A randomized hypofractionation dose escalation trial for high risk prostate cancer patients: interim analysis of acute toxicity and quality of life in 124 patients

[Moderately hypofractionated dose escalation radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer, ESHYPRO: Results of a retrospective single-centre series evaluating safety and efficacy]

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer is the most frequent cancer among men and radiotherapy hypofractionation regimens have become standard treatments for the localized stages, but the absence of increased risk of acute and late genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity of the dose escalation still must be demonstrated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study population included all patients with localized prostatic adenocarcinoma treated at the institut Curie from February 2016 to March 2018 by external radiation delivered by a linear accelerator using an image-guided conformal intensity modulation technique at a total dose of 75Gy in 30 fractions of 2.5Gy in the planning target volume that included the prostate and the proximal seminal vesicles, and could be paired with a prophylactic lymph node radiotherapy at 46Gy in 23 fractions with simultaneous integrated boost.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients were included. Among them, 68.6% were unfavourable intermediate or (very) high risk. The median age and follow-up were 71.4years and 3.96years. One hundred and forty-nine patients received prophylactic lymph node radiotherapy (89.8%). One hundred and thirty-one patients received hormonotherapy (78.9%). Genito-urinary toxicity events of grades 2 or above during radiotherapy, at 6months, 1year and 5years were respectively 36.7%, 8.8%, 3.1% and 4.7%. Two patients had late grade 4 toxicity at 5years (1.6%). Grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity events during radiotherapy, 6months, 1year and 5years were respectively 15.1%, 1.9%, 14.6% and 9.3%. Of these, eight patients had grade 3 toxicity (6.2%). There was no grade 4 toxicity. Analyses did not reveal any predictive factor for toxicity. The 5-year overall, progression-free, and specific survival rates were respectively 82.4%, 85.7%, and 93.3%. Serum prostate specific antigen concentration and cardiovascular risk factors were found to be predictive factors of deterioration in overall survival (P=0.0028 for both).

CONCLUSION

External radiotherapy for localized prostatic cancer with our moderately hypofractionated dose escalation regimen is well tolerated. In the absence of increased late toxicity, the analysis of the modes of long-term relapses will be interesting to determine the benefit of this dose escalation on local and distant relapses.

Development and validation of an automated Tomotherapy planning method for cervical cancer

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop an automated Tomotherapy (TOMO) planning method for cervical cancer treatment, and to validate its feasibility and effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study enrolled 30 cervical cancer patients treated with TOMO at our center. Utilizing scripting and Python environment within the RayStation (RaySearch Labs, Sweden) treatment planning system (TPS), we developed automated planning methods for TOMO and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. The clinical manual TOMO (M-TOMO) plans for the 30 patients were re-optimized using automated planning scripts for both TOMO and VMAT, creating automated TOMO (A-TOMO) and automated VMAT (A-VMAT) plans. We compared A-TOMO with M-TOMO and A-VMAT plans. The primary evaluated relevant dosimetric parameters and treatment plan efficiency were assessed using the two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test for statistical analysis, with a P-value < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.

RESULTS

A-TOMO plans maintained similar target dose uniformity compared to M-TOMO plans, with improvements in target conformity and faster dose drop-off outside the target, and demonstrated significant statistical differences (P+ < 0.01). A-TOMO plans also significantly outperformed M-TOMO plans in reducing V50Gy, V40Gy and Dmean for the bladder and rectum, as well as Dmean for the bowel bag, femoral heads, and kidneys (all P+ < 0.05). Additionally, A-TOMO plans demonstrated better consistency in plan quality. Furthermore, the quality of A-TOMO plans was comparable to or superior than A-VMAT plans. In terms of efficiency, A-TOMO significantly reduced the time required for treatment planning to approximately 20 min.

CONCLUSION

We have successfully developed an A-TOMO planning method for cervical cancer. Compared to M-TOMO plans, A-TOMO plans improved target conformity and reduced radiation dose to OARs. Additionally, the quality of A-TOMO plans was on par with or surpasses that of A-VMAT plans. The A-TOMO planning method significantly improved the efficiency of treatment planning.

Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies).

RESULTS

A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.

Case report: Immunotherapy plus chemotherapy and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (ICSABR): a novel treatment combination for Epstein-Barr virus-associated lymphoepithelioma-like intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Epstein-Barr virus-associated lymphoepithelioma-like intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EBVa LEL-ICC) is a rare tumor, characterized by a rich tumor immune microenvironment (TIME). While this tumor is reportedly sensitive to immunotherapy, its response has been inconsistent. This decreased sensitivity was associated with reduced TIME abundance. We report the case of a 53-year-old woman with EBVa LEL-ICC having reduced TIME abundance. The patient presented with a liver lesion, which was detected using ultrasound. Initially, the tumor was sensitive to immunotherapy and chemotherapy (IC), but resistance developed after a short interval. Subsequently, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) was added to the patient's treatment, which now consisted of ICSABR. Successful tumor shrinkage was achieved with the combination therapy regimen. Thus, surgery and ICSABR are effective adjuncts to the first-line IC therapy in improving the survival rate of patients with EBVa LEL-ICC. The results of this study support multidisciplinary treatment as a viable treatment strategy for EBVa LEL-ICC.

Acute and late toxicity patterns of moderate hypo-fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Moderate hypofractionated (HF) radiotherapy is becoming the new standard in radiotherapy for prostate cancer patients. It is established as safe, but it might be associated with increased acute toxicity levels. We conducted a systematic review on moderate HF to establish acute toxicity levels and their required clinical management; late toxicity was reported as a secondary outcome.

Material and methods

Using PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review for studies published until June 2022. We identified 17 prospective studies, with 7796 localised prostate cancer patients, reporting acute toxicity of moderate hypofractionation (2.5-3.4 Gy/fraction). A meta-analysis was done for 10/17 studies with a control arm (standard fractionation (SF)), including evaluation of late toxicity rates. We used Cochrane bias assessment and Newcastle-Ottawa bias assessment tools for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) RCT and non-RCTs, respectively.

Results

Pooled results showed that acute grade ≥ 2 gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicity was increased by 6.3 % (95 % CI for risk difference = 2.0 %-10.6 %) for HF vs SF. Acute grade ≥ 2 Genito-urinary (GU) and late toxicity were not significantly increased. The overall risk of bias assessment revealed a low risk in the meta-analysis of included studies. Data on management of toxicity (medication, interventions) was only reported in 2/17 studies.

Conclusion

HF is associated with increased acute GI symptoms, needing adequate monitoring and management. Reports on toxicity management were very limited. Pooled late GI and GU toxicity showed similar levels for SF and HF.

Safety of accelerated hypofractionated whole pelvis radiation therapy prior to high dose rate brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiation therapy prostate boost

Background

To evaluate acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities and patient reported urinary and sexual function following accelerated, hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy to the prostate, seminal vesicles and pelvic lymph nodes and high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) prostate boost.

Methods

Patients at a single institution with NCCN intermediate- and high-risk localized prostate cancer with logistical barriers to completing five weeks of whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) were retrospectively reviewed for toxicity following accelerated, hypofractionated WPRT (41.25 Gy in 15 fractions of 2.75 Gy). Patients also received prostate boost radiotherapy with either HDR brachytherapy (1 fraction of 15 Gy) or SBRT (19 Gy in 2 fractions of 9.5 Gy). The duration of androgen deprivation therapy was at the discretion of the treating radiation oncologist. Toxicity was evaluated by NCI CTCAE v 5.0.

Results

Between 2015 and 2017, 22 patients with a median age of 71 years completed accelerated, hypofractionated WPRT. Median follow-up from the end of radiotherapy was 32 months (range 2–57). 5%, 73%, and 23% of patients had clinical T1, T2, and T3 disease, respectively. 86% of tumors were Gleason grade 7 and 14% were Gleason grade 9. 68% and 32% of patients had NCCN intermediate- and high-risk disease, respectively. 91% and 9% of patients received HDR brachytherapy and SBRT prostate boost following WPRT, respectively. Crude rates of grade 2 or higher GI and GU toxicities were 23% and 23%, respectively. 3 patients (14%) had late or persistent grade 2 toxicities of urinary frequency and 1 patient (5%) had late or persistent GI toxicity of diarrhea. No patient experienced grade 3 or higher toxicity at any time. No difference in patient-reported urinary or sexual function was noted at 12 months.

Conclusions

Accelerated, hypofractionated whole pelvis radiotherapy was associated with acceptable GU and GI toxicities and should be further validated for those at risk for harboring occult nodal disease.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Acute Phase of the Randomized Hypofractionated Irradiation for Prostate Cancer (HYPRO) Trial

PURPOSE

Many patients experience bowel and bladder toxicity during the acute phase of radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Recent literature indicates that hypofractionation (HF) might increase this acute response but little is known on patient-reported outcome during this phase with HF. We evaluated the course of patient-reported acute symptoms during HF versus standard fractionated (SF) radiation therapy within the hypofractionated irradiation for prostate cancer (HYPRO) trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In the HYPRO trial patients were treated with either 64.4 Gy (HF) in 19 fractions (3 times per week) or 78 Gy (SF) in 39 fractions (5 times per week). Normalized total dose for 2 Gy/fractions (NTD_2Gy)for acute toxicity (α/β ratio of 10) for HF was 72.1 Gy with a similar dose rate of 10.2 Gy per week. Among the 794 patients who were previously eligible for acute grade ≥2 toxicity assessment, 717 had filled out ≥1 symptom questionnaires. For each maximum symptom, we scored "any complaint" and "moderate-severe complaint." Differences were tested by χ² test, and associations with clinical factors were tested using logistic regression. Significance was set at P ≤ .008 to adjust for multiple testing.

RESULTS

We observed significantly higher rates of moderate-severe painful defecation (HF 10.8%, SF 5.3%), any mucus discharge (HF 47.1%, SF 37.4%), any rectal blood loss (HF 16.1%, SF 9.3%), increased daily stool frequency ≥4 and ≥6 (HF 34.6%/13.8%, SF 25.6%/7.0%), and any urinary straining (HF 69.9%, SF 58.0%). At 3 months postradiation therapy, rates dropped considerably with similar levels for HF and SF. Hormonal treatment was associated with less acute gastrointestinal symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The increased patient-reported acute rectal symptoms with HF confirmed the previously reported results on acute grade ≥2 rectal toxicity. The increase in bladder symptoms with HF was not identified previously. These observations contradict the NTD_2Gy calculations. We observed no patterns of persisting complaints with HF after the acute period; therefore, HF is well tolerated and only associated with a temporary increase of symptoms.

Strategic enhancement of immune checkpoint inhibition in refractory Colorectal Cancer: Trends and future prospective

Colorectal cancer (CRC), known as a frequently fatal disease, ranking as the third most common malignancy, is the second leading cause of cancer related mortality worldwide. Metastases are common in CRC patients which account for approximately 25% of the patients at diagnosis, 50% of patients during treatment which is associated closely with CRC mortality. Conventional therapies such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy are standards of care for the treatment of CRC patients. However, primary tumor recurrence and secondary disease in patients receiving standard of care treatment modalities occur in 50% of patients so that new treatment modalities are needed. Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has transformed the management of patients suffered from metastatic CRC (mCRC) with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and microsatellite instability (MSI) -high (MSI-H) while manifests ineffectiveness in preserved mismatch repair (pMMR) or microsatellite stable (MSS) "cold" tumors which makes up the majority (95%) of mCRC. In this review, we mainly lay emphasis on the development of combinations in therapy strategies with ICIs with other immune based treatment approaches to increase the intra-tumoral immune response and render tumors 'immune-reactive', thereby increasing the efficacy of tumor immunotherapy.

Clinical Outcomes of the CHIRP Trial: A Phase II Prospective Randomized Trial of Conventionally Fractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Prostate and Pelvic Nodal Radiation Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) may offer treatment advantages for patients with prostate cancer. However, HFRT may also increase the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity compared with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT). Several large trials have found that HFRT is well tolerated in mixed risk population studies. Here, we report on a phase II, randomized controlled study conducted to evaluate these endpoints in exclusively high-risk patients with prostate cancer treated with prostate and pelvic nodal radiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

After giving informed consent, patients with high-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to prostate plus pelvic nodal radiation therapy with either HFRT (68 Gy in 25 fractions) or CFRT (78 Gy in 39 fractions) and 18 months of androgen suppression therapy. Toxicity was scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Biochemical failure was determined by the Phoenix definition. Patients were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 111 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled and 109 patients were treated. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or higher acute GI toxicity was not significantly different between the arms (HFRT 18.9% vs CFRT 21.8%; P = .812). Similarly, acute GU (HFRT 30.2% vs CFRT 30.9%; P = 1.00), late GI (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 10.0%; P = .554), and late GU (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 6.0%; P = .200) were not significantly different between the arms. Median follow-up was 38.0 months (4.8-77.8 months). The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was not significantly different between the 2 arms (97.3% for HFRT vs 91.0% for CFRT; P = .606). The 3-year overall survival was 94.8% in the HFRT arm and 100.0% in the CFRT arm (P = .116).

CONCLUSIONS

HFRT and CFRT using intensity modulated radiation therapy were both well tolerated for patients with high-risk prostate cancer and resulted in similar 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and overall survival.

Practical considerations for prostate hypofractionation in the developing world

External beam radiotherapy is an effective curative treatment option for localized prostate cancer, the most common cancer in men worldwide. However, conventionally fractionated courses of curative external beam radiotherapy are usually 8-9 weeks long, resulting in a substantial burden to patients and the health-care system. This problem is exacerbated in low-income and middle-income countries where health-care resources might be scarce and patient funds limited. Trials have shown a clinical equipoise between hypofractionated schedules of radiotherapy and conventionally fractionated treatments, with the advantage of drastically shortening treatment durations with the use of hypofractionation. The hypofractionated schedules are supported by modern consensus guidelines for implementation in clinical practice. Furthermore, several economic evaluations have shown improved cost effectiveness of hypofractionated therapy compared with conventional schedules. However, these techniques demand complex infrastructure and advanced personnel training. Thus, a number of practical considerations must be borne in mind when implementing hypofractionation in low-income and middle-income countries, but the potential gain in the treatment of this patient population is substantial.

Patient-specific radiotherapy quality assurance for estimating actual treatment dose

This study aimed to evaluate the optimal method for planning computed tomography (CT) for prostate cancer radiotherapy to avoid a dose difference of ≥3% between the actual and planned treatments using multiple acquisition planning CT (MPCT). We calculated the 3-dimensional (3D) displacement error between the pelvic bone and matching fiducial marker on MPCT and cone-beam CT scans of 25 patients who underwent prostate volumetric-modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer. The correlation of the 3D displacement error and the dose difference between planned and actual treatments was calculated using least squares second-order polynomial model. The 3D displacement error showed a moderate correlation with differences between planned and accumulated treatment doses (r = 0.587, p < 0.0001). Moreover, the improvement rate of the minimum 3D displacement error showed a strong correlation with the relative error between each MPCT image (r = 0.793, p < 0.0001). Significant differences were observed between planned and actual treatment doses (p < 0.0001) in the relative 3D displacement errors of <1 mm, 1 to 3 mm, and >3 mm. The 3D displacement error on MPCT (as the selection estimation index for optimal planning CT) is useful for monitoring patient-specific intensity-modulated radiation therapy quality assurance. This new method allows to estimate dose differences from the planned dose before commencing treatment, thereby ensuring high-quality therapy. As radiotherapy quality is critical for patient outcome, these findings may contribute to better management of prostate cancer.

Patient-Reported Functional Outcomes After Hypofractionated or Conventionally Fractionated Radiation for Prostate Cancer: A National Cohort Study in England

PURPOSE

The aim of the current study was to determine patient-reported functional outcomes in men with prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing moderately hypofractionated (H-RT) or conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (C-RT) in a national cohort study.

PATIENDS AND METHODS

All men diagnosed with PCa between April 2014 and September 2016 in the English National Health Service undergoing C-RT or H-RT were identified in the National Prostate Cancer Audit and mailed a questionnaire at least 18 months after diagnosis. We estimated differences in patient-reported urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal function-Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite short-form 26 domain scores on a 0 to 100 scale-and health-related quality of life-EQ-5D-5L on a 0 to 1 scale-using linear regression with adjustment for patient, tumor, and treatment-related factors in addition to GI and genitourinary baseline function, with higher scores representing better outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 17,058 men in the cohort, 77% responded: 8,432 men received C-RT (64.2%) and 4,699 H-RT (35.8%). Men in the H-RT group were older (age ≥ 70 years: 67.5% v 60.9%), fewer men had locally advanced disease (56.5% v 71.3%), were less likely to receive androgen-deprivation therapy (79.5% v 87.8%), and slightly more men had pretreatment genitourinary procedures (24.2% v 21.2%). H-RT was associated with small increases in adjusted mean Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite short-form 26 sexual (3.3 points; 95% CI, 2.1 to 4.5; P < .001) and hormonal function scores (3.2 points; 95% CI, 1.8 to 4.6; P < .001). These differences failed to meet established thresholds for a clinically meaningful change. There were no statistically significant differences in urinary or bowel function and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This is the first national cohort study comparing functional outcomes after H-RT and C-RT reported by patients. These real-world results further support the use of H-RT as the standard for radiation therapy in men with nonmetastatic PCa.

A randomised assessment of image guided radiotherapy within a phase 3 trial of conventional or hypofractionated high dose intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) improves treatment set-up accuracy and provides the opportunity to reduce target volume margins. We introduced IGRT methods using standard (IGRT-S) or reduced (IGRT-R) margins in a randomised phase 2 substudy within CHHiP trial. We present a pre-planned analysis of the impact of IGRT on dosimetry and acute/late pelvic side effects using gastrointestinal and genitourinary clinician and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and evaluate efficacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CHHiP is a randomised phase 3, non-inferiority trial for men with localised prostate cancer. 3216 patients were randomly assigned to conventional (74 Gy in 2 Gy/fraction (f) daily) or moderate hypofractionation (60 or 57 Gy in 3 Gy/f daily) between October 2002 and June 2011. The IGRT substudy included a second randomisation assigning to no-IGRT, IGRT-S (standard CTV-PTV margins), or IGRT-R (reduced CTV-PTV margins). Primary substudy endpoint was late RTOG bowel and urinary toxicity at 2 years post-radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Between June 2010 to July 2011, 293 men were recruited from 16 centres. Median follow-up is 56.9(IQR 54.3-60.9) months. Rectal and bladder dose-volume and surface percentages were significantly lower in IGRT-R compared to IGRT-S group; (p < 0.0001). Cumulative proportion with RTOG grade ≥ 2 toxicity reported to 2 years for bowel was 8.3(95% CI 3.2-20.7)%, 8.3(4.7-14.6)% and 5.8(2.6-12.4)% and for urinary 8.4(3.2-20.8)%, 4.6(2.1-9.9)% and 3.9(1.5-9.9)% in no IGRT, IGRT-S and IGRT-R groups respectively. In an exploratory analysis, treatment efficacy appeared similar in all three groups.

CONCLUSION

Introduction of IGRT was feasible in a national randomised trial and IGRT-R produced dosimetric benefits. Overall side effect profiles were acceptable in all groups but lowest with IGRT and reduced margins.

ISRCTN

97182923.

The role of hypofractionated radiotherapy for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer: early results of a randomized trial

Background: Prostate cancer is considered to have a special biology which could affect the radiation therapy result based on the selected fractionation scheme. We present the preliminary results of a randomized trial comparing conventionally and hypofractionated radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Methods: Patients included in the study had localized prostate cancer (cT1c-T3bN0M0) and were randomly assigned to mild hypofractionated (72 Gy in 32 fractions, arm1) or conventionally fractionated (74 Gy in 37 fractions, arm2) radiation therapy treatment with Volumetric Arc Therapy technique. The treatment was delivered only to the prostate with or without the seminal vesicles according to physician's discretion and hormone therapy was optional according to the disease stage and comorbidities. Here we present the preliminary results of acute toxicity from the gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) system.

Results: Between 2015 and 2016, 139 patients were enrolled. 67 patients were treated with conventional fractionation and 72 were treated with hypofractionation. Grade≥ 2 toxicity from GU and GI was observed in 23 and 21 patients (31,9% vs 31,3%, p=0,79) and 15 and 12 (20,8% vs 17,9%, p=0,6) for arm1 and arm2 respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between arms in the incidence of early toxicity. There was no correlation observed between patient characteristics and toxicity from either GU or GI.

Conclusions: Hypofractionated radiotherapy appears to be equally tolerated compared to conventional fractionation in the early setting. Longer follow up is needed to assess the late toxicity profile of the patients and any potential differences between the control and experimental arm.

Hypofractionation for clinically localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Using hypofractionation (fewer, larger doses of daily radiation) to treat localized prostate cancer may improve convenience and resource use. For hypofractionation to be feasible, it must be at least as effective for cancer-related outcomes and have comparable toxicity and quality of life outcomes as conventionally fractionated radiation therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy compared to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy for men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and trials registries from 1946 to 15 March 2019 with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors. Searches were not limited by language or publication status. We reran all searches within three months (15th March 2019) prior to publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled comparisons which included men with clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma where hypofractionated radiation therapy (external beam radiation therapy) to the prostate using hypofractionation (greater than 2 Gy per fraction) compared with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy to the prostate delivered using standard fractionation (1.8 Gy to 2 Gy per fraction).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used Review Manager 5 for data analysis and meta-analysis. We used the inverse variance method and random-effects model for data synthesis of time-to-event data with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported. For dichotomous data, we used the Mantel-Haenzel method and random-effects model to present risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI. We used GRADE to assess evidence quality for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies with 8278 men in our analysis comparing hypofractionation with conventional fractionation to treat prostate cancer.Primary outcomesHypofractionation may result in little or no difference in prostate cancer-specific survival [PC-SS] (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.39; studies = 8, participants = 7946; median follow-up 72 months; low-certainty evidence). For men in the intermediate-risk group undergoing conventional fractionation this corresponds to 976 per 1000 men alive after 6 years and 0 more (44 fewer to 18 more) alive per 1000 men undergoing hypofractionation.We are uncertain about the effect of hypofractionation on late radiation therapy gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.78; studies = 4, participants = 3843; very low-certainty evidence).Hypofractionation probably results in little or no difference to late radiation therapy genitourinary (GU) toxicity (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18; studies = 4, participants = 3843; moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 262 per 1000 late GU radiation therapy toxicity events with conventional fractionation and 13 more (18 fewer to 47 more) per 1000 men when undergoing hypofractionation.Secondary outcomesHypofractionation results in little or no difference in overall survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07; 10 studies, 8243 participants; high-certainty evidence). For men in the intermediate-risk group undergoing conventional fractionation this corresponds to 869 per 1000 men alive after 6 years and 17 fewer (54 fewer to 17 more) participants alive per 1000 men when undergoing hypofractionation.Hypofractionation may result in little to no difference in metastasis-free survival (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.76; 5 studies, 4985 participants; low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 981 men per 1000 men metastasis-free at 6 years when undergoing conventional fractionation and 5 more (58 fewer to 19 more) metastasis-free per 1000 when undergoing hypofractionation.Hypofractionation likely results in a small, possibly unimportant reduction in biochemical recurrence-free survival based on Phoenix criteria (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.13; studies = 5, participants = 2889; median follow-up 90 months to 108 months; moderate-certainty evidence). In men of the intermediate-risk group, this corresponds to 804 biochemical-recurrence free men per 1000 participants at six years with conventional fractionation and 42 fewer (134 fewer to 37 more) recurrence-free men per 1000 participants with hypofractionationHypofractionation likely results in little to no difference to acute GU radiation therapy toxicity (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.11; 4 studies, 4174 participants at 12 to 18 weeks' follow-up; moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 360 episodes of toxicity per 1000 participants with conventional fractionation and 11 more (18 fewer to 40 more) per 1000 when undergoing hypofractionation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that moderate hypofractionation (up to a fraction size of 3.4 Gy) results in similar oncologic outcomes in terms of disease-specific, metastasis-free and overall survival. There appears to be little to no increase in both acute and late toxicity.

Evaluation of the correlation between prostatic displacement and rectal deformation using the Dice similarity coefficient of the rectum

To estimate the relationship between the three-dimensional (3D) displacement error of the prostate and rectal deformation for reduction of deviation between the planned and treatment dose, using multiple acquisition planning CT (MPCT) and the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for rectal deformation for treatment of patients with prostate cancer. The 3D displacement error between the pelvic bone and a matching fiducial marker was calculated using MPCT in 24 patients who underwent prostate volumetric-modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer. We calculated the 3D displacement error between the pelvic bone and a matching fiducial marker on MPCT. The correlation of the 3D displacement error with the DSC of the rectum, calculated from MPCT images, was evaluated based on deformable image registration. The 3D displacement error of the prostate showed a slight correlation between MPCT and cone-beam computed tomography (adjusted r² = 0.241). The 3D displacement error, based on the pelvic bone and a fiducial marker on MPCT images, showed a moderate correlation with the DSC of the rectum (adjusted r² = 0.645) and was improved by a mean of 3.94 mm, based on MPCT, during the treatment period. The 3D displacement error on MPCT correlates with the 3D displacement error of daily cone-beam computed tomography; optimal selection of MPCT can potentially facilitate on-board setup of prostate patients to enable more accurate radiotherapy. The advance information of the 3D displacement error and rectal deformation is useful for optimal planning CT that can minimize the deviation between the planned dose and the treatment dose in patients receiving treatment for prostate cancer.

Genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity among patients with localized prostate cancer treated with conventional versus moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hypofractionated (HRT) prostate radiation therapy has the potential to deliver a higher biologically effective dose over a shorter time compared with conventional fractionation (CRT). HRT, giving fewer fractions each with higher dose, might improve the therapeutic ratio, resource use and patient convenience but the toxicity is still controversial. Our objective was to compare the gastroinstestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity of HRT versus CRT.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials studies in PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases published through December 2016 was done. Only randomized trials that evaluated patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing CRT or HRT were included. In these studies, the daily dose was 1.8 Gy or 2 Gy per day for CRT and 2.4 to 3.4 Gy for HRT.

RESULTS

7317 patients in nine studies were analyzed. Six studies included acute GU toxicity data which showed similar rates for both HRT and CRT (32.6vs. 31.9%; RD 0.00; 95% CI; -0.03,0.03; p = .81; I² = 0%). Similarly, seven studies showed no difference in late GU toxicity based on treatment schedule (28.7 vs. 28.0%; RD -0.01; 95% CI; -0.04,0.03; p = .67; I² = 52%). GI toxicity at three months after radiotherapy was higher in patients treated with HRT in six studies (27.5 vs. 21.9%; RD 0.06; 95% CI; 0.02,0.10; p = .004; I² = 39%); however, eight studies showed GI toxicity 12 months or more after radiotherapy that was statistically the same (12.9 HRT vs. 16.2% CRT; RD -0.01; 95% CI; -0.04,0.02; p = .41; I² = 58%).

CONCLUSION

In meta-analysis of the available randomized trials on moderate HRT versus CRT for prostate cancer, acute and late GU toxicity were similar for both treatment schemes. While HRT was associated with higher acute GI toxicity, late toxicity was similar.

Acute toxicity and quality of life in high risk prostate cancer patients: Updated results of randomized hypofractionation trial

Purpose

The aim of our study was to perform the final analysis of acute toxicity and quality of life data obtained from 221 consecutive patients who suffered from intermediate-to-high risk prostate cancer.

Methods

In this trial, 221 patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (63 Gy in 20 fractions, 4 fractions/week) or conventionally fractionated (76 Gy in 38 fractions, 5 fractions/week) radiotherapy to the prostate and seminal vesicles. Elective pelvic lymph node irradiation with 46 Gy in 23 fractions sequentially and 44 Gy in 20 fractions simultaneously was also applied.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in acute GU and GI toxicity in men treated with hypofractionated (SIB) (Arm 2) in comparison with patients who had conventional fractionation (Arm 1) radiation therapy. Multivariate analysis using logistic regression showed statistical significant association between acute GU ≥ 1 and PTV(LN) (p = 0.008) only. We found out that clinically relevant decrease (CRD) was significantly higher only in the urinary domain of Arm 1 at month 3 (p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that hypofractionated radiotherapy was associated with a small but insignificant increase of acute toxicity. The reduction of overall treatment time has no significant influence on patients' QOL in any domain.

Radiotherapy and Hormone Treatment in Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer has the highest incidence of any type of cancer in Germany; an estimated 67 000 new diagnoses of prostate cancer will be made in 2016. In the current German S3 guideline for the treatment of prostate cancer, radiotherapy-sometimes in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)-is one of the two recommended options for treatment with curative intent (the other is radical prostatectomy). There have been many publications on this subject, yet it is still often unclear in routine practice how ADT should be administered, and for how long.

METHODS

This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective literature search, with special attention to controlled trials.

RESULTS

For low risk patients, radiotherapy without ADT is indicated (evidence level 1). Patients with localized prostate cancer and an intermediate risk benefit from radiotherapy combined with a four-to-six-month course of ADT. In this situation, a higher radiation dose might be an effective substitute for ADT (evidence level 1-2). For patients at high risk, radiotherapy combined with long-term hormonal treatment is the standard therapy, as it significantly improves all oncological end points (evidence level 1). For example, in the largest randomized and controlled trial, this form of treatment reduced cancer-specific mortality from 19% to 9% . Higher radiation doses of 66-74 Gy and longer ADT can improve local control at the cost of increased urethral toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Androgen deprivation combined with external beam radiotherapy is a curative standard option for patients with prostate cancer who are at high risk of recurrence. The modern radiotherapeutic techniques that are now available, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy, enable a further improvement of the risk/benefit ratio.

Interventions to reduce acute and late adverse gastrointestinal effects of pelvic radiotherapy for primary pelvic cancers

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of people survive cancer but a significant proportion have gastrointestinal side effects as a result of radiotherapy (RT), which impairs their quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVES

To determine which prophylactic interventions reduce the incidence, severity or both of adverse gastrointestinal effects among adults receiving radiotherapy to treat primary pelvic cancers.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in September 2016 and updated them on 2 November 2017. We also searched clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to prevent adverse gastrointestinal effects of pelvic radiotherapy among adults receiving radiotherapy to treat primary pelvic cancers, including radiotherapy techniques, other aspects of radiotherapy delivery, pharmacological interventions and non-pharmacological interventions. Studies needed a sample size of 20 or more participants and needed to evaluate gastrointestinal toxicity outcomes. We excluded studies that evaluated dosimetric parameters only. We also excluded trials of interventions to treat acute gastrointestinal symptoms, trials of altered fractionation and dose escalation schedules, and trials of pre- versus postoperative radiotherapy regimens, to restrict the vast scope of the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. We used the random-effects statistical model for all meta-analyses, and the GRADE system to rate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 92 RCTs involving more than 10,000 men and women undergoing pelvic radiotherapy. Trials involved 44 different interventions, including radiotherapy techniques (11 trials, 4 interventions/comparisons), other aspects of radiotherapy delivery (14 trials, 10 interventions), pharmacological interventions (38 trials, 16 interventions), and non-pharmacological interventions (29 trials, 13 interventions). Most studies (79/92) had design limitations. Thirteen studies had a low risk of bias, 50 studies had an unclear risk of bias and 29 studies had a high risk of bias. Main findings include the following:Radiotherapy techniques: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) versus 3D conformal RT (3DCRT) may reduce acute (risk ratio (RR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.88; participants = 444; studies = 4; I2 = 77%; low-certainty evidence) and late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.65; participants = 332; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Conformal RT (3DCRT or IMRT) versus conventional RT reduces acute GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.82; participants = 307; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; high-certainty evidence) and probably leads to less late GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.09; participants = 517; studies = 3; I2 = 44%; moderate-certainty evidence). When brachytherapy (BT) is used instead of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in early endometrial cancer, evidence indicates that it reduces acute GI toxicity (grade 2+) (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.18; participants = 423; studies = 1; high-certainty evidence).Other aspects of radiotherapy delivery: There is probably little or no difference in acute GI toxicity grade 2+ with reduced radiation dose volume (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.81; participants = 211; studies = 1; moderate-certainty evidence) and maybe no difference in late GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.15 to 6.97; participants = 107; studies = 1; low-certainty evidence). Evening delivery of RT may reduce acute GI toxicity (diarrhoea) grade 2+ during RT compared with morning delivery of RT (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76; participants = 294; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in acute (RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.62 to 7.93, participants = 110; studies = 1) and late GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.65; participants = 81; studies = 1) between a bladder volume preparation of 1080 mls and that of 540 mls (low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence on balloon and hydrogel spacers suggests that these interventions for prostate cancer RT may make little or no difference to GI outcomes.Pharmacological interventions: Evidence for any beneficial effects of aminosalicylates, sucralfate, amifostine, corticosteroid enemas, bile acid sequestrants, famotidine and selenium is of a low or very low certainty. However, evidence on certain aminosalicylates (mesalazine, olsalazine), misoprostol suppositories, oral magnesium oxide and octreotide injections suggests that these agents may worsen GI symptoms, such as diarrhoea or rectal bleeding.Non-pharmacological interventions: Low-certainty evidence suggests that protein supplements (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.74; participants = 74; studies = 1), dietary counselling (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.60; participants = 74; studies = 1) and probiotics (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.82; participants = 923; studies = 5; I2 = 91%) may reduce acute RT-related diarrhoea (grade 2+). Dietary counselling may also reduce diarrhoeal symptoms in the long term (at five years, RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.78; participants = 61; studies = 1). Low-certainty evidence from one study (108 participants) suggests that a high-fibre diet may have a beneficial effect on GI symptoms (mean difference (MD) 6.10, 95% CI 1.71 to 10.49) and quality of life (MD 20.50, 95% CI 9.97 to 31.03) at one year. High-certainty evidence indicates that glutamine supplements do not prevent RT-induced diarrhoea. Evidence on various other non-pharmacological interventions, such as green tea tablets, is lacking.Quality of life was rarely and inconsistently reported across included studies, and the available data were seldom adequate for meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conformal radiotherapy techniques are an improvement on older radiotherapy techniques. IMRT may be better than 3DCRT in terms of GI toxicity, but the evidence to support this is uncertain. There is no high-quality evidence to support the use of any other prophylactic intervention evaluated. However, evidence on some potential interventions shows that they probably have no role to play in reducing RT-related GI toxicity. More RCTs are needed for interventions with limited evidence suggesting potential benefits.

Reducing errors in prostate tracking with an improved fiducial implantation protocol for CyberKnife based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT)

PURPOSE

Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy with SBRT is an established technique for treating localized prostate cancer. CyberKnife based SBRT requires implantation of fiducial markers for soft tissue target tracking by the orthogonal KV X-ray imaging system. The spatial distribution of fiducial markers must allow accurate calculation of a 3D transformation that describes the position of the prostate within the reference frame of the planning CT scan. Accuray provides a fiducial implantation guideline for tracking soft tissue lesions. Despite using the guideline we experienced an unacceptably high rate of rotational tracking failure due to problems with fiducial placement. We adapted the Accuray guideline to prostate SBRT for improved fiducial placement and more reliable target tracking.Methods and materials: 54 patients with prostate adenocarcinoma were treated with ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy on CyberKnife. Patients had platinum fiducial markers implanted transrectally under ultrasound guidance by a Radiologist. For the first 26 patients, fiducial markers were positioned following the Accuray fiducial placement guidelines for soft tissue lesions (cohort 1). The initial rotational tracking error rate was unacceptably high (23%). On review, inappropriate fiducial placement was identified as the cause of error (especially insufficient spacing between seeds). In October 2016 we developed a seed placement protocol specifically for implanting fiducial markers within the prostate and a second cohort of patients was treated thereafter (cohort 2, 28 patients). The stipulations of the original guideline are maintained while the modified protocol requires that 4 fiducial markers be implanted in the postero-lateral peripheral zone in a single coronal plane.

RESULTS

In cohort 1, patients had a median age of 64 years (50 - 74), PSA of 6.6mcg/L (1.1 - 14.7), and prostate volume of 56 cc (22 - 125), while in cohort 2 they had a mean age of 65 years (53 - 75), PSA of 6.2 mcg/L (1 - 12) and prostate volume of 47 cc (21 - 106). The fiducial markers were easily visualized and there were no cases of urosepsis related to fiducial implantation. In 6 of 26 patients (23%) from cohort 1, only translational mapping without accurate spatial rotations could be calculated. After adopting the prostate specific fiducial implantation protocol, rotational tracking error was eliminated. Accurate 6 degree tracking (accounting for translations and rotations) was achieved in all 28 patients from cohort 2. Using an in-house computer script we analyzed the dose distributions resulting from rotational misalignments of -10, -5, -3, 3, 5, and 10 degrees along all three rotational axes (pitch, roll and yaw). Rotational misalignments result in decreased minimum dose to the PTV and increased maximum dose to OARs.

CONCLUSION

Implementing a prostate specific fiducial placement protocol for SBRT significantly improved our ability to track prostate motion in 6 degrees 77% to 100% reliability. Failure to track rotations can potentially lead to underdosing and overdosing of portions of the prostate and OARs respectively.

Acute toxicity of image-guided hypofractionated proton therapy for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Hypofractionated proton therapy (HFPT) is expected to become an effective treatment approach for localized prostate cancer (PCa). The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in acute toxicity among patients with localized PCa treated with either conventional fractionated proton therapy (CFPT) or HFPT.

METHODS

A total of 526 eligible patients treated with proton therapy between February 2013 and May 2016 in three phase II trials were analyzed. We prescribed 74 gray relative biological effectiveness equivalents [Gy (RBE)]/37 fractions for low-risk patients and 78 Gy (RBE)/39 fractions for intermediate- and high-risk patients in the CFPT group (n = 254) and 60 Gy (RBE)/20 fractions for low-risk and 63 Gy (RBE)/21 fractions for intermediate- and high-risk patients in the HFPT group (n = 272). Patients were evaluated for acute toxicity with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, and urinary quality-of-life change using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS).

RESULTS

No grade ≥3 acute toxicity was observed in either group. Among acute genitourinary toxicities, grade 2 rates were 15% (n = 38) in CFPT and 5.9% (n = 16) in HFPT (P ≤ 0.001). The median baseline IPSSs of the CFPT and HFPT groups were 7 (0-29) and 6 (0-31), respectively (P = 0.70). One-month post-treatment scores were 9 (0-32) and 11 (0-32), respectively (P = 0.036), and 6-month post-treatment scores were 7 (0-30) and 7 (0-33), respectively (P = 0.88). There were no significant differences in acute gastrointestinal toxicity between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated the safety of HFPT for localized PCa patients in terms of acute toxicity.

Acute toxicity and its dosimetric correlates for high-risk prostate cancer treated with moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy

AIMS

To report the acute toxicity and the dosimetric correlates after moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

A total of 101 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Patients were treated to 65Gy/25Fr/5 weeks (n = 18), or 60Gy/20Fr/4 weeks (n = 83). Most (82.2%) had high-risk or pelvic node-positive disease. Acute toxicity was assessed using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) acute morbidity scoring criteria. Dose thresholds for acute rectal and bladder toxicity were identified.

RESULTS

The incidence of acute grade 2 GI toxicity was 20.8%, and grade 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity was 6.9%. No Grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred. Small bowel toxicity was uncommon (Gr 2 = 4%). The 2Gy equivalent doses (EQD2) to the rectum and bladder (α/β = 3) calculated showed that the absolute doses were more consistent predictors of acute toxicities than the relative volumes. Those with grade 2 or more GI symptoms had significantly higher V_EQD2-60Gy (13.2 vs 9.9cc, p = 0.007) and V_EQD2-50Gy (20.6 vs 15.4cc, p = 0.005). Those with grade 2 or more GU symptoms had significantly higher V_EQD2-70Gy (30.4 vs 18.4cc, p = 0.001) and V_EQD2-65Gy (44.0 vs 28.8cc, p = 0.001). The optimal cutoff value for predicting grade 2 acute proctitis, for V_EQD2-60Gy was 9.7cc and for V_EQD2-50Gy was 15.9cc. For grade 2 GU symptoms, the threshold values were 23.6cc for V_EQD2-70Gy and 38.1cc for V_EQD2-65Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer is well tolerated and associated with manageable acute side effects. The absolute dose-volume parameters of rectum and bladder predict for acute toxicities.

Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes From a Phase 3 Randomized Prospective Trial of Conventional Versus Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

To assess the long-term quality of life (QoL) outcomes from a phase 3 trial comparing 2 modes of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): conventional IMRT (CIMRT) versus hypofractionated IMRT (HIMRT) in patients with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2002 and 2006, 303 men with low-risk to high-risk prostate cancer were randomized to 76 Gy in 38 fractions (CIMRT) versus 70.2 Gy in 26 fractions (HIMRT). QoL was compared by use of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and EuroQoL (EQ5D) questionnaires. The primary outcome of the QoL analysis was a minimum clinically important difference defined as a 0.5 standard deviation change from baseline for each respective QoL parameter. Treatment effects were evaluated with the use of logistic mixed effects regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 286, 299, and 218 patients had baseline EPIC, IPSS, or EQ5D data available and were included in the analysis. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 treatment arms in terms of EPIC, IPSS, or EQ5D scores over time, although there was a trend toward lower EPIC urinary incontinence scores in the HIMRT arm. More patients in the HIMRT arm had a lower EPIC urinary incontinence score relative to baseline versus patients in the CIMRT arm with long-term follow-up. On multivariable analysis, there was no association between radiation fractionation scheme and any QoL parameter. When other clinical factors were examined, lymph node radiation was associated with worse EPIC hormonal scores versus patients receiving no lymph node radiation. In general, QoL outcomes were generally stable over time, with the exception of EPIC hormonal and EQ5D scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized prospective study, there were stable QoL changes in patients receiving HIMRT or CIMRT. Our results add to the growing body of literature suggesting that HIMRT may be an acceptable treatment modality in clinically localized prostate cancer.

Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer might have high radiation-fraction sensitivity that would give a therapeutic advantage to hypofractionated treatment. We present a pre-planned analysis of the efficacy and side-effects of a randomised trial comparing conventional and hypofractionated radiotherapy after 5 years follow-up.

METHODS

CHHiP is a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial that recruited men with localised prostate cancer (pT1b-T3aN0M0). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to conventional (74 Gy delivered in 37 fractions over 7·4 weeks) or one of two hypofractionated schedules (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3·8 weeks) all delivered with intensity-modulated techniques. Most patients were given radiotherapy with 3-6 months of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen suppression. Randomisation was by computer-generated random permuted blocks, stratified by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group and radiotherapy treatment centre, and treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure; the critical hazard ratio (HR) for non-inferiority was 1·208. Analysis was by intention to treat. Long-term follow-up continues. The CHHiP trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN97182923.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 18, 2002, and June 17, 2011, 3216 men were enrolled from 71 centres and randomly assigned (74 Gy group, 1065 patients; 60 Gy group, 1074 patients; 57 Gy group, 1077 patients). Median follow-up was 62·4 months (IQR 53·9-77·0). The proportion of patients who were biochemical or clinical failure free at 5 years was 88·3% (95% CI 86·0-90·2) in the 74 Gy group, 90·6% (88·5-92·3) in the 60 Gy group, and 85·9% (83·4-88·0) in the 57 Gy group. 60 Gy was non-inferior to 74 Gy (HR 0·84 [90% CI 0·68-1·03], pNI=0·0018) but non-inferiority could not be claimed for 57 Gy compared with 74 Gy (HR 1·20 [0·99-1·46], pNI=0·48). Long-term side-effects were similar in the hypofractionated groups compared with the conventional group. There were no significant differences in either the proportion or cumulative incidence of side-effects 5 years after treatment using three clinician-reported as well as patient-reported outcome measures. The estimated cumulative 5 year incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or worse bowel and bladder adverse events was 13·7% (111 events) and 9·1% (66 events) in the 74 Gy group, 11·9% (105 events) and 11·7% (88 events) in the 60 Gy group, 11·3% (95 events) and 6·6% (57 events) in the 57 Gy group, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Hypofractionated radiotherapy using 60 Gy in 20 fractions is non-inferior to conventional fractionation using 74 Gy in 37 fractions and is recommended as a new standard of care for external-beam radiotherapy of localised prostate cancer.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Evolving Paradigm of Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Current Consensus and Continuing Controversies

High-risk prostate cancer is an aggressive form of the disease with an increased risk of distant metastasis and subsequent mortality. Multiple randomized trials have established that the combination of radiation therapy and long-term androgen deprivation therapy improves overall survival compared to either treatment alone. Standard of care for men with high-risk prostate cancer in the modern setting is dose-escalated radiotherapy along with 2-3 years of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). There are research efforts directed towards assessing the efficacy of shorter ADT duration. Current research has been focused on assessing hypofractionated and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) techniques. Ongoing randomized trials will help assess the utility of pelvic lymph node irradiation. Research is also focused on multimodality therapy with addition of a brachytherapy boost to external beam radiation to help improve outcomes in men with high-risk prostate cancer.

Comparison of dosimetric parameters and acute toxicity after whole-pelvic vs prostate-only volumetric-modulated arc therapy with daily image guidance for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To compare dosimetric parameters and acute toxicity rates between whole-pelvic (WP) and prostate-only (PO) volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

A total of 224 consecutive patients treated with definitive VMAT to 78 Gy in 39 fractions were enrolled. Of these, 119 patients received initial WP VMAT at 46.8 Gy in 26 fractions using a simultaneous integrated boost technique, and 105 patients received PO VMAT. Image-guided radiotherapy was practised with daily cone beam CT.

RESULTS

The mean rectal dose, the rectal volume receiving ≥30 Gy (V30Gy), rectal V50Gy, the mean bladder dose, bladder V30Gy and bladder V50Gy were significantly increased in the WP group (p < 0.05 each); however, the rectal V70Gy did not differ between groups (p = 0.101), and the bladder V70Gy was significantly lower in the WP group (p = 0.029). The WP group experienced a significantly increased frequency of acute grade 2 diarrhoea relative to the PO group (5.9% vs 0%; p = 0.015). No differences were seen between the WP and PO groups in terms of acute grade 2 proctitis (10.1% vs 6.7%; p = 0.360) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity (12.6% vs 10.5%; p = 0.620).

CONCLUSION

Despite larger rectum and bladder volumes at low- and medium-dose levels, WP VMAT resulted in no significant increase in acute proctitis or GU toxicity when compared with PO VMAT.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study demonstrates that whole-pelvic radiotherapy has comparable acute toxicity to those observed with prostate-only radiotherapy when VMAT with daily image guidance is used.

Acute Toxicity and Quality of Life in Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Protons or Carbon Ions in a Prospective Randomized Phase II Study--The IPI Trial

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare safety and feasibility of proton therapy with that of carbon ion therapy in hypofractionated raster-scanned irradiation of the prostate, in a prospective randomized phase 2 trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In this trial, 92 patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either proton therapy (arm A) or carbon ion therapy (arm B) and treated with a total dose of 66 Gy(relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) administered in 20 fractions (single dose of 3.3 Gy[RBE]). Patients were stratified by the use of antihormone therapy. Primary endpoint was the combined assessment of safety and feasibility. Secondary endpoints were specific toxicities, prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients completed therapy and have had a median follow-up of 22.3 months. Among acute genitourinary toxicities, grade 1 cystitis rates were 34.1% (39.1% in A; 28.9% in B) and 17.6% grade 2 (21.7% in A; 13.3% in B). Seven patients (8%) required urinary catheterization during treatment due to urinary retention, 5 of whom were in arm A. Regarding acute gastrointestinal toxicities, 2 patients treated with protons developed grade 3 rectal fistulas. Grade 1 radiation proctitis occurred in 12.1% (13.0% in A; 11.1% in B) and grade 2 in 5.5% (8.7% in A; 2.2% in B). No statistically significant differences in toxicity profiles between arms were found. Reduced QoL was evident mainly in fatigue, pain, and urinary symptoms during therapy and 6 weeks thereafter. All European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and -PR25 scores improved during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated irradiation using either carbon ions or protons results in comparable acute toxicities and QoL parameters. We found that hypofractionated particle irradiation is feasible and may be safe. Due to the occurrence of gel in the rectal wall and the consecutive occurrence of 2 rectal fistulas, we stopped using the insertion of spacer gel. Longer follow-up is necessary for evaluation of PFS and OS. (Ion Prostate Irradiation (IPI); NCT01641185; ClinicalTrials.gov.).

Quality of life outcomes from a dose-per-fraction escalation trial of hypofractionation in prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

This multi-institutional phase I/II trial explored patient-assessed tolerance of increasingly hypofractionated (HPFX) radiation for low/intermediate risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

347 patients enrolled from 2002 to 2010. Three increasing dose-per-fraction schedules of 64.7 Gy/22 fx, 58.08 Gy/16 fx and 51.6 Gy/12 fx were each designed to yield equivalent predicted late toxicity. Three quality of life (QoL) surveys were administered prior to treatment and annually upto 3 years.

RESULTS

Bowel QoL data at 3years revealed no significant difference among regimens (p=0.469). Bowel QoL for all regimens declined transiently, largely recovering by three years, with only the 22 fraction decrement reaching significance. Bladder outcomes at 3 years were comparable (p=0.343) although, for all patients combined, a significant decline was observed from the baseline (p=0.008). Spitzer quality of life data revealed similarly excellent, 3-year means (p=0.188). International erectile function data also revealed no significant differences at 3 years although all measures except intercourse satisfaction worsened post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-year QoL changes for bowel, bladder and SQLI were modest and similar for 3 HPFX regimens spanning 2.94-4.3 Gy per fraction. These favorable patient-scored outcomes demonstrate the safety and tolerability of such regimens and may be leveraged to support further implementation of mild to moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy in the setting of low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer: 2-year patient-reported outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) might detect more toxic effects of radiotherapy than do clinician-reported outcomes. We did a quality of life (QoL) substudy to assess PROs up to 24 months after conventionally fractionated or hypofractionated radiotherapy in the Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP) trial.

METHODS

The CHHiP trial is a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial done in 71 centres, of which 57 UK hospitals took part in the QoL substudy. Men with localised prostate cancer who were undergoing radiotherapy were eligible for trial entry if they had histologically confirmed T1b-T3aN0M0 prostate cancer, an estimated risk of seminal vesicle involvement less than 30%, prostate-specific antigen concentration less than 30 ng/mL, and a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive a standard fractionation schedule of 74 Gy in 37 fractions or one of two hypofractionated schedules: 60 Gy in 20 fractions or 57 Gy in 19 fractions. Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted block sizes of six and nine, stratified by centre and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group. Treatment allocation was not masked. UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), including Short Form (SF)-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and SF-12 quality-of-life questionnaires were completed at baseline, pre-radiotherapy, 10 weeks post-radiotherapy, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial completed accrual on June 16, 2011, and the QoL substudy was closed to further recruitment on Nov 1, 2009. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint of the QoL substudy was overall bowel bother and comparisons between fractionation groups were done at 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97182923.

FINDINGS

2100 participants in the CHHiP trial consented to be included in the QoL substudy: 696 assigned to the 74 Gy schedule, 698 assigned to the 60 Gy schedule, and 706 assigned to the 57 Gy schedule. Of these individuals, 1659 (79%) provided data pre-radiotherapy and 1444 (69%) provided data at 24 months after radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 50·0 months (IQR 38·4-64·2) on April 9, 2014, which was the most recent follow-up measurement of all data collected before the QoL data were analysed in September, 2014. Comparison of 74 Gy in 37 fractions, 60 Gy in 20 fractions, and 57 Gy in 19 fractions groups at 2 years showed no overall bowel bother in 269 (66%), 266 (65%), and 282 (65%) men; very small bother in 92 (22%), 91 (22%), and 93 (21%) men; small bother in 26 (6%), 28 (7%), and 38 (9%) men; moderate bother in 19 (5%), 23 (6%), and 21 (5%) men, and severe bother in four (<1%), three (<1%) and three (<1%) men respectively (74 Gy vs 60 Gy, ptrend=0.64, 74 Gy vs 57 Gy, ptrend=0·59). We saw no differences between treatment groups in change of bowel bother score from baseline or pre-radiotherapy to 24 months.

INTERPRETATION

The incidence of patient-reported bowel symptoms was low and similar between patients in the 74 Gy control group and the hypofractionated groups up to 24 months after radiotherapy. If efficacy outcomes from CHHiP show non-inferiority for hypofractionated treatments, these findings will add to the growing evidence for moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules becoming the standard treatment for localised prostate cancer.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Radiation Therapy Intensification for Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

PURPOSE

To systematically review the outcomes of randomized trials testing radiation therapy (RT) intensification, including both dose escalation and/or the use of altered fractionation, as a strategy to improve disease control for a number of malignancies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a literature search to identify randomized trials testing RT intensification for cancers of the central nervous system, head and neck, breast, lung, esophagus, rectum, and prostate. Findings were described qualitatively. Where adequate data were available, pooled estimates for the effect of RT intensification on local control (LC) or overall survival (OS) were obtained using the inverse variance method.

RESULTS

In primary central nervous system tumors, esophageal cancer, and rectal cancer, randomized trials have not demonstrated that RT intensification improves clinical outcomes. In breast cancer and prostate cancer, dose escalation has been shown to improve LC or biochemical disease control but not OS. Radiation therapy intensification may improve LC and OS in head and neck and lung cancers, but these benefits have generally been limited to studies that did not incorporate concurrent chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In randomized trials, the benefits of RT intensification have largely been restricted to trials in which concurrent chemotherapy was not used. Novel strategies to optimize the incorporation of RT in the multimodality treatment of solid tumors should be explored.

Prostate cancer: contouring target and organs at risk by kilovoltage and megavoltage CT and MRI in patients with and without hip prostheses

OBJECTIVE

In radiotherapy treatment, planning target volume and organs at risk are contoured on kilovoltage CT (kVCT) images. Unlike MR images, kVCT does not provide precise information on target volume extension. Since neither kVCT nor MRI may be suitable for contouring in patients with ferrous hip prostheses, this study evaluated whether megavoltage CT (MVCT) reduced interobserver variability.

METHODS

Two patients without hip prostheses and one patient (Patient 3) with hip prostheses were enrolled. Six radiation oncologists contoured prostate, rectum and bladder on kVCT (Patients 1 and 3), MRI (Patient 2) and MVCT images (Patient 3). MVCT was acquired with fine, normal and coarse modalities. Interobserver variability for each organ was analysed using conformity index (CI) and coefficient of variation (CV).

RESULTS

In patients without hip prostheses, CIs were higher in prostate contouring with MRI than with kVCT, indicating lower interobserver variability with MRI. Very slight variations were seen in rectum and bladder contouring. In the patient with hip prostheses (Patient 3), contouring on kVCT lowered CI and increased CV in the prostate, bladder and rectum. The differences were more marked in the prostate. Only fine modality MVCT reduced interobserver variability and only for the prostate.

CONCLUSION

Even though greater noise and less soft-tissue contrast increase contouring variability with MVCT than with kVCT, lack of artefacts on MVCT could provide better image definition by this modality in hip prosthesis patients in whom MRI is precluded.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

We recommend the fine modality MVCT for contouring hip prostheses patients.

Hypofractionated Helical Tomotherapy for Older Aged Patients With Prostate Cancer: Preliminary Results of a Phase I-II Trial

In our center, the feasibility and related acute toxicities of hypofractionated helical tomotherapy have been evaluated in older aged patients with prostate cancer . Between February 2009 and February 2014, 67 patients (older than 65 years) were enrolled in a prospective phase I-II study (registered number, ChiCTR-ONC-13004037). Patients in cohort 1 (n = 33) and cohort 2 (n = 34) received 76 Gy in 34 fractions (2.25 Gy/F) and 71.6 Gy in 28 fractions (2.65 Gy/F), respectively, to the prostate and seminal vesicles, while 25 patients in cohort 2 also received integrated elective lymph node irradiation (50.4 Gy). All patients were treated with helical tomotherapy, and daily image guidance was performed before each treatment. Acute toxicities were assessed with Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)/European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) criteria. No significant difference was detected between the 2 cohorts in the incidence of acute toxicities. In cohort 1, the incidences of grade 1 and 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 45.5% and 45.4%, respectively, and without grade 3 and 4 toxicities. In cohort 2, the incidences of acute grade 1 and 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 47.1% and 55.9%, respectively, and grade 3 genitourinary toxicity (hematuria) was noted only in 1 patient. No significant difference was detected in the incidence of acute toxicities between the patients receiving integrated elective lymph node irradiation and those receiving irradiation to prostate and seminal vesicle in cohort 2. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed with clinical parameters. Only the baseline weight was found negatively correlated with genitourinary toxicities at a weak level (relative risk = 0.946, 95% confidence interval 0.896-0.998], P = .043). This study shows that 2 hypofractionation regimens (76 Gy/34F and 71.6 Gy/28F) delivered with HT are well tolerated in older aged patients having prostate cancer without significant difference for acute toxicities between the 2 cohorts. Late toxicities and treatment outcomes for these patients are under investigation.

Surface refraction of sound waves affects calibration of three-dimensional ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional ultrasound (3D-US) is used in planning and treatment during external beam radiotherapy. The accuracy of the technique depends not only on the achievable image quality in clinical routine, but also on technical limitations of achievable precision during calibration. Refraction of ultrasound waves is a known source for geometric distortion, but such an effect was not expected in homogenous calibration phantoms. However, in this paper we demonstrate that the discontinuity of the refraction index at the phantom surface may affect the calibration unless the ultrasound probe is perfectly perpendicular to the phantom.

METHODS

A calibration phantom was repeatedly scanned with a 3D-US system (Elekta Clarity) by three independent observers. The ultrasound probe was moved horizontally at a fixed angle in the sagittal plane. The resulting wedge shaped volume between probe and phantom was filled with water to couple in the ultrasound waves. Because the speed of sound in water was smaller than the speed of sound in Zerdine, the main component of the phantom, the angle of the ultrasound waves inside the phantom increased. This caused an apparent shift in the calibration features which was recorded as a function of the impeding angle. To confirm the magnitude and temperature dependence, the experiment was repeated by two of the observers with a mixture of ice and water at 0 °C and with thermalized tap water at 21 °C room temperature.

RESULTS

During the first series of measurements, a linear dependency of the displacements dx of the calibration features on the angle α of the ultrasound probe was observed. The three observers recorded significantly nonzero (p < 0.0001) and very consistent slopes of dx/dα of 0.12, 0.12, and 0.13 mm/°, respectively.. At 0 °C water temperature, the slope increased to 0.18 ± 0.04 mm/°. This matched the prediction of Snell's law of 0.185 mm/° for a speed of sound of 1,402 m/s at the melting point of ice. At 21 °C, slopes of 0.11 and 0.12 mm/° were recorded in agreement with the first experiment at about room temperature. The difference to the theoretical expectation of 0.07 mm/° was not significant (p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

The surface refraction of sound waves my affect the calibration of three-dimensional ultrasound. The temperature dependence of the effect rules out alternative explanations for the observed shifts in calibration. At room temperature and for a structure that is 10 cm below the water-phantom interface, a tilt of the ultrasound probe of 10° may result in a position reading that is off by more than half a millimeter. Such errors are of the order of other relevant errors typically encountered during the calibration of a 3D-US system. Hence, care must be taken not to tilt the ultrasound probe during calibration.

A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT

Background

The accuracy of the Elekta Clarity™ three-dimensional ultrasound system (3DUS) was assessed for prostate positioning and compared to seed- and bone-based positioning in kilo-voltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during a definitive radiotherapy.

Methods

The prostate positioning of 6 patients, with fiducial markers implanted into the prostate, was controlled by 3DUS and CBCT. In total, 78 ultrasound scans were performed trans-abdominally and compared to bone-matches and seed-matches in CBCT scans. Setup errors detected by the different modalities were compared. Systematic and random errors were analysed, and optimal setup margins were calculated.

Results

The discrepancy between 3DUS and seed-match in CBCT was −0.2 ± 2.7 mm laterally, −1.9 ± 2.3 mm longitudinally and 0.0 ± 3.0 mm vertically and significant only in longitudinal direction. Using seed-match as reference, systematic errors of 3DUS were 1.3 mm laterally, 0.8 mm longitudinally and 1.4 mm vertically, and random errors were 2.5 mm laterally, 2.3 mm longitudinally, and 2.7 mm vertically. No significant difference could be detected for 3DUS in comparison to bone-match in CBCT.

Conclusions

3DUS is feasible for image guidance for patients with prostate cancer and appears comparable to CBCT based image guidance in the retrospective study. While 3DUS offers some distinct advantages such as no need of invasive fiducial implantation and avoidance of extra radiation, its disadvantages include the operator dependence of the technique and dependence on sufficient bladder filling. Further study of 3DUS for image guidance in a large patient cohort is warranted.

Potential applications of image-guided radiotherapy for radiation dose escalation in patients with early stage high-risk prostate cancer

Patients with early stage high-risk prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen > 20, Gleason score > 7) are at high risk of recurrence following prostate cancer irradiation. Radiation dose escalation to the prostate may improve biochemical-free survival for these patients. However, high rectal and bladder dose with conventional three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy may lead to excessive gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity. Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), by virtue of combining the steep dose gradient of intensity-modulated radiotherapy and daily pretreatment imaging, may allow for radiation dose escalation and decreased treatment morbidity. Reduced treatment time is feasible with hypo-fractionated IGRT and it may improve patient quality of life.

Preoperative hypofractionated radiotherapy in the treatment of localized soft tissue sarcomas

BACKGROUND

The primary treatment of soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is a radical resection of the tumor with adjuvant radiotherapy. Conventional fractionation of preoperative radiotherapy is 50 Gy in fraction of 2 Gy a day. The purpose of the conducted study was to assess the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated radiotherapy in preoperative setting in STS patients.

METHODS

272 patients participated in this prospective study conducted from 2006 till 2011. Tumors were localized on the extremities or trunk wall. Median tumor size was 8.5 cm, 42% of the patients had tumor larger than 10 cm, whereas 170 patients (64.6%) had high grade (G3) tumors. 167 patients (61.4%) had primary tumors. Patients were treated with preoperative radiotherapy for five consecutive days in 5 Gy per fraction, with an immediate surgery. Median follow up is 35 months.

RESULTS

79 patients died at the time of the analysis, the 3-year overall survival was 72%. Local recurrences were observed in 19.1 % of the patients. Factors that had a significant adverse impact on local recurrence were tumor size of 10 cm or more and G3 grade. 114 patients (42%) had any kind of treatment toxicity, vast majority with tumors located on lower limbs. 7% (21) of the patients required surgery for treatment of the complications.

CONCLUSION

In this non-selected group of locally advanced STS use of hypofractionated preoperative radiotherapy was associated with similar local control (81%) when compared to previously published studies. The early toxicity is tolerable, with small rate of late complications. Presented results warrant further evaluation.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy with flattening filter-free beams for prostate cancer: assessment of patient-reported quality of life

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging treatment approach reported as safe and effective strategy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. End point of the current study is to appraise the patient-reported quality of life according to the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) questionnaire.

METHODS

In the framework of a prospective mono-institutional phase II trial, EPIC questionnaire was dispensed (up to 1 year after treatment) to a cohort of 46 patients of 72 treated with 5 fractions of 7 Gy each to the prostate. SBRT was delivered with RapidArc VMAT with 10 MV flattening filter-free photon beams.

RESULTS

Median follow-up of patients was 14.5 months (range: 6-23). Acute rectal toxicity was mild (only 23/72 cases with G1-2 and no G3-4) as well as urinary (50/72 G1-2 and no G3-4). At the moment, four cases of G1 late rectal toxicity and 22 cases of G1 urinary (1 of G2) were reported. Urinary, rectal, sexual, and hormonal scores resulted stable over time: 1 year scores resulted, respectively, in -0.3, +2.8, -1.7, and -2.8 % variations with respect to baseline. No significant differences were observed also when data were stratified according to functional and bother sub-scales.

CONCLUSIONS

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment of prostate with RapidArc and high-intensity photon beams resulted to be well tolerated by patients with mild toxicity profiles and good patient-reported quality of life perception for the first year after treatment. Longer follow-up in the trial cohort is in progress.

Image guided hypofractionated radiotherapy by helical tomotherapy for prostate carcinoma: toxicity and impact on Nadir PSA

AIM

To evaluate the toxicity of a hypofractionated schedule for primary radiotherapy (RT) of prostate cancer as well as the value of the nadir PSA (nPSA) and time to nadir PSA (tnPSA) as surrogate efficacy of treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighty patients underwent hypofractionated schedule by Helical Tomotherapy (HT). A dose of 70.2 Gy was administered in 27 daily fractions of 2.6 Gy. Acute and late toxicities were graded on the RTOG/EORTC scales. The nPSA and the tnPSA for patients treated with exclusive RT were compared to an equal cohort of 20 patients treated with conventional fractionation and standard conformal radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Most of patients (83%) did not develop acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity and 50% did not present genitourinary (GU) toxicity. After a median follow-up of 36 months only grade 1 of GU and GI was reported in 6 and 3 patients as late toxicity. Average tnPSA was 30 months. The median value of nPSA after exclusive RT with HT was 0.28 ng/mL and was significantly lower than the median nPSA (0.67 ng/mL) of the conventionally treated cohort (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated RT schedule with HT for prostate cancer treatment reports very low toxicity and reaches a low level of nPSA that might correlate with good outcomes.

[Radiation therapy in locally advanced and/or relapsed urological tumors]

Radiation therapy (RT) plays a fundamental role in the treatment of locally advanced and/or relapsed urological tumors, as well as in palliation, or as definitive treatment, and even where integrated into a multi-modal approach. In operated renal tumors, positive margins or extracapsular extension show a positive impact of postoperative RT, with a reduction of relapses between 100% and 30%, while, in the case of palliation, treatments with RT at high doses are preferred. In advanced cancers of the upper urinary tract, RT plays a limited role, even if it seems to increase the level of disease control locally and, with the combination of cisplatin, survival rates too. An important reduction in the recurrence is also observed in locally advanced tumors of the urethra, with a recurrence of 60% after surgery, 36% after RT and 25% after pairing of the two. In locally advanced tumors of the penis, RT shows poorer results than surgery, and the addition of postoperative RT does not seem to add any further outcome, except where, in the presence of a positive inguinal dissection, the postoperative RT reduces lymph node recurrences by 60%-11%. Interesting data for the preservation of the organ are reported with reference to the combination with chemotherapy. In the tumors of the testis, it is still disputable whether the treatment of residual masses after chemotherapy may be appropriate, with a view to a possible salvage radiotherapy. In the treatment of the prostate, the role of RT is consolidated and evolving with the progress of dose escalation, the association with hormonal therapy, new technologies, new possibilities of IMRT and proton therapy and various studies on multi-modal approaches (hormone therapy, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy). Cystectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of locally advanced bladder cancer, even though there is a revived interest in multimodal treatments (transurethral resection, chemotherapy, RT) that may allow the organ preservation. Postoperative radiotherapy, which can reduce by 50% to 20%-5% local recurrences that are highly correlated with distance failure and with survival, should be revised in the light of modern RT techniques that can further increase local control levels and reduce the toxicity significantly.