancies. Enduring significant technical achievements both on the levels of treatment planning and radiation delivery have led to improvements in local control of tumor growth and reduction in healthy tissue toxicity. Nevertheless, resistance mechanisms, which presumably also involve activation of DNA damage response signaling pathways that eventually may account for loco-regional relapse and consequent tumor progression, still remain a critical problem. Accumulating data suggest that signaling via growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, which are aberrantly expressed in many tumors, may interfere with the cytotoxic impact of ionizing radiation via the direct activation of the DNA damage response, leading eventually to so-called tumor radioresistance. The aim of this review is to overview the current known data that support a molecular crosstalk between the hepatocyte growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase MET and the DNA damage response. Apart of extending well established concepts over MET biology beyond its function as a growth factor receptor, these observations directly relate to the role of its aberrant activity in resistance to DNA damaging agents, such as ionizing radiation, which are routinely used in cancer therapy and advocate tumor sensitization towards DNA damaging agents in combination with MET targeting.

Oncology training programs: are we doing comparative effectiveness research justice?

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is defined as an assessment of all available options for a specific medical condition, with intent to estimate effectiveness in specific subpopulations. Medical professionals must receive training in CER, including its general goals, the 'toolbox' necessary to perform CER and its design. Oncologic training programs are currently not doing justice to CER: a rationale for conducting CER has been proposed, funding from the US government is available, but encouragement from oncologic residencies and fellowships is minimal. Encouragement to train oncologic physicians in CER is limited by a few factors, including inadequate emphasis on evidence weighing, and no explicit mention of factors key to CER in the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education guidelines. As residency program requirements transition to milestone-based curricula and evaluations, explicit recommendations regarding CER and patient-centered outcomes research should be implemented for all programs. Upper level trainees who have reached milestones related to CER will be competitive applicants for research funding.