Planning magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer intensity-modulated radiation therapy: Impact on target volumes, radiotherapy dose and androgen deprivation administration

Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy as definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer: Pattern of practice in German-speaking countries : A survey of the Prostate Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and the Working Party on Radiation Oncology of the German Cancer Society (DKG-ARO)

Purpose

Various randomized phase III clinical trials have compared moderately hypofractionated to normofractionated radiotherapy (RT). These modalities showed similar effectiveness without major differences in toxicity. This project was conducted by the Prostate Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and the Working Party on Radiation Oncology of the German Cancer Society. We aimed to investigate expert opinions on the use of moderately hypofractionated RT as a definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries.

Methods

A 25-item, web-based questionnaire on moderate-hypofractionation RT was prepared by an internal committee. The experts of the DEGRO were asked to complete the questionnaire.

Results

Fourteen active members of DEGRO completed the questionnaire. The questions described indications for selecting patients eligible to receive moderate hypofractionation based on clinical and pathological factors such as age, urinary symptoms, and risk-group. The questions also collected information on the technical aspects of selection criteria, including the definition of a clinical target volume, the use of imaging, protocols for bladder and rectal filling, the choice of a fractionation schedule, and the use of image guidance. Moreover, the questionnaire collected information on post-treatment surveillance after applying moderately hypofractionated RT.

Conclusion

Although opinions varied on the use of moderate-hypofractionation RT, the current survey reflected broad agreement on the notion that moderately hypofractionated RT could be considered a standard treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries.

Prospects of Treating Prostate Cancer through Apalutamide: A Mini-Review

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is considered the second most diagnosed cancer, and one of the most common causes of death from cancer in men. Apalutamide is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated agent used for the treatment of men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer (mHNPC). Androgen receptor signaling is a leading factor that drives these prostate tumors. USFDA has approved apalutamide on 14 February 2018 as an agent that targets androgen receptor signaling through inhibition causing significant improvement in metastasis-free survival in patients with prostate cancer. <P> Objective: In this review, various aspects related to apalutamide have been summarized which involve the mechanism of action, chemistry, synthesis, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, adverse reactions, and safety parameters. <P> Methods: The literature was thoroughly searched in the relevant databases to identify studies published in this field during recent years. Special attention has been given to apalutamide clinical trials phases and its promising future as one of the first-line agents for the treatment of patients with advanced prostate cancer. <P> Results: Ongoing trials are progressing for apalutamide monotherapy and also for its combinations in other disease settings. The expected results of such trials will shape the future scenario of prostate cancer therapy. <P> Conclusion: This review article has highlighted different aspects of Apalutamide like its mechanism of action, adverse effects, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical trials among others. The contents of this article should make an excellent read for prospective researchers in this field.

Choosing between conventional and hypofractionated prostate cancer radiation therapy: Results from a study of shared decision-making

AIM

To evaluate patient choice of prostate cancer radiotherapy fractionation, using a decision aid.

BACKGROUND

Recent ASTRO guidelines recommend patients with localised prostate cancer be offered moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy after discussing increased acute toxicity and uncertainty of long-term results compared to conventional fractionation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision aid was designed to outline the benefits and potential downsides of conventionally and moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy. The aid incorporated the ASTRO guideline to outline risks and benefits.

RESULTS

In all, 124 patients with localised prostate cancer were seen from June-December 2018. Median age was 72 (range 50-90), 49.6 % were intermediate risk (50.4 % high risk). All except three patients made a choice using the aid; the three undecided patients were hypofractionated. In all, 33.9 % of patients chose hypofractionation: falling to 25.3 % for patients under 75 years, 24.3 % for patients living within 30 miles of the cancer centre, and 14.3 % for patients with baseline gastrointestinal symptoms. On multivariate analysis, younger age, proximity to the centre, and having baseline gastrointestinal symptoms significantly predicted for choosing conventional fractionation. Insurance status, attending clinician, baseline genitourinary symptoms, work/carer status, ECOG, cancer risk group and driving status did not impact choice. Reasons for choosing conventional fractionation were certainty of long-term results (84 %) and lower acute bowel toxicity (51 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients declined the convenience of moderate hypofractionation due to potentially increased acute toxicity, and the uncertainty of long-term outcomes. We advocate that no patient should be offered hypofractionation without a thorough discussion of uncertainty and acute toxicity.

PSMA-PET guided dose-escalated volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) for newly diagnosed lymph node positive prostate cancer: Efficacy and toxicity outcomes at two years

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

There are no published reports of prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) guided dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (DE-IMRT) in newly diagnosed lymph node (LN) positive prostate cancer. We report early toxicity and efficacy outcomes with this approach.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed high-risk prostate cancer were staged using PSMA PET, computed tomography (CT) and bone scans. Patients with LN positive-only metastases were offered curative therapy using 3 months androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) followed by DE-IMRT (using volumetric arc therapy), and 3 years adjuvant ADT. All patients had fiducial marker insertion, with privately insured patients having spacer hydrogel insertion. PET and prostate magnetic resonance imaging were fused with the planning CT. We aimed to deliver 81 Gy in 45 fractions (Fx) to the prostate and PET-positive LNs, and 60 Gy in 45Fx to bilateral elective pelvic LNs.

RESULTS

In all, 46 patients were treated, with 83% Gleason 8-10, 67% T3/T4, median number of LNs 2 (range 1-6), and median PET-positive LN volume 1.14 cc (range 0.15-4.14). LNs were outside of standard contouring guidelines in 37% of patients. The mean PET-positive LN clinical target volume dose ranged from 73.3 to 85.9 Gy (median 83.6 Gy). With 24 months median follow-up, two year failure-free survival was 100%, and 2 year overall survival 95.7%. Acute grade 1 and 2 GI toxicity occurred in 48 and 11% of patients, and GU toxicity in 72 and 24%. Late grade 1, 2 and 3 GI toxicity occurred in 13, 2 and 0%, and GU toxicity 28, 13 and 4%. No toxicity was attributable to the high dose LN boost.

CONCLUSIONS

PSMA PET-guided DE-IMRT up to 81 Gy to the prostate and involved LNs, and long term ADT, is a promising approach for newly diagnosed LN positive prostate cancer. LN contouring guidelines require re-evaluation in the era of PSMA PET imaging.

Late toxicities of prostate cancer radiotherapy with and without hydrogel SpaceAOR insertion

INTRODUCTION

To investigate whether the implantation of a hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR) reduces long-term rectal toxicity for prostate cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS

Patients with localised prostate cancer treated with 81 Gy in 45 fx of IMRT over 9 weeks were retrospectively compared: 65 patients with SpaceOAR and 56 patients without SpaceOAR. Planning aims restricted rectal doses to V40 Gy < 35%, V65 Gy < 17%, V75 Gy < 10%. Toxicities were evaluated between 3 months and 3 years after the completion of radiotherapy and were based on the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) assessment tool for diarrhoea, haemorrhoids, faecal incontinence and proctitis.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of low-grade diarrhoea (G1) was significantly higher in the non-SpaceOAR group (21.4% vs 6.2%; P = 0.016). The cumulative incidence of proctitis (grades G1 and G2) was also higher in the non-SpaceOAR group (26.7% vs 9.2%; P = 0.015); the cumulative incidence of G2 proctitis was higher in the latter group (P = 0.043). There were no differences between the treatment groups for cumulative incidences of faecal incontinence and/or haemorrhoids. Three years after IMRT, diarrhoea and proctitis were higher in the non-SpaceOAR group, without reaching statistical significance. This finding was unchanged after correcting for baseline symptoms.

CONCLUSION

SpaceOAR is of benefit in reducing the cumulative incidence of low-grade diarrhoea and proctitis for up to 3 years after intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

68Ga-PSMA-PET: added value and future applications in comparison to the current use of choline-PET and mpMRI in the workup of prostate cancer

Positron emission tomography (PET) has been commonly and successfully used, in combination with computed tomography (CT) and more recently magnetic resonance (MRI), in the workup of intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Nowadays, new specific receptor targeted PET tracers in prostate cancer imaging have been introduced; one of the most used is ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA, that evaluates the expression of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). This tracer has been rapidly taken into account for its better sensitivity and specificity compared to lipid metabolism tracers, such as ¹¹C/¹⁸F labelled fluorocholine. Besides, in the era of theranostics, this tracer is having a useful application not only for imaging but also for therapeutic purposes. The aim of this review article is, in the first part, to give an overview of the main indications and future development of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA imaging, using PET/CT or PET/MRI, according to the clinical course of the disease and in view of the current use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and choline PET in the management of PCa. In the second part, a brief overview of the promising ¹⁸F-labelled PSMA tracers and the current use of PSMA radionuclide therapy will be provided.

The Use of Ultrasound Imaging in the External Beam Radiotherapy Workflow of Prostate Cancer Patients

External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is one of the curative treatment options for prostate cancer patients. The aim of this treatment option is to irradiate tumor tissue, while sparing normal tissue as much as possible. Frequent imaging during the course of the treatment (image guided radiotherapy) allows for determination of the location and shape of the prostate (target) and of the organs at risk. This information is used to increase accuracy in radiation dose delivery resulting in better tumor control and lower toxicity. Ultrasound imaging is harmless for the patient, it is cost-effective, and it allows for real-time volumetric organ tracking. For these reasons, it is an ideal technique for image guidance during EBRT workflows. Review papers have been published in which the use of ultrasound imaging in EBRT workflows for different cancer sites (prostate, breast, etc.) was extensively covered. This new review paper aims at providing the readers with an update on the current status for prostate cancer ultrasound guided EBRT treatments.

Moderate hypofractionation for prostate cancer: A user's guide

Three large randomised controlled trials have been published in the last year demonstrating the non-inferiority of moderate hypofractionation compared to conventional fractionation for localised prostate cancer with respect to both disease control and late toxicity at 5 years. Furthermore, no clinically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes have emerged. More mature follow-up data are now also available from phase 2 studies confirming that moderate hypofractionation is associated with low rates of significant toxicity at 10 years. Moving forward it is likely that appropriate patient selection, integration of androgen deprivation and attention to optimising technique will play a more important role than modest differences in dose-fractionation schedules. Here we briefly review the evidence, discuss issues of patient selection and provide an approach to implementing moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for prostate cancer in clinical practice.

Magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer before radical and salvage radiotherapy: What radiation oncologists need to know

External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is one of the principal curative treatments for patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Risk group classification is based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, and T-stage. After risk group determination, the treatment volume and dose are defined and androgen deprivation therapy is prescribed, if appropriate. Traditionally, imaging has played only a minor role in T-staging due to the low diagnostic accuracy of conventional imaging strategies such as transrectal ultrasound, computed tomography, and morphologic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). As a result, a notable percentage of tumours are understaged, leading to inappropriate and imprecise EBRT. The development of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), an imaging technique that combines morphologic studies with functional diffusion-weighted sequences and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, has revolutionized the diagnosis and management of PCa. As a result, mpMRI is now used in staging PCa prior to EBRT, with possible implications for both risk group classification and treatment decision-making for EBRT. mpMRI is also being used in salvage radiotherapy (SRT), the treatment of choice for patients who develop biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. In the clinical context of biochemical relapse, it is essential to accurately determine the site of recurrence - pelvic (local, nodal, or bone) or distant - in order to select the optimal therapeutic management approach. Studies have demonstrated the value of mpMRI in detecting local recurrences - even in patients with low PSA levels (0.3-0.5 ng/mL) - and in diagnosing bone and nodal metastasis. The main objective of this review is to update the role of mpMRI prior to radical EBRT or SRT. We also consider future directions for the use and development of MRI in the field of radiation oncology.

Can a peri-rectal hydrogel spaceOAR programme for prostate cancer intensity-modulated radiotherapy be successfully implemented in a regional setting?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the implementation of a hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR) programme for patients treated with 81 Gy prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in a regional setting can reduce rectal doses and toxicity.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 125 patients with localised prostate cancer treated between April 2014 (programme commencement) and June 2015 were compared: 65 with SpaceOAR (inserted by five different urologists) and 60 patients treated over the same time period without SpaceOAR. Patients were treated with 81 Gy in 45Fx of IMRT over 9 weeks. Planning aims included restricting rectal doses to V40 Gy < 35%, V65 Gy < 17%, V75 Gy < 10%. Acute toxicity was assessed weekly during radiotherapy and at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Rectal volume parameters were all significantly lower in the SpaceOAR group, with an associated reduction in acute diarrhoea (13.8% vs 31.7%). There were no significant differences in the very low rates of acute and late faecal incontinence or proctitis, however, there was a trend towards increased haemorrhoid rate in the SpaceOAR group (11.7% vs 3.1%, P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

A SpaceOAR programme in a regional setting with urologists performing low volumes of insertions (<1 per month on average) is of clinical benefit, and was associated with significantly lower radiation doses to the rectum and lower rates of acute diarrhoea.

Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy: What Do Clinicians Have to Know?

Radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PC) has steadily evolved over the last decades, with improving biochemical disease-free survival. Recently population based research also revealed an association between overall survival and doses ≥ 75.6 Gray (Gy) in men with intermediate- and high-risk PC. Examples of improved RT techniques are image-guided RT, intensity-modulated RT, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and stereotactic ablative body RT, which could facilitate further dose escalation. Brachytherapy is an internal form of RT that also developed substantially. New devices such as rectum spacers and balloons have been developed to spare rectal structures. Newer techniques like protons and carbon ions have the intrinsic characteristics maximising the dose on the tumour while minimising the effect on the surrounding healthy tissue, but clinical data are needed for confirmation in randomised phase III trials. Furthermore, it provides an overview of an important discussion issue in PC treatment between urologists and radiation oncologists: the comparison between radical prostatectomy and RT. Current literature reveals that all possible treatment modalities have the same cure rate, but a different toxicity pattern. We recommend proposing the possible different treatment modalities with their own advantages and side-effects to the individual patient. Clinicians and patients should make treatment decisions together (shared decision-making) while using patient decision aids.

Prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning in seven mouse clicks: Development of a class solution for cancer

AIM

The aim of the retrospective study was to develop a planning class solution for prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) that achieved target and organs-at-risk (OAR) doses within acceptable departmental protocol criteria using the Monaco treatment planning system (Elekta-CMS Software, MO, USA).

BACKGROUND

Advances in radiation therapy technology have led to a re-evaluation of work practices. Class solutions have the potential to produce highly conformal plans in a time-efficient manner.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using data from intermediate and high risk prostate cancer patients, a stepwise quality improvement model was employed. Stage 1 involved the development of a broadly based treatment template developed across 10 patients. Stage 2 involved template refinement and clinical audit (n = 20); Stage 3, template review (n = 50) and Stage 4 an assessment of a revised template against the actual treatment plan involving 72 patients.

RESULTS

The computer algorithm that comprised the Stage 4 template met clinical treatment criteria for 82% of patients. Minor template changes were required for a further 13% of patients. Major changes were required in 4%; one patient could not be assessed. The average calculation time was 13 min and involved seven mouse clicks by the planner. Thus, the new template met treatment criteria or required only minor changes in 95% of prostate patients; this is an encouraging result suggesting improvements in planning efficiency and consistency.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to develop a class solution for prostate IMRT using a stepwise quality improvement model which delivers clinically acceptable plans in the great majority of prostate cases.

Can we avoid high levels of dose escalation for high-risk prostate cancer in the setting of androgen deprivation?

Aim

Both dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (DE-EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. However, there is little evidence specifically evaluating DE-EBRT for patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving ADT, particularly for EBRT doses >74 Gy. We aimed to determine whether DE-EBRT >74 Gy improves outcomes for patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving long-term ADT.

Patients and methods

Patients with high-risk prostate cancer were treated on an institutional protocol prescribing 3–6 months neoadjuvant ADT and DE-EBRT, followed by 2 years of adjuvant ADT. Between 2006 and 2012, EBRT doses were escalated from 74 Gy to 76 Gy and then to 78 Gy. We interrogated our electronic medical record to identify these patients and analyzed our results by comparing dose levels.

Results

In all, 479 patients were treated with a 68-month median follow-up. The 5-year biochemical disease-free survivals for the 74 Gy, 76 Gy, and 78 Gy groups were 87.8%, 86.9%, and 91.6%, respectively. The metastasis-free survivals were 95.5%, 94.5%, and 93.9%, respectively, and the prostate cancer-specific survivals were 100%, 94.4%, and 98.1%, respectively. Dose escalation had no impact on any outcome in either univariate or multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

There was no benefit of DE-EBRT >74 Gy in our cohort of high-risk prostate patients treated with long-term ADT. As dose escalation has higher risks of radiotherapy-induced toxicity, it may be feasible to omit dose escalation beyond 74 Gy in this group of patients. Randomized studies evaluating dose escalation for high-risk patients receiving ADT should be considered.

Can we avoid dose escalation for intermediate-risk prostate cancer in the setting of short-course neoadjuvant androgen deprivation?

Background

Both dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (DE-EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve the outcomes in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Despite this, there are only few reports evaluating DE-EBRT for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer receiving neoadjuvant ADT, and virtually no studies investigating dose escalation >74 Gy in this setting. We aimed to determine whether DE-EBRT >74 Gy improved the outcomes for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received neoadjuvant ADT.

Findings

In our institution, patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated with neoadjuvant ADT and DE-EBRT, with doses sequentially increasing from 74 Gy to 76 Gy and then to 78 Gy between 2006 and 2012. We identified 435 patients treated with DE-EBRT and ADT, with a median follow-up of 70 months. For the 74 Gy, 76 Gy, and 78 Gy groups, five-year biochemical disease-free survival rates were 95.0%, 97.8%, and 95.3%, respectively; metastasis-free survival rates were 99.1%, 100.0%, and 98.6%, respectively; and prostate cancer-specific survival rate was 100% for all three dose levels. There was no significant benefit for dose escalation either on univariate or multivariate analysis for any outcome.

Conclusion

There was no benefit for DE-EBRT >74 Gy in our cohort of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Given the higher risks of toxicity associated with dose escalation, it may be feasible to omit dose escalation in this group of patients. Randomized studies evaluating dose de-escalation should be considered.

Tumor staging using 3.0 T multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer: impact on treatment decisions for radical radiotherapy

To assess and validate the incorporation of the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) tumour category (mT-category) to the conventional clinical tumour category (cT-category), in order to guide the radiotherapy (RT) treatment decisions in prostate cancer. In addition, to identify the clinical factors associated to the technique reliability. mpMRI was performed in 274 prostate cancer patients in order to refine the treatment decisions according to PSA, Gleason Score (GS) and cT-category. Comparisons between the cT and mT-category were performed, as well as the impact on the RT treatment [target volume, doses and hormonal therapy (HT)] independently if it was finally performed. Changes in HT indication for intermediate risk were also analyzed. mpMRI validation was performed with pathological staging (n = 90 patients finally decided to join surgery). The mpMRI upstaging range was 86-94 % for any PSA value or GS. Following mpMRI, 32.8 % of the patients (90/274) were assigned to a different risk group. Compared to cT-category, mpMRI identified more intermediate-risk (46.4 vs. 59.5 %) and high-risk (19.0 vs. 28.8 %) prostate cancer patients. This resulted in a higher indication (p < 0.05) of seminal vesicle irradiation (63.5 vs. 70.0 %), inclusion of any extracapsular disease (T3-T4) within the target volume (1.8 vs. 18.2 %), higher doses (65.3 vs. 88.3 %) and HT associated to RT (45.6 vs. 62.4 %). Global accuracy for mpMRI was higher compared to DRE/TRUS (8.9 vs. 71.1 %, p < 0.05). mpMRI reliability was independent of PSA or GS. mpMRI tumor staging significantly modified the RT treatment decisions in all prostate cancer risk groups.