Prostate cancer death is unlikely in high-risk patients following quality permanent interstitial brachytherapy

Long-term outcomes of high-dose-rate brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy without hormone therapy for high-risk localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Until March 2018, patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer had been administered high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) without additional hormone therapy (HT) at our institution. In this study, we aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes of this treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with prostate cancer who received HDR-BT and EBRT between April 1997 and March 2021 and who were followed up for at least 6 months were included in the study. High-risk groups were classified into five levels according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. The EBRT and HDR-BT doses were 39-45 Gy/13-25 fractions. and 16.5-22 Gy/2-4 fractions, respectively. None of the patients received HT during initial treatment. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate biochemical freedom from failure (bFFF), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) rates. Biochemical failure was also determined.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were enrolled in the study, with a median follow-up of 91.9 months. The median age and initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) level were 71 years and 10.95 ng/mL, respectively. The median biologically effective dose for HDR-BT plus EBRT was 270.3 Gy. The 5- and 7-year bFFF, CSS, and OS rates were 85.2 and 74.2%, 100 and 100%, and 95.7 and 91.9%, respectively. Only the iPSA ≤ 20 group was associated with the higher bFFF rate. The 7-year bFFF rates in the groups with iPSA ≤ 20 and iPSA > 20 were 86.6 and 48.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

HDR-BT plus EBRT without HT might be an alternative treatment option for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer and iPSA levels ≤ 20. Further studies are required to validate the efficacy of this treatment strategy.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy versus Brachytherapy: Relative Strengths of Two Highly Efficient Options for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a valid option for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In randomized trials, it was found not inferior to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). It also compares favorably to brachytherapy (BT) even if level 1 evidence is lacking. However, BT remains a strong competitor, especially for young patients, as series with 10-15 years of median follow-up have proven its efficacy over time. SBRT will thus have to confirm its effectiveness over the long-term as well. SBRT has the advantage over BT of less acute urinary toxicity and, more hypothetically, less sexual impairment. Data are limited regarding SBRT for high-risk disease while BT, as a boost after EBRT, has demonstrated superiority against EBRT alone in randomized trials. However, patients should be informed of significant urinary toxicity. SBRT is under investigation in strategies of treatment intensification such as combination of EBRT plus SBRT boost or focal dose escalation to the tumor site within the prostate. Our goal was to examine respective levels of evidence of SBRT and BT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicity and quality of life, and to discuss strategies of treatment intensification.

5-Aminolevulinic acid overcomes hypoxia-induced radiation resistance by enhancing mitochondrial reactive oxygen species production in prostate cancer cells

Background

The naturally occurring amino acid 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) is a precursor of protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) biosynthesised in the mitochondria. When accumulated PpIX is excited by light (wavelength of 625–635 nm), reactive oxygen species (ROS) are generated. Here, we investigated whether 5-ALA may increase the sensitisation of prostate cancer (PCA) cells to radiotherapy through the generation of ROS via its metabolite, PpIX.

Methods

Effect of 5-ALA on PC-3 and DU-145 PCA cell lines treated with ionising radiation (IR) was examined in vitro and in vivo with assessment by clonogenic assay, mitochondrial function and ROS production under normoxia or hypoxia condition.

Results

5-ALA enhanced intra-mitochondrial ROS production immediately after exposure to IR and decreased mitochondrial membrane potential via increase of intra-cellular PpIX. IR with 5-ALA induced mitochondrial dysfunction and increased ATP production, switching energy metabolism to the quiescence. Under hypoxic condition, ROS burst and mitochondrial dysfunction were induced by IR with 5-ALA resulting reducing cancer stemness and radiation resistance.

Conclusion

These results suggest that combined therapy with 5-ALA and radiation therapy is a novel strategy to improve the anti-cancer effects of radiation therapy for PCA.

Brachytherapy boost (BT-boost) or stereotactic body radiation therapy boost (SBRT-boost) for high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa)

Systematic review for the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa, D'Amico classification risk system) with external body radiation therapy (EBRT)+brachytherapy-boost (BT-boost) or with EBRT+stereotactic body RT-boost (SBRT-boost). In March 2020, 391 English citations on PubMed matched with search terms "high risk prostate cancer boost". Respectively 9 and 48 prospective and retrospective studies were on BT-boost and 7 retrospective studies were on SBRT-boost. Two SBRT-boost trials were prospective. Only one study (ASCENDE-RT) directly compared the gold standard treatment [dose-escalation (DE)-EBRT+androgen deprivation treatment (ADT)] versus EBRT+ADT+BT-boost. Biochemical control rates at 9 years were 83% in the experimental arm versus 63% in the standard arm. Cumulative incidence of late grade 3 urinary toxicity in the experimental arm and in the standard arm was respectively 18% and 5%. Two recent studies with HR-PCa (National Cancer Database) demonstrated better overall survival with BT-boost (low dose rate LDR or high dose rate HDR) compared with DE-EBRT. These recent findings demonstrate the superiority of EBRT+BT-boost+ADT versus DE-EBRT+ADT for HR-PCa. It seems that EBRT+BT-boost+ADT could now be considered as a gold standard treatment for HR-PCa. HDR or LDR are options. SBRT-boost represents an attractive alternative, but the absence of randomised trials does not allow us to conclude for HR-PCa. Prospective randomised international phase III trials or meta-analyses could improve the level of evidence of SBRT-boost for HR-PCa.

American Brachytherapy Society Task Group Report: Use of androgen deprivation therapy with prostate brachytherapy-A systematic literature review

PURPOSE

Prostate brachytherapy (PB) has well-documented excellent long-term outcomes in all risk groups. There are significant uncertainties regarding the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with brachytherapy. The purpose of this report was to review systemically the published literature and summarize present knowledge regarding the impact of ADT on biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A literature search was conducted in Medline and Embase covering the years 1996-2016. Selected were articles with >100 patients, minimum followup 3 years, defined risk stratification, and directly examining the role and impact of ADT on bPFS, CSS, and OS. The studies were grouped to reflect disease risk stratification. We also reviewed the impact of ADT on OS, cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, and on-going brachytherapy randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Fifty-two selected studies (43,303 patients) were included in this review; 7 high-dose rate and 45 low-dose rate; 25 studies were multi-institutional and 27 single institution (retrospective review or prospective data collection) and 2 were RCTs. The studies were heterogeneous in patient population, risk categories, risk factors, followup time, and treatment administered, including ADT administration and duration (median, 3-12 months);71% of the studies reported a lack of benefit, whereas 28% showed improvement in bPFS with addition of ADT to PB. The lack of benefit was seen in low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk (IR) disease and most high-dose rate studies. A bPFS benefit of up to 15% was seen with ADT use in patients with suboptimal dosimetry, those with multiple adverse risk factors (unfavorable IR [uIR]), and most high-risk (HR) studies. Four studies reported very small benefit to CSS (2%). None of the studies showed OS advantage; however, three studies reported an absolute 5-20% OS detriment with ADT. Literature suggests that OS detriment is more likely in older patients or those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Four RCTs with an adequate number of patients and well-defined risk stratification are in progress. One RCT will answer the question regarding the role of ADT with PB in favorable IR patients and the other three RCTs will focus on optimal duration of ADT in the uIR and favorable HR population.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with brachytherapy have excellent long-term disease outcomes. Existing evidence shows no benefit of adding ADT to PB in low-risk and favorable IR patients. UIR and HR patients and those with suboptimal dosimetry may have up to 15% improvement in bPFS with addition of 3-12 months of ADT, with uncertain impact on CSS and a potential detriment on OS. To minimize morbidity, one should exercise caution in prescribing ADT together with PB, in particular to older men and those with existing cardiovascular disease. Due to the retrospective nature of this evidence, significant selection, and treatment bias, no definitive conclusions are possible. RCT is urgently needed to define the potential role and optimal duration of ADT in uIR and favorable HR disease.

ACR appropriateness criteria: Permanent source brachytherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To provide updated American College of Radiology (ACR) appropriateness criteria for transrectal ultrasound-guided transperineal interstitial permanent source brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The ACR appropriateness criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

RESULTS

Permanent prostate brachytherapy (PPB) is a treatment option for appropriately selected patients with localized prostate cancer with low to very high risk disease. PPB monotherapy remains an appropriate and effective curative treatment for low-risk prostate cancer patients demonstrating excellent long-term cancer control and acceptable morbidity. PPB monotherapy can be considered for select intermediate-risk patients with multiparametric MRI useful in evaluation of such patients. High-risk patients treated with PPB should receive supplemental external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) along with androgen deprivation. Similarly, patients with involved pelvic lymph nodes may also be considered for such combined treatment but reported long-term outcomes are limited. Computed tomography-based postimplant dosimetry completed within 60 days of PPB is essential for quality assurance. PPB may be considered for treatment of local recurrence after EBRT but is associated with an increased risk of toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Updated appropriateness criteria for patient evaluation, selection, treatment, and postimplant dosimetry are given. These criteria are intended to be advisory only with the final responsibility for patient care residing with the treating clinicians.

American Brachytherapy Society Task Group Report: Combination of brachytherapy and external beam radiation for high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To review outcomes for high-risk prostate cancer treated with combined modality radiation therapy (CMRT) utilizing external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with a brachytherapy boost.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The available literature for high-risk prostate cancer treated with combined modality radiation therapy was reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

At this time, the literature suggests that the majority of high-risk cancers are curable with multimodal treatment. Several large retrospective studies and three prospective randomized trials comparing CMRT to dose-escalated EBRT have demonstrated superior biochemical control with CMRT. Longer followup of the randomized trials will be required to determine if this will translate to a benefit in metastasis-free survival, disease-specific survival, and overall survival. Although greater toxicity has been associated with CMRT compared to EBRT, recent studies suggest that technological advances that allow better definition and sparing of critical adjacent structures as well as increasing experience with brachytherapy have improved implant quality and the toxicity profile of brachytherapy. The role of androgen deprivation therapy is well established in the external beam literature for high-risk disease, but there is controversy regarding the applicability of these data in the setting of dose escalation. At this time, there is not sufficient evidence for the omission of androgen deprivation therapy with dose escalation in this population. Comparisons with surgery remain limited by differences in patient selection, but the evidence would suggest better disease control with CMRT compared to surgery alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to a series of technological advances, modern combination series have demonstrated unparalleled rates of disease control in the high-risk population. Given the evidence from recent randomized trials, combination therapy may become the standard of care for high-risk cancers.

Significant association of brachytherapy boost with reduced prostate cancer-specific mortality in contemporary patients with localized, unfavorable-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

A randomized trial recently found that adding brachytherapy (BT) boost to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) improves biochemical recurrence-free survival but not prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). We investigated the relationship between BT boost and PCSM in a modern cohort from a large population-based database.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We conducted an analysis of patients in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results diagnosed with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer in 2004-2011, treated with EBRT only or EBRT + BT. The cumulative incidence of PCSM was evaluated in the presence of other-cause mortality as a competing risk. Propensity score matching and multivariable Fine and Gray proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association of combined modality RT on PCSM.

RESULTS

A total of 52,535 patients were identified, of which 19.6% were treated with EBRT + BT. One-third of cases were high-risk. On multivariable analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) of PCSM for EBRT + BT vs. EBRT alone was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.87, p = 0.002), and the adjusted incidence of PCSM was 1.8% vs. 2.7% at 8 years, respectively. In subgroup analyses, the AHR for PCSM was also significantly reduced with EBRT + BT for high-risk disease (AHR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.94, p = 0.02; adjusted incidence of PCSM at 8 years, 5.4% vs. 7.6%), but not for intermediate-risk disease.

CONCLUSIONS

BT boost was associated with a moderate reduction to PCSM in men with localized unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Those most likely to benefit are younger patients with high-risk disease.

The impact of diabetes mellitus on survival in men with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with permanent interstitial brachytherapy

PURPOSE

Patients with cancer of any origin with preexisting diabetes mellitus (DM) are at increased risk for all-cause mortality compared with those without DM. However, the influence of DM on biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) has not been clearly defined for men with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From April 1995 to May 2006, 1624 consecutive patients underwent brachytherapy with or without supplemental therapies. A prebrachytherapy diagnosis of diabetes was present in 199 patients (12.3%). Median follow-up was 7.8 years. Cause of death was determined for each deceased patient. Patients with metastatic prostate cancer or castrate-resistant disease without obvious metastases who died of any cause were classified as dead of prostate cancer. All other deaths were attributed to the immediate cause of death.

RESULTS

In patients without (n=1425) and with (n=199) DM, CSS was 97.2% versus 100% (P=0.168), bPFS was 95.6% versus 95.7% (P=0.960), and OS was 77.3% versus 56.0% at 12 years (P=0.003). In Cox regression analysis, OS in nondiabetic patients was most closely related to patient age, coronary artery disease, tobacco consumption, and androgen deprivation. In patients with diabetes, OS was related to patient age and coronary artery disease. In patients without diabetes, CSS was associated with Gleason score and clinical stage. No patient with diabetes died of prostate cancer. Patients with DM were more likely to die of cardiovascular disease (17.8% vs. 12.4%, P=0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

DM does not impact CSS or bPFS after brachytherapy. OS is significantly lower in patients with diabetes due to more deaths from cardiovascular disease.

Patient-reported long-term rectal function after permanent interstitial brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of permanent interstitial brachytherapy with or without supplemental therapies on long-term rectal function using a patient-administered quality-of-life instrument.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred thirty four of the initial 219 prostate brachytherapy patients who remain alive and have participated in a prospective evaluation of rectal function were mailed the rectal function assessment score (R-FAS). Of the 134 patients, 3 have a colostomy because of colorectal cancer, 2 failed to respond, and 129 (99.2% of eligible patients) returned a completed R-FAS. R-FAS ranges from 0 to 27 with lower scores indicative of better bowel function. Median followup was 14 years. Multiple clinical, treatment, and dosimetric parameters were evaluated for impact on bowel function.

RESULTS

For the current cohort, R-FAS was 3.35, which was comparable to the 1999 (4.29), 2002 (3.92), and 2006 (4.00) surveys. In the 2011 survey, 10 (7.8%), 17 (13.1%), and 102 (78.3%) patients reported bowel function to be worse, improved, or unchanged after brachytherapy. No patient has developed a rectal ulcer or fistula. The number of preimplant bowel movements, tobacco, and diabetes mellitus correlated with R-FAS. Consistent with the previous thee surveys, patient's perception of overall rectal quality of life was inversely related to the use of supplemental external beam radiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term rectal function after prostate brachytherapy is favorable with a small number of patients reporting deterioration in bowel function. The judicious use of supplemental external beam radiation with particular attention to rectal doses may further improve long-term function.

Predictors of the use of supplemental androgen suppression therapy and external beam radiation in men with high-risk prostate cancer undergoing brachytherapy in community practice

PURPOSE

We assessed clinical- and practice-related variables associated with the use of trimodality treatment (androgen suppression therapy, external beam radiation therapy, and brachytherapy) in a community-based cohort of men with high-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The study cohort was composed of 1342 men with a prostate-specific antigen level >20ng/mL, clinical tumor stage T3 or T4, and/or Gleason score 8-10 disease at two community radiation facilities, Chicago Prostate Cancer Center (Chicago PCC) and 21st Century Oncology (21C). Logistic regression multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors associated with trimodality treatment.

RESULTS

Of 1342 men treated from 1991 to 2005, 650 (48%) received trimodality therapy. Factors associated with trimodality use include younger age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.95, p<0.0001), increasing prostate-specific antigen (AOR 1.54, p<0.0001), Gleason score 7 (AOR 2.88, p<0.0001), Gleason score 8-10 (AOR 4.28, p<0.0001), clinical category T2 (AOR 1.40, p=0.012), clinical category T3 (AOR 4.84, p<0.0001), and year of brachytherapy (AOR 1.13, p<0.0001). Patients treated at 21C were 4.6 times more likely to receive trimodality therapy (p<0.0001) than Chicago PCC. There was a significant interaction between cardiovascular comorbidity status and site (comorbidity×21C, AOR 1.74, p=0.025), indicating that less healthy patients were more likely to receive trimodality treatment at 21C than healthy patients and vice versa at Chicago PCC.

CONCLUSIONS

Younger men and those with more aggressive pretreatment clinical factors were more likely to receive trimodality treatment in this community cohort of men with high-risk prostate cancer. Selection for trimodality use varied significantly by site indicating a need for treatment standardization in the community.