4
|
Harmon SA, Perk T, Lin C, Eickhoff J, Choyke PL, Dahut WL, Apolo AB, Humm JL, Larson SM, Morris MJ, Liu G, Jeraj R. Quantitative Assessment of Early [ 18F]Sodium Fluoride Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Response to Treatment in Men With Metastatic Prostate Cancer to Bone. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35:2829-2837. [PMID: 28654366 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.72.2348] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose [18F]Sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is a promising radiotracer for quantitative assessment of bone metastases. This study assesses changes in early NaF PET/CT response measures in metastatic prostate cancer for correlation to clinical outcomes. Patients and Methods Fifty-six patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with osseous metastases had NaF PET/CT scans performed at baseline and after three cycles of chemotherapy (n = 16) or androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (n = 40). A novel technology, Quantitative Total Bone Imaging, was used for analysis. Global imaging metrics, including maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) and total functional burden (SUVtotal), were extracted from composite lesion-level statistics for each patient and tracked throughout treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated as a composite end point of progressive events using conventional imaging and/or physician discretion of clinical benefit; NaF imaging was not used for clinical evaluation. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were conducted between imaging metrics and PFS. Results Functional burden (SUVtotal) assessed midtreatment was the strongest univariable PFS predictor (hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.71; P < .001). Classification of patients based on changes in functional burden showed stronger correlation to PFS than did the change in number of lesions. Various global imaging metrics outperformed baseline clinical markers in predicting outcome, including SUVtotal and SUVmean. No differences in imaging response or PFS correlates were found for different treatment cohorts. Conclusion Quantitative total bone imaging enables comprehensive disease quantification on NaF PET/CT imaging, showing strong correlation to clinical outcomes. Total functional burden assessed after three cycles of hormonal therapy or chemotherapy was predictive of PFS for men with mCRPC. This supports ongoing development of NaF PET/CT-based imaging biomarkers in mCRPC to bone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie A Harmon
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Timothy Perk
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Christie Lin
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Jens Eickhoff
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - William L Dahut
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Andrea B Apolo
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - John L Humm
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Steven M Larson
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Michael J Morris
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Glenn Liu
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| | - Robert Jeraj
- Stephanie A. Harmon, Timothy Perk, Christie Lin, Jens Eickhoff, Glenn Liu, and Robert Jeraj, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Glenn Liu and Robert Jeraj, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, Madison, WI; Peter L. Choyke, William L. Dahut, and Andrea B. Apolo, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; John L. Humm, Steven M. Larson, and Michael J. Morris, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and Steven M. Larson and Michael J. Morris, Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Alghamdi M, Taggar A, Tilley D, Kerba M, Kostaras X, Gotto G, Sia M. An audit of referral and treatment patterns of high-risk prostate cancer patients in Alberta. Can Urol Assoc J 2017; 10:410-415. [PMID: 28096916 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.3910] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We aimed to determine the impact of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) on rates of radiation oncologist (RO) referral, androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), radiation therapy (RT), and radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa). METHODS All men >18 years, diagnosed with PCa in 2005 and 2012 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Patient age, aggregated clinical risk group (ACRG) score, Gleason score (GS), pre-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA), RO referral, and treatment received were extracted from electronic medical records. Logistic regression modelling was used to examine associations between RO referral rates and relevant factors. RESULTS HR-PCa was diagnosed in 261 of 1792 patients in 2005 and 435 of 2148 in 2012. Median age and ACRG scores were similar in both years (p>0.05). The rate of patients with PSA >20 were 67% and 57% in 2005 and 2012, respectively (p=0.004). GS ≤6 was found in 13% vs. 5% of patients, GS 7 in 27% vs. 24%, and GS ≥8 in 59% vs. 71% in 2005 and 2012, respectively (p<0.001). In 2005, RO referral rate was 68% compared to 56% in 2012 (p=0.001), use of RT + ADT was 53% compared to 32% (p<0.001), and RP rate was 9% vs. 17% (p=0.002). On regression analysis, older age, 2012 year of diagnosis and higher PSA were associated with decreased RO referral rates (odds ratios [OR] 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.61; OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.76; and OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39-0.61), respectively [p<0.001]). CONCLUSIONS Since CPG creation in 2005, RO referral rates and ADT + RT use declined and RP rates increased, which demonstrates a need to improve adherence to CPG in the HR-PCa population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Majed Alghamdi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Calgary and Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada; Albaha University, Albaha, Saudi Arabia
| | - Amandeep Taggar
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Calgary and Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Derek Tilley
- CancerControl, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Marc Kerba
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Calgary and Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | | - Geoffrey Gotto
- Division of Urology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Michael Sia
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Calgary and Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|