Adjuvant vs. salvage radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer

Quality of Life after post-prostatectomy intensity modulated radiation therapy to the prostate bed with or without the use of gold fiducial markers for image guidance or higher total radiotherapy doses

Purpose

To evaluate quality of life (QoL) after post-prostatectomy intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the “adjuvant” setting starting within 4 months of radical prostatectomy for adverse features; and “salvage” setting for a PSA≥0.2ng/mL.

Materials and Methods

Retrospective review of 130 patients who underwent IMRT to the prostate bed±gold fiducial marker placement for image guidance to 64.8-72.0Gy (median, 70.2Gy) between 2004 and 2013. Higher doses were defined as 70.2-72.0Gy and lower doses were defined as 64.8-68.4Gy. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was given to 4/48 (8%) adjuvant patients and 9/82 (11%) salvage patients. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM), and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26-bowel (EPIC-26-bowel) questionnaires were used to assess urinary, sexual, and bowel QoL, respectively.

Results

Median follow-up was 46 months. There were better urinary (p=0.03) and sexual (p=0.002) QoL scores with adjuvant IMRT relative to salvage IMRT. The use of prostate bed fiducial markers did not significantly affect urinary, sexual, or bowel QoL (p=0.39, p=0.49, and p=0.40, respectively). Higher total radiotherapy doses did not significantly affect urinary, sexual, or bowel QoL (p=0.21, p=0.61, and p=0.36, respectively).

Conclusions

There was no significant change in urinary, sexual, and bowel sexual QoL with post-prostatectomy IMRT regardless of whether prostate bed fiducial markers or higher total radiotherapy doses were used. QoL with IMRT in the present study compares favorably with prior reports for three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy.

Radiotherapy in the management of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

The choice of treatment options for prostate cancer patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy depends on their risk profile, which is determined by the tumor node metastasis (TNM) status, histopathologic findings, and the pre- and post-radical prostatectomy PSA characteristics. The results of large clinical studies with a 10-year follow-up or more are the backbone of predictive models for risk estimates that incorporate these criteria and also for guideline recommendations. For low-to-intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients and older patients, observation with--in case of biochemical recurrence--early salvage radiotherapy can be advised after R0 resection, thus, avoiding overtreatment. After R1 resection, adjuvant radiotherapy should be considered. Patients with two or more positive lymph nodes and/or with distant metastasis may benefit from adjuvant hormone deprivation therapy. Beyond this rough outline, detailed analysis of subgroups is still required (and ongoing) to enable individually optimized treatment.

Partial sampling of radical prostatectomy specimens: detection of positive margins and extraprostatic extension

Currently there is no global agreement as to how extensively a radical prostatectomy specimen should be sectioned and histologically examined. We analyzed the ability of different methods of partial sampling in detecting positive margin (PM) and extraprostatic extension (EPE)-2 pathologic features of prostate cancer that are most easily missed by partial sampling of the prostate. Radical prostatectomy specimens from 617 patients treated with open radical prostatectomy between 1992 and 2011 were analyzed. Examination of the entirely submitted prostate detected only PM in 370 (60%), only EPE in 100 (16%), and both in 147 (24%) specimens. We determined whether these pathologic features would have been diagnosed had the examination of the specimen been limited only to alternate sections (method 1), alternate sections representing the posterior aspect of the gland in addition to one of the mid-anterior aspects (method 2), and every section representing the posterior aspect of the gland in addition to one of the mid-anterior aspects, supplemented by the remaining ipsilateral anterior sections if a sizeable tumor is seen (method 3). Methods 1 and 2 missed 13% and 21% of PMs and 28% and 47% of EPEs, respectively. Method 3 demonstrated better results missing only 5% of PMs and 7% of EPEs. Partial sampling techniques missed slightly more PMs and EPEs in patients with low-risk to intermediate-risk prostate cancer, although even in high-risk cases none of the methods detected all of the studied aggressive pathologic features.

Role of surgery in high-risk localized prostate cancer

Men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) remain a challenge for clinicians. Until recently, surgery was not the preferred approach, in part because risk of subclinical metastatic disease, elevated rates of positive surgical margins, absence of randomized studies, and suboptimal cancer control did not justify the morbidity of surgery. No randomized data comparing surgery with radiation therapy are yet available. Data for and comparisons between treatment options should therefore be analyzed with extreme caution.When selecting the best treatment for patients with clinically localized high-risk PCa, considerations should include the life expectancy of the patient, the natural history of PCa, the curability of the disease, and the morbidity of treatment. High-grade PCa managed with noncurative intent greatly reduces life expectancy, but overall, it must also be remembered that radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy (RT) appear to have similar effects on quality of life. In this population, RP necessitates an extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND), but in selected cases, nerve-sparing is a therapeutic possibility and may offer a significant advantage over rt in terms of local control and-although absolutely not yet proved-maybe even in survival. One clear advantage is the ease of administering adjuvant or salvage external-beam rt (EBRT) after rp; conversely, salvage rp after failed EBRT is an exceedingly difficult surgery, with major complications. Surgery therefore has its place, but must be considered in the context of multimodality treatment and the risk of micrometastatic disease. Awaited trial results will help to further refine management in this group of patients.

Early hypofractionated salvage radiotherapy for postprostatectomy biochemical recurrence

BACKGROUND

Postprostatectomy adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy, when using standard fractionation, requires 6.5 to 8 weeks of treatment. The authors report on the safety and efficacy of an expedited radiotherapy course for salvage prostate radiotherapy.

METHODS

A total of 108 consecutive patients were treated with salvage radiation therapy to 65 grays (Gy) in 26 fractions of 2.5 Gy. Median follow-up was 32.4 months. Median presalvage prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 0.44 (range, 0.05-9.50). Eighteen (17%) patients received androgen deprivation after surgery or concurrently with radiation.

RESULTS

The actuarial freedom from biochemical failure for the entire group at 4 years was 67% ± 5.3%. An identical 67% control rate was seen at 5 years for the first 50 enrolled patients, whose median follow-up was longer at 43 months. One acute grade 3 genitourinary toxicity occurred, with no acute grade 3 gastrointestinal and no late grade 3 toxicities observed. On univariate analysis, higher Gleason score (P = .006), PSA doubling time ≤12 months (P = .03), perineural invasion (P = .06), and negative margins (P = .06) showed association with unsuccessful salvage. On multivariate analysis, higher Gleason score (P = .057) and negative margins (P = .088) retained an association with biochemical failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (65 Gy in 2.5 Gy fractions in about 5 weeks) reduces the length of treatment by from 1-½ to 3 weeks relative to other treatment schedules commonly used, produces low rates of toxicity, and demonstrates encouraging efficacy at 4 to 5 years. Hypofractionation may provide a convenient, resource-efficient, and well-tolerated salvage approach for the estimated 20,000 to 35,000 US men per year experiencing biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy.