Impact of hormonal treatment duration in combination with radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: meta-analysis of randomized trials

Whole pelvis vs. hemi pelvis elective nodal radiotherapy in patients with PSMA-positive nodal recurrence after radical prostatectomy - a retrospective multi-institutional propensity score analysis

PURPOSE

Despite growing evidence for bilateral pelvic radiotherapy (whole pelvis RT, WPRT) there is almost no data on unilateral RT (hemi pelvis RT, HPRT) in patients with nodal recurrent prostate cancer after prostatectomy. Nevertheless, in clinical practice HPRT is sometimes used with the intention to reduce side effects compared to WPRT. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography / computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) is currently the best imaging modality in this clinical situation. This analysis compares PSMA-PET/CT based WPRT and HPRT.

METHODS

A propensity score matching was performed in a multi-institutional retrospective dataset of 273 patients treated with pelvic RT due to nodal recurrence (214 WPRT, 59 HPRT). In total, 102 patients (51 in each group) were included in the final analysis. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) defined as prostate specific antigen (PSA) < post-RT nadir + 0.2ng/ml, metastasis-free survival (MFS) and nodal recurrence-free survival (NRFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log rank test.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 29 months. After propensity matching, both groups were mostly well balanced. However, in the WPRT group there were still significantly more patients with additional local recurrences and biochemical persistence after prostatectomy. There were no significant differences between both groups in BRFS (p = .97), MFS (p = .43) and NRFS (p = .43). After two years, BRFS, MFS and NRFS were 61%, 86% and 88% in the WPRT group and 57%, 90% and 82% in the HPRT group, respectively. Application of a boost to lymph node metastases, a higher RT dose to the lymphatic pathways (> 50 Gy EQD2α/β=1.5 Gy) and concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were significantly associated with longer BRFS in uni- and multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this analysis presents the outcome of HPRT in nodal recurrent prostate cancer patients and shows that it can result in a similar oncologic outcome compared to WPRT. Nevertheless, patients in the WPRT may have been at a higher risk for progression due to some persistent imbalances between the groups. Therefore, further research should prospectively evaluate which subgroups of patients are suitable for HPRT and if HPRT leads to a clinically significant reduction in toxicity.

A prospective study of the effect of testosterone escape on preradiotherapy prostate-specific antigen kinetics in prostate cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy

Introduction

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetic patterns during neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy have been shown to predict unfavorable long-term outcomes.

Objective

To investigate the effect of testosterone escape (TE) on these kinetic patterns, as this had not been previously reported.

Methods

There were 50 consecutive prostate cancer patients who received 6 months of triptorelin prior to definitive radiotherapy (RT). Testosterone and PSA levels were measured at baseline and every 6 weeks. Clinical factors were tested for their ability to predict for TE and unfavorable PSA kinetic patterns. The effects of TE, at both 1.7 and 0.7 nmol/L levels, were analyzed.

Results

TE occurred in at least one reading for 14% and 34% of the patients at the 1.7 and 0.7 nmol/L levels, respectively. No baseline factors predicted TE. The median PSA halving time was 25 days and the median pre-RT PSA level was 0.55 ng/mL. The only factor significantly associated with a higher pre-RT PSA level was a higher baseline PSA level. The only factor that significantly predicted a longer PSA halving time was TE at the 1.7 nmol/L level.

Conclusions

TE and higher baseline PSA levels may adversely affect PSA kinetics and other outcomes for patients undergoing neoadjuvant hormone therapy prior to radiotherapy. Studies investigating the tailoring of neoadjuvant therapy by extending the duration in those patients with a higher baseline PSA level or by the addition of anti-androgens in those demonstrating TE, should be considered.

Saudi Oncology Society and Saudi Urology Association combined clinical management guidelines for prostate cancer 2017

This is an update to the previously published Saudi guidelines for the evaluation and medical and surgical management of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is categorized according to the stage of the disease using the tumor node metastasis staging system 7^th edition. The guidelines are presented with supporting evidence levels based on a comprehensive literature review, several internationally recognized guidelines, and the collective expertise of the guidelines committee members (authors) who were selected by the Saudi Oncology Society and Saudi Urological Association. Local factors, such as availability, logistic feasibility, and familiarity of various treatment modalities, have been taken into consideration. These guidelines should serve as a roadmap for the urologists, oncologists, general physicians, support groups, and health-care policymakers in the management of patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

Saudi Oncology Society and Saudi Urology Association combined clinical management guidelines for prostate cancer 2017

This is an update to the previously published Saudi guidelines for the evaluation and medical and surgical management of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is categorized according to the stage of the disease using the tumor node metastasis staging system 7^th edition. The guidelines are presented with supporting evidence levels based on a comprehensive literature review, several internationally recognized guidelines, and the collective expertise of the guidelines committee members (authors) who were selected by the Saudi Oncology Society and Saudi Urological Association. Local factors, such as availability, logistic feasibility, and familiarity of various treatment modalities, have been taken into consideration. These guidelines should serve as a roadmap for the urologists, oncologists, general physicians, support groups, and health-care policymakers in the management of patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

Saudi oncology society and Saudi urology association combined clinical management guidelines for prostate cancer

This is an update to the previously published Saudi guidelines for the evaluation, medical, and surgical management of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. It is categorized according to the stage of the disease using the tumor node metastasis staging system 7(th) edition. The guidelines are presented with supporting evidence level, they are based on comprehensive literature review, several internationally recognized guidelines, and the collective expertise of the guidelines committee members (authors) who were selected by the Saudi oncology society and Saudi urological association. Considerations to the local availability of drugs, technology, and expertise have been regarded. These guidelines should serve as a roadmap for the urologists, oncologists, general physicians, support groups, and health care policy makers in the management of patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the prostate to.

Patient-reported 'ever had' and 'current' long-term physical symptoms after prostate cancer treatments

Objective

To investigate the prevalence of physical symptoms that were ‘ever’ and ‘currently’ experienced by survivors of prostate cancer at a population level, to assess burden and thus inform policy to support survivors.

Patients and Methods

The study included 3 348 men surviving prostate cancer for 2–18 years after diagnosis. A cross‐sectional, postal survey of 6 559 survivors diagnosed 2–18 years ago with primary, invasive prostate cancer (ICD10‐C61) identified via national, population‐based cancer registries in Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland. Questions included symptoms at diagnosis, primary treatments and physical symptoms (erectile dysfunction [ED]/urinary incontinence [UI]/bowel problems/breast changes/loss of libido/hot flashes/fatigue) experienced ‘ever’ and at questionnaire completion (‘current’). Symptom proportions were weighted by age, country and time since diagnosis. Bonferroni corrections were applied for multiple comparisons.

Results

Adjusted response rate 54%; 75% reported at least one ‘current’ physical symptom (‘ever’ 90%), with 29% reporting at least three. Prevalence varied by treatment. Overall, 57% reported current ED and this was highest after radical prostatectomy (RP, 76%) followed by external beam radiotherapy with concurrent hormone therapy (HT, 64%). UI (overall ‘current’ 16%) was highest after RP (‘current’ 28%; ‘ever’ 70%). While 42% of brachytherapy patients reported no ‘current’ symptoms, 43% reported ‘current’ ED and 8% ‘current’ UI. ‘Current’ hot flashes (41%), breast changes (18%) and fatigue (28%) were reported more often by patients on HT.

Conclusion

Symptoms after prostate cancer treatment are common, often multiple, persist long‐term and vary by treatment method. They represent a significant health burden. An estimated 1.6% of men aged >45 years are survivors of prostate cancer and currently experiencing an adverse physical symptom. Recognition and treatment of physical symptoms should be prioritised in patient follow‐up. This information should facilitate men and clinicians when deciding about treatment as differences in survival between radical treatments is minimal.

The early result of whole pelvic radiotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy boost for high-risk localized prostate cancer

Purpose: The rationale for hypofractionated radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer is based on the modern understanding of radiobiology and advances in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) techniques. Whole-pelvis irradiation combined with SBRT boost for high-risk prostate cancer might escalate biologically effective dose without increasing toxicity. Here, we report our 4-year results of SBRT boost for high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Methods and Materials: From October 2009 to August 2012, 41 patients newly diagnosed, high-risk or very high-risk (NCCN definition) localized prostate cancer were treated with whole-pelvis irradiation and SBRT boost. The whole pelvis dose was 45 Gy (25 fractions of 1.8 Gy). The SBRT boost dose was 21 Gy (three fractions of 7 Gy). Ninety percent of these patients received hormone therapy. The toxicities of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) tracts were scored by Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Effect (CTCAE v3.0). Biochemical failure was defined by Phoenix definition.

Results: Median follow-up was 42 months. Mean PSA before treatment was 44.18 ng/ml. Mean PSA level at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was 0.94, 0.44, 0.13, 0.12, and 0.05 ng/ml, respectively. The estimated 4-year biochemical failure-free survival was 91.9%. Three biochemical failures were observed. GI and GU tract toxicities were minimal. No grade 3 acute GU or GI toxicity was noted. During radiation therapy, 27% of the patient had grade 2 acute GU toxicity and 12% had grade 2 acute GI toxicity. At 3 months, most toxicity scores had returned to baseline. At the last follow-up, there was no grade 3 late GU or GI toxicity.

Conclusions: Whole-pelvis irradiation combined with SBRT boost for high-risk localized prostate cancer is feasible with minimal toxicity and encouraging biochemical failure-free survival. Continued accrual and follow-up would be necessary to confirm the biochemical control rate and the toxicity profiles.

Efficacy and toxicity of external-beam radiation therapy for localised prostate cancer: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many radiation regimens for treating prostate cancer have been used over the years, but which regimen is optimal for localised or locally advanced prostate cancer lacks consensus. We performed a network meta-analysis to identify the optimal radiation regimen.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed data from 27 randomised controlled trials and could group seven radiation regimens as follows: low- and high-dose radiation therapy (LDRT and HDRT), LDRT+ short- or long-term androgen deprivation therapy (LDRT+SADT and LDRT+LADT), HDRT+SADT, hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT), and HFRT+SADT. The main outcomes were overall mortality (OM), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure, cancer-specific mortality, and adverse events.

RESULTS

For the network meta-analysis of 27 trials, LDRT+LADT and LDRT+SADT were associated with decreased risk of OM as compared with LDRT alone as was LDRT+LADT compared with HDRT. Apart from HFRT, all other treatments were associated with decreased risk of PSA failure as compared with LDRT. HFRT+SADT was associated with decreased risk of cancer-specific mortality as compared with HFRT, LDRT+SADT, HDRT, and LDRT.

CONCLUSIONS

HFRT+SADT therapy might be the most efficacious treatment but with worst toxicity for localised or locally advanced prostate cancer, and HDRT showed excellent efficacy but more adverse events.

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

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and second most common cause of cancer death in American men. Although high-risk disease accounts for less than 15% of diagnoses, high-risk prostate cancer patients have a cancer-specific mortality rate of 15% at 10 years. There is currently no consensus on the optimal management of high-risk disease because (1) there are different primary modalities available (ie, surgery, radiation), for which there are no randomized trials comparing efficacy; and (2) unstandardized timing of different therapies (ie, neoadjuvant v concurrent v adjuvant), which makes comparisons of efficacy problematic. Increased understanding into the mechanisms leading to the formation of advanced metastatic disease has spurred the development of agents to target these pathways. However, new questions regarding optimal management of disease arise with regard to the role of these therapies in combination with "conventional" primary modalities for earlier stage, high-risk prostate cancer patients. In this article, we review the transforming world of multimodality therapy in high-risk prostate cancer.

Adjuvant leuprolide with or without docetaxel in patients with high-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (TAX-3501): important lessons for future trials

BACKGROUND

The current trial evaluated 2 common therapies for patients with advanced prostate cancer, docetaxel and hormonal therapy (HT), in the surgical adjuvant setting.

METHODS

TAX-3501 was a randomized, phase 3, adjuvant study post-radical prostatectomy (RP) in high-risk patients with prostate cancer (n=228) comparing 18 months of HT with (CHT) without docetaxel chemotherapy either immediately (I) or deferred (D). High-risk disease was defined as a 5-year freedom-from-disease-progression rate of ≤ 60% as predicted by a post-RP nomogram. Progression-free survival (PFS), including prostate-specific antigen disease recurrence, was the primary endpoint. The authors also assessed the accuracy of the nomogram and analyzed testosterone recovery in 108 patients treated with HT who had at least 1 posttreatment testosterone value.

RESULTS

Between December 2005 and September 2007, 228 patients were randomized between the treatment cohorts. TAX-3501 was terminated prematurely because of enrollment challenges, leaving it underpowered to detect differences in PFS. After a median follow-up of 3.4 years (interquartile range, 2.3-3.8 years), 39 of 228 patients (17%) demonstrated PSA disease progression, and metastatic disease progression occurred in 1 patient. The median time to baseline testosterone recovery after the completion of treatment was prolonged at 487 days (95% confidence interval, 457-546 days). The nomogram's predicted versus observed freedom from disease progression was significantly different for the combination D(HT) and D(CHT) group (P<.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

TAX-3501 illustrated several difficulties involved in conducting postoperative adjuvant systemic trials in men with high-risk prostate cancer: the lack of consensus regarding patient selection and treatment, the need for long follow-up time, nonvalidated intermediate endpoints, evolving standard approaches, and the need for long-term research support. Except for selected patients at very high-risk of disease recurrence and death, surgical adjuvant trials in patients with prostate cancer may not be feasible.

Short-term versus long-term hormone therapy plus radiotherapy or prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of short-term versus long-term hormonotherapy (HT) plus radiotherapy (RT) or prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer.

METHODS

Literatures were searched from Embase, PubMed, Web of science and Cochrane Library up to October, 2012. Quality of the study was evaluated according to the Cochrane's risk of bias of randomized controlled trial (RCT); the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System was used to rate the level of evidence. RevMan 5.1 was used for statistical analysis. Two comparisons were of interest: RT plus short-term HT versus RT plus long-term HT and RP plus short-term HT versus RP plus long-term HT. Pooled risk ratio or standardized mean differences were calculated; HT adverse reactions were descriptively evaluated.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs (total 4,743 patients) were included, 7 RCTs compared RT plus short-term HT with RT plus long-term HT, 2 RCTs compared RP plus short-term HT with RP plus long-term HT. Meta-analysis showed there was no significant difference in overall survival, disease-free survival and PSA level before RP; long-term was superior to short-term hormonotherapy in biochemical failure rate, clinical progression rate, prostate cancer-specific mortality, positive surgical margin rate and prostate volume before RP. Systematic review demonstrated adverse events caused by the increased length of HT were more common.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term HT plus RT showed a trend toward improved overall survival; long-term HT plus RP declined positive surgical margin rate and prostate volume before RP. So, long-term HT may benefit more, but it did not significantly improve the patients' overall survival, and the adverse reactions are inevitable.

[Radiotherapy in case of locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term follow-up in 223 patients]

AIM OF THE STUDY

To evaluate the long-term follow-up in patients undergoing external beam radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From November 1999 to January 2007, 223 patients with a histologic diagnosis (204 transperineal needle biopsies; 19 trans-urethral prostatic resections) of locally advanced prostate cancer underwent external beam radiotherapy; of these patients, 151 were T3a (extracapsular extension) and 72 were T3b (involvement of seminal vesicles); the extracapsular extension was demonstrated using pelvic RMN or transrectal ultrasound, while the presence of distant and lymph node metastases was excluded using TC total body or bone scan. PSA value at diagnosis was 29.1 ng/mL (0.4-379 ng/mL). Radiotherapy was used on prostate and seminal vesicles in 201 patients (141 T3a; 60 T3b) while in 22 patients (10 T3a; 12 T3b) it was extended to the pelvis. Biochemical recurrence was defined using ASTRO definition (three consecutive PSA rises after PSA nadir); no patients underwent control prostate needle biopsy for problems of interpretation related to postactinic tissue changes. All complications were recorded and analyzed using Radiation Morbidity Scoring Criteria (RTOG).

RESULTS

At a mean 55-month follow-up, of the 223 patients treated, 26 have escaped controls, 168 are alive (141 disease-free; 27 with recurrent disease) and 29 died; of this group, 11 patients died from clinical progression, while in the others the cause was not related to the prostatic problem; only one patient died from iatrogenic problems. Hormone treatment was conducted in different ways (neoadjuvant, adjuvant, concurrent to radiotherapy or in association) considering patients' characteristics. Most common complications involved rectum and bladder.


CONCLUSIONS

Radiotherapy is a viable and safe method in the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer; however, it is essential the role of hormone therapy.

[Radiotherapy with androgen deprivation in high-risk prostate cancer: what outcomes on a Caribbean population?]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze in a Caribbean population at 90% of African descent, the results of radiotherapy with androgen deprivation (AD) in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-nine consecutive patients with a high-risk PCa as defined by the D'AMICO classification and treated by radiotherapy with AD between January 2003 and April 2009 in our center were analyzed. The median dose of radiation and the median duration of AD were 70Gy and 37months respectively. Biochemical recurrence (BF), as primary outcome was defined according to the PHOENIX criteria (nadir PSA+2ng/mL). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictive factors of BF. The median follow-up was 47months.

RESULTS

Eight (13.6%) patients had BF and four (6.8%) developed metastases. Six (10.2%) died during the follow-up. The 5years acturial biochemical disease-free survival was 79.7%. Multivariate analyses have shown that Gleason sum (GS) superior to 7 (P=0.029), AD duration less than 24months (P=0.004) and the rate of Nadir PSA greater or equal to 0.5ng/mL (P=0.011) were independent predictive factors of BF.

CONCLUSION

This study was the first to our knowledge, to provide that radiotherapy associate with AD for HRPC among Caribbean men is effective as observed in other populations. Patients with GS superior to 7 could be considered for more aggressive treatments in clinical trials.

Androgen deprivation therapy in combination with radiotherapy for high-risk clinically localized prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has remained the main therapeutic option for patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) for about 70 years. Several reports and our findings revealed that aggressive PCa can occur under a low dihydrotestosterone (DHT) level environment where the PCa of a low malignancy with high DHT dependency cannot easily occur. Low DHT levels in the prostate with aggressive PCa are probably sufficient to propagate the growth of the tumor, and the prostate with aggressive PCa can produce androgens from the adrenal precursors more autonomously than that with non-aggressive PCa does under the low testosterone environment with testicular suppression. In patients treated with ADT the pituitary-adrenal axis mediated by adrenocorticotropic hormone has a central role in the regulation of androgen synthesis. Several experimental studies have confirmed the potential benefits from the combination of ADT with radiotherapy (RT). A combination of external RT with short-term ADT is recommended based on the results of phase III randomized trials. In contrast, the combination of RT plus 6 months of ADT provides inferior survival as compared with RT plus 3 years of ADT in the treatment of locally advanced PCa. Notably, randomized trials included patients with diverse risk groups treated with older RT modalities, a variety of ADT scheduling and duration and, importantly, suboptimal RT doses. The use of ADT with higher doses of RT or newer RT modalities has to be properly assessed.

Preventability of cancer: the relative contributions of biologic and social and physical environmental determinants of cancer mortality

Whereas models of cancer disparities and variation in cancer burden within population groups now specify multiple levels of action from biologic processes to individual risk factors and social and physical contextual factors, approaches to estimating the preventable proportion of cancer use more traditional direct models often from single exposures to cancer at specific organ sites. These approaches are reviewed, and the strengths and limitations are presented. The need for additional multilevel data and approaches to estimation of preventability are identified. International or regional variation in cancer may offer the most integrated exposure assessment over the life course. For the four leading cancers, which account for 50% of incidence and mortality, biologic, social, and physical environments play differing roles in etiology and potential prevention. Better understanding of the interactions and contributions across these levels will help refine prevention strategies.

HDR Brachytherapy in the Management of High-Risk Prostate Cancer

High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy is used with increasing frequency for the treatment of prostate cancer. It is a technique which allows delivery of large individual fractions to the prostate without exposing adjacent normal tissues to unacceptable toxicity. This approach is particularly favourable in prostate cancer where tumours are highly sensitive to dose escalation and to increases in radiotherapy fraction size, due to the unique radiobiological behaviour of prostate cancers in contrast with other malignancies. In this paper we discuss the rationale and the increasing body of clinical evidence for the use of this technique in patients with high-risk prostate cancer, where it is combined with external beam radiotherapy. We highlight practical aspects of delivering treatment and discuss toxicity and limitations, with particular reference to current practice in the United Kingdom.

Androgenic suppression combined with radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate adenocarcinoma: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced prostate cancer is often associated with elevated recurrence rates. Despite the modest response observed, external-beam radiotherapy has been the preferred treatment for this condition. More recent evidence from randomised trials has demonstrated clinical benefit with the combined use of androgen suppression in such cases. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the combination of distinct hormone therapy modalities versus radiotherapy alone for overall survival, disease-free survival and toxicity.

METHODS

Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov) were scanned for randomised clinical trials involving radiotherapy with or without androgen suppression in local prostate cancer. The search strategy included articles published until October 2011. The studies were examined and the data of interest were plotted for meta-analysis. Survival outcomes were reported as a hazard ratio with corresponding 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Data from ten trials published from 1988 to 2011 were included, comprising 6555 patients. There was a statistically significant advantage to the use of androgen suppression, in terms of both overall survival and disease free survival, when compared to radiotherapy alone. The use of long-term goserelin (up to three years) was the strategy providing the higher magnitude of clinical benefit. In contrast to goserelin, there were no trials evaluating the use of other luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogues as monotherapy. Complete hormonal blockade was not shown to be superior to goserelin monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of this systematic review, the evidence supports the use of androgen suppression with goserelin monotherapy as the standard treatment for patients with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy, which are at high risk of recurrence or metastases.