Proctitis following stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Rectal toxicity of 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy following hydrogel spacer (Space OAR) injection for men with prostate cancer

Purpose

To evaluate whether hydrogel spacer injection, which increases the distance between the prostate and rectum, prior to local radiation therapy for prostate cancer reduces rectal and bladder toxicity.

Patients and methods

With institutional review board approval (05-004), we retrospectively reviewed rectal and bladder toxicity after local radiation therapy in patients with prostate cancer who were followed up for more than 1 year.

Results

We included 156 patients who had received local radiation therapy. Their ages ranged from 63 to 86 years, with an average of 75 years. Most patients were treated only on the prostate and seminal vesicles. All prostate sites were irradiated as follows: whole pelvis with prostate in 10 patients, whole pelvis with prostate and metastatic sites in six, and prostate and metastatic sites in eight. Radiation therapy (70-74 Gy) was performed for the prostate. Irradiation of 45-46.8 Gy was applied to whole pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes, with 54-60 Gy applied to bone metastatic sites. In one case, stereotactic body radiation therapy (36 Gy) was performed for a sacral bone metastatic site. The hydrogel spacer was injected in 39 patients. Rectal toxicity was reported in 21 patients without (17.9%) and 3 patients with (7.7%) the hydrogel spacer. Bladder toxicity was reported in five patients without and only one patient with the hydrogel spacer.

Conclusion

Hydrogel spacer injection prior to local radiation therapy for prostate cancer reduces rectal radiation exposure, lowers the risk of rectal complications, and may be a promising method for boosting the irradiation dose in the future.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SIB-VMAT technique) to dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL) for localized prostate cancer: a dose-escalation trial (DESTROY-4)

PURPOSE

DESTROY-4 (DOSE-ESCALATION STUDY OF STEREOTACTIC BODY RADIATION THERAPY) was a Phase I trial aimed to evaluate the safety and the feasibility of escalating doses of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) on MRI-defined Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion (DIL) in low- and intermediate-risk pCa patients using a simultaneous integrated boost-volumetric arc therapy (SIB-VMAT) technique.

METHODS

Eligible patients included those with low- and intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma (NCCN risk classes) and an International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS) ≤ 15. No restriction about DIL and prostate volumes was set. Pretreatment preparation required an enema and the placement of intraprostatic gold fiducials. SBRT was delivered in five consecutive daily fractions. For the first three patients, the DIL radiation dose was set at 8 Gy per fraction up to a total dose of 40 Gy (PTV1) and was gradually increased in succeeding cohorts to total doses of 42.5 Gy, 45.0 Gy, 47.5 Gy, and finally, 50.0 Gy, while keeping the prescription of 35 Gy/7 Gy per fraction for the entire prostate gland. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3 or worse gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurring within 90 days of follow-up (Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events scale 4.0). Patients completed quality-of-life questionnaires at defined intervals.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients with a median age of 75 (range, 58-89) years were enrolled. The median follow-up was 26.3 months (8.9-84 months). 66.7% of patients were classified as intermediate-risk groups, while the others were low-risk groups, according to the NCCN guidelines. Enrolled patients were treated as follows: 8 patients (40 Gy), 5 patients (42.5 Gy), 4 patients (45 Gy), 4 patients (47.5 Gy), and 3 patients (50 Gy). No severe acute toxicities were observed. G1 and G2 acute GU toxicities occurred in 4 (16%) and 3 patients (12.5%), respectively. Two patients (8.3%) and 3 patients (12.5%) experienced G1 and G2 GI toxicities, respectively. Since no DLTs were observed, 50 Gy in five fractions was considered the MTD. The median nadir PSA was 0.20 ng/mL. A slight improvement in QoL values was registered after the treatment.

CONCLUSION

This trial confirms the feasibility and safety of a total SIB-VMAT dose of 35 Gy on the whole gland and 50 Gy on DIL in 5 fractions daily administered in a well-selected low- and intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma population. A phase II study is ongoing to confirm the tolerability of the schedule and assess the efficacy.

Radiotherapy Induces Innate Immune Responses in Patients Treated for Prostate Cancers

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy is a curative therapeutic modality used to treat cancers as a single agent or in combination with surgery and chemotherapy. Advanced radiotherapy technologies enable treatment with large fractions and highly conformal radiation doses to effect free-radical damage to cellular DNA leading to cell-cycle arrest, cell death, and innate immune response (IIR) stimulation.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

To understand systemic clinical responses after radiation exposure, proteomic and metabolomic analyses were performed on plasma obtained from patients with cancer at intervals after prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy. Pathway and multivariate analyses were used to delineate molecular alterations following radiotherapy and its correlation with clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

DNA damage response increased within the first hour after treatment and returned to baseline by 1 month. IIR signaling also increased within 1 hour of treatment but persisted for up to 3 months thereafter. Furthermore, robust IIR and metabolite elevations, consistent with an early proinflammatory M1-mediated innate immune activation, were observed in patients in remission, whereas patients experiencing prostate serum antigen-determined disease progression demonstrated less robust immune responses and M2-mediated metabolite elevations.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, these data are the first report of longitudinal proteomic and metabolomic molecular responses in patients after radiotherapy for cancers. The data supports innate immune activation as a critical clinical response of patients receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Furthermore, we propose that the observed IIR may be generalized to the treatment of other cancer types, potentially informing multidisciplinary therapeutic strategies for cancer treatment.

Rationale for Utilization of Hydrogel Rectal Spacers in Dose Escalated SBRT for the Treatment of Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer

In this review we outline the current evidence for the use of hydrogel rectal spacers in the treatment paradigm for prostate cancer with external beam radiation therapy. We review their development, summarize clinical evidence, risk of adverse events, best practices for placement, treatment planning considerations and finally we outline a framework and rationale for the utilization of rectal spacers when treating unfavorable risk prostate cancer with dose escalated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT).

Bleeding Risk Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer in Men on Baseline Anticoagulant or Antiplatelet Therapy

Purpose

Patients on anticoagulant/antiplatelet medications are at a high risk of bleeding following external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. SBRT may reduce the bleeding risk by decreasing the volume of bladder/rectum receiving high doses. This retrospective study sought to evaluate the rates of hematuria and hematochezia following SBRT in these patients.

Methods

Localized prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT from 2007 to 2017 on at least one anticoagulant/antiplatelet at baseline were included. The minimum follow-up was 3 years with a median follow-up of 72 months. Patients who had a rectal spacer placed prior to SBRT were excluded. Radiotherapy was delivered in 5 fractions to a dose of 35 Gy or 36.25 Gy utilizing the CyberKnife system. Hematuria and hematochezia were prospectively assessed before and after treatment using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26). Toxicities were scored using the CTCAE v4. Cystoscopy and colonoscopy findings were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Forty-four men with a median age of 72 years with a history of taking at least one anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medication received SBRT. Warfarin (46%), clopidogrel (34%) and rivaroxaban (9%) were the most common medications. Overall, 18.2% experienced hematuria with a median time of 10.5 months post-SBRT. Altogether, 38.6% experienced hematochezia with a median time of 6 months post-SBRT. ≥ Grade 2 hematuria and hematochezia occurred in 4.6% and 2.5%, respectively. One patient required bladder neck fulguration and one patient underwent rectal cauterization for multiple non-confluent telangiectasia. There were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Cystoscopy revealed bladder cancer (40%) and benign prostatic bleeding (40%) as the most common hematuria etiology. Colonoscopy demonstrated hemorrhoids (54.5%) and radiation proctitis (9.1%) as the main causes of hematochezia. There was no significant change from the mean baseline EPIC-26 hematuria and hematochezia scores at any point during follow up.

Conclusion

In patients with baseline anticoagulant usage, moderate dose prostate SBRT was well tolerated without rectal spacing. High grade bleeding toxicities were uncommon and resolved with time. Baseline anticoagulation usage should not be considered a contraindication to prostate SBRT.

Sexual aspects of shared decision making and prehabilitation in men diagnosed with prostate cancer

This article addresses sexual aspects of two related HCP-roles in the period between a diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) and the start of treatment. First, the 'lovemap-perspective' is used to fine-tune the process of shared decision making. Then sexual prehabilitation is explored in detail, in the belief that better sexual function before starting treatment is more likely to lead to better post-treatment outcomes. Recommendations will be shared on further development of sexual prehabilitation approaches.

Utilization of Iodinated SpaceOAR Vue™ During Robotic Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) to Identify the Rectal-Prostate Interface and Spare the Rectum: A Case Report

We describe the utilization of SpaceOAR Vue™, a new iodinated rectal spacer, during Robotic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for a Prostate Cancer Patient with a contraindication to Magnetic Resonance Imaging. A 69-year-old Caucasian male presented with unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer and elected to undergo SBRT. His medical history was significant for atrial fibrillation on Rivaroxaban with a pacemaker. He was felt to be at increased risk of radiation proctitis following SBRT due to the inability to accurately contour the anterior rectal wall at the prostate apex without a treatment planning MRI and an increased risk of late rectal bleeding due to prescribed anticoagulants. In this case report, we discuss the technical aspects of appropriate placement and treatment planning for utilizing SpaceOAR Vue™ with Robotic SBRT.

Discovery of Metabolic Biomarkers Predicting Radiation Therapy Late Effects in Prostate Cancer Patients

Patients presenting with prostate cancers undergo clinical staging evaluations to determine the extent of disease to guide therapeutic recommendations. Management options may include watchful waiting, surgery, or radiation therapy. Thus, initial risk stratification of prostate cancer patients is important for achieving optimal therapeutic results or cancer cure and preservation of quality of life. Predictive biomarkers for risks of complications or late effects of treatment are needed to inform clinical decisions for treatment selection. Here, we analyzed pre-treatment plasma metabolites in a cohort of prostate cancer patients (N = 99) treated with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) at Medstar-Georgetown University Hospital in a longitudinal, quality-of-life study to determine if individuals experiencing radiation toxicities can be identified by a molecular profile in plasma prior to treatment. We used a multiple reaction mass spectrometry-based molecular phenotyping of clinically annotated plasma samples in a retrospective outcome analysis to identify candidate biomarker panels correlating with adverse clinical outcomes following radiation therapy. We describe the discovery of candidate biomarkers, based on small molecule metabolite panels, showing high correlations (AUCs ≥ 95%) with radiation toxicities, suitable for validation studies in an expanded cohort of patients.

Comparison of Late Urinary Symptoms Following SBRT and SBRT with IMRT Supplementation for Prostate Cancer

Background

Prostate cancer survivors commonly experience late-onset lower urinary tract symptoms following radiotherapy. We aimed to compare lower urinary tract symptoms in patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to those treated with a combination of lower dose SBRT and supplemental intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SBRT + IMRT).

Methods

Subjects with localized prostate carcinoma scheduled to receive SBRT or a combination of SBRT and IMRT were enrolled and followed for up to 2 years after treatment completion. Participants treated with SBRT received 35-36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, while those treated with SBRT + IMRT received 19.5 Gy of SBRT in 3 fractions followed by 45-50.4 Gy of IMRT in 25-28 fractions. Urinary symptoms were measured using the American Urological Association (AUA) Symptom Score.

Results

Two hundred patients received SBRT (52% intermediate risk, 37.5% low risk according to D'Amico classification) and 145 patients received SBRT + IMRT (61.4% high risk, 35.2% intermediate risk). Both groups experienced a transient spike in urinary symptoms 1 month after treatment. More severe late urinary flare (increase in AUA scores ≥ 5 points from baseline to 1 year after treatment completion and an AUA score ≥ 15 at 1 year after treatment) was experienced by patients who received SBRT compared to those treated with SBRT + IMRT.

Conclusion

Participants who received SBRT and supplemental IMRT experienced less severe late urinary flare 1 year after treatment compared to those who received higher dose SBRT alone. This information can be used by clinicians to provide patients with anticipatory counseling to mitigate any psychological burden that comes with unanticipated late urinary toxicities.

[Toxicity and quality of life comparison of iodine 125 brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancers]

Quality of life is a major issue for good prognostic prostate cancer, for which brachytherapy is one of the reference treatments. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is a recent alternative however not yet validated as a standard treatment. This review of the literature reports and compares the toxicities and the quality of life, either after exclusive brachytherapy with iodine 125 or after SBRT. The comparison is made with the limitations of the absence of randomized trial comparing the two treatment techniques. Acute toxicity appears to be lower after SBRT compared to brachytherapy (from 10 to 40 % versus 30 to 40 %, respectively). Conversely, acute and late gastrointestinal toxicity (from 0 to 21 % and from 0 to 10 % of grade 2, respectively) appears more frequent with SBRT. Late urinary toxicity seems identical between both techniques (from 20 to 30 % of grade 2), with a possible urinary flare syndrome. Both treatments have an impact on erectile dysfunction, although it is not possible to conclude that a technique is superior because of the limited data on SBRT. SBRT has better bowel and urinary (irritation or obstruction) quality of life scores than brachytherapy; while sexual and urinary incontinence remain the same. The absence of randomized trial comparing SBRT with brachytherapy for prostate cancers does not allow to conclude on the superiority of one technique over another, thus justifying a phase III medicoeconomic evaluation.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a viable treatment option for the many patients who receive a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer each year. Technological advancements have led to tight target conformality, allowing for high-dose-per-fraction delivery without untoward normal tissue toxicity. Biochemical control, now reported up to 5 years, appears to compare favorably with dose-escalated conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Moreover, toxicity and quality of life follow-up data indicate genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities are likewise comparable to conventional radiation therapy. Nevertheless, because of the long natural history of prostate cancer, extended follow-up will be necessary to confirm these impressive initial results. Within this prostate SBRT review, we explore the detailed rationale for SBRT treatment, the diverse SBRT techniques utilized and their unique technical considerations, and finally data for SBRT clinical efficacy and treatment-related toxicity.

Cyberknife Radioablation of Prostate Cancer – Preliminary Results for 400 Patients

Objectives: To evaluate the tolerance and effectiveness of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) applied in the treatment of low and intermediate risk (LR & IR) prostate cancer patients (PCP) and provide an evaluation of the level of risk group impact on treatment results. In addition, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) usage and prostatic specific antigen (PSA) decline after SABR were assessed. Material and Methods: A total of 400 PCP (213 LR and 187 IR, including T2c) were irradiated with a CyberKnife using fd 7.25 Gy to TD 36.25 Gy. At the start of treatment, 60.3% of patients were undergoing ADT and this gradually decreased to 0% after 38 months. Follow-up was for a median of 15.0 months. Patients were monitored on SABR completion and 1, 4, 8 months later and then subsequently every 6 months. GI (Gastro-Intestinal) and GU (Genito-Urinary) acute and late adverse effects, PSA and ADT usage were evaluated. Results: Failure was noted in 9 patients (2.25%) (5 in LR and 4 in IR groups) - 4 relapses and 5 nodal metastases. No G3/4 late adverse effects (EORTC/RTOG) were observed. Some 0.5% of G3 GU and 0.3% of G3 GI acute reactions were noted respectively on the SABR completion day and one month later. The median of PSA declined 1.5 ng/ml during the first month and 0.6 ng/ml during the next three months. No impact of risk groups on treatment results was found. An impact of ADT on PSA decline was only confirmed for time point interactions. Conclusions: SABR for LR and IR PCP is a safe and effective treatment. The inclusion of T2c patients and the low percentage of IR patient failure permit us the assumption that this procedure could be utilized in the treatment of more advanced cases. The results do not allow clear definition of the impact of ADT on radioablation results in LR and IR+ T2c cases.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

With over a decade׳s worth of clinical experience to guide stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa), sufficient data exist for robust conclusions to be made regarding its efficacy and the toxicities associated with this treatment. We briefly review the fundamental radiobiological basis of SBRT for PCa and provide a comprehensive synthesis of the medical literature to date, focusing on clinical outcomes and toxicities. When possible, we draw comparisons to comparable data for conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Finally, a brief overview of technical considerations is presented. Although randomized clinical trials comparing SBRT with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy are underway, the current body of evidence supports the efficacy and safety of SBRT for PCa.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: A Report on 3-Year Toxicity

Background

Recent data suggest that intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plus brachytherapy boost for unfavorable prostate cancer provides improved biochemical relapse-free survival over IMRT alone. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may be a less invasive alternative to brachytherapy boost. Here, we report the 3-year gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities of IMRT plus SBRT boost.

Materials and methods

Between March 2008 and September 2012, patients with prostate cancer were treated with robotic SBRT (19.5 Gy in three fractions) followed by fiducial-guided IMRT (45–50.4 Gy) on an institutional protocol. Toxicity was prospectively graded using the common terminology criteria for adverse events version 4.0 (CTCAEv.4) at the start of and at 1- to 6-month intervals after therapy. Rectal telangiectasias were graded using the Vienna Rectoscopy Score (VRS).

Results

At a median follow-up of 4.2 years (2.4–7.5), 108 patients (4 low-, 45 intermediate-, and 59 high-risk) with a median age of 74 years (55–92) were treated with SBRT plus IMRT, with 8% on anticoagulation and an additional 48% on antiplatelet therapy at the start of therapy. The cumulative incidence of late ≥grade 2 GI toxicity was 12%. Of these, 7% were due to late rectal bleeding, with six patients requiring up to two coagulation procedures. One patient with rectal telangiectasias was treated with hyperbaric oxygen (grade 3 toxicity). No rectal fistulas or stenoses were observed. Ten patients had multiple non-confluent telangiectasias (VRS grade 2), and three patients had multiple confluent telangiectasias (VRS grade 3). The cumulative incidence of late grade 3 GU toxicity was 6%. Most late toxicities were due to hematuria requiring bladder fulguration. There were no late ≥grade 4 GU toxicities.

Conclusion

Rates of clinically significant GI and GU toxicities are modest following IMRT plus SBRT boost. Future studies should compare cancer control, quality of life, and toxicity with other treatment modalities for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Proctitis 1 Week after Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Implications for Clinical Trial Design

Background

Proctitis following prostate cancer radiation therapy is a primary determinant of quality of life (QOL). While previous studies have assessed acute rectal morbidity at 1 month after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), little data exist on the prevalence and severity of rectal morbidity within the first week following treatment. This study reports the acute bowel morbidity 1 week following prostate SBRT.

Materials and methods

Between May 2013 and August 2014, 103 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with 35–36.25 Gy in five fractions using robotic SBRT delivered on a prospective clinical trial. Bowel toxicity was graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAEv.4). Bowel QOL was assessed using the EPIC-26 questionnaire bowel domain at baseline, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. Time-dependent changes in bowel symptoms were statistically compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Clinically significant change was assessed by the minimally important difference (MID) in EPIC score. This was defined as a change of 1/2 standard deviation (SD) from the baseline score.

Results

One-hundred and three patients with a minimum of 3 months of follow-up were analyzed. The cumulative incidence of acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 23%. There were no acute ≥ grade 3 bowel toxicities. EPIC bowel summary scores maximally declined at 1 week after SBRT (−13.9, p < 0.0001) before returning to baseline at 3 months after SBRT (+0.03, p = 0.94). Prior to treatment, 4.9% of men reported that their bowel bother was a moderate to big problem. This increased to 28.4% (p < 0.0001) 1 week after SBRT and returned to baseline at 3 months after SBRT (0.0%, p = 0.66). Only the bowel summary and bowel bother score declines at 1 week met the MID threshold for clinically significant change.

Conclusion

The rate and severity of acute proctitis following prostate SBRT peaked at 1 week after treatment and returned to baseline by 3 months. Toxicity assessment at 1 week can therefore minimize recall bias and should aid in the design of future clinical trials focused on accurately capturing and minimizing acute morbidity following SBRT.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: The Georgetown University Experience

Purpose/objective(s)

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to brachytherapy to deliver highly conformal, dose-­escalated radiation therapy (RT) to the prostate. SBRT alone may not adequately cover the tumor extensions outside the prostate commonly seen in unfavorable prostate cancer. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with high dose rate brachytherapy boost is a proven effective therapy for unfavorable prostate cancer. This study reports on early prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer-specific quality of life (QOL) outcomes in a cohort of unfavorable patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and SBRT boost.

Materials/methods

Prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT (19.5 Gy in three fractions) followed by fiducial-guided IMRT (45–50.4 Gy) from March 2008 to September 2012 were included in this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Biochemical failure was assessed using the Phoenix definition. Patients completed the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC)-26 at baseline, 1 month after the completion of RT, every 3 months for the first year, then every 6 months for a minimum of 2 years.

Results

One hundred eight patients (4 low-, 45 intermediate-, and 59 high-risk) with median age of 74 years completed treatment, with median follow-up of 4.4 years. Sixty-four percent of the patients received androgen deprivation therapy prior to the initiation of RT. The 3-year actuarial biochemical control rates were 100 and 89.8% for intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively. At the initiation of RT, 9 and 5% of men felt their urinary and bowel function was a moderate to big problem, respectively. Mean EPIC urinary and bowel function and bother scores exhibited transient declines, with subsequent return to near baseline. At 2 years posttreatment, 13.7 and 5% of men felt their urinary and bowel function was a moderate to big problem, respectively.

Conclusion

At 3-year follow-up, biochemical control was favorable. Acute urinary and bowel symptoms were comparable to conventionally fractionated IMRT and brachytherapy. Patients recovered to near their baseline urinary and bowel function by 2 years posttreatment. A combination of IMRT with SBRT boost is well tolerated with minimal impact on prostate cancer-specific QOL.

CyberKnife-based prostate cancer patient radioablation - early results of irradiation in 200 patients

INTRODUCTION

Prostrate cancer (PC) is one of the most common malignancies and is frequently treated with an 8-week course of radiotherapy. CyberKnife (CK) based radioablation enables completion of therapy within 5-9 days. The aim of this study is an evaluation of the effectiveness and tolerance of CyberKnife-based radioablation in prostate cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

200 PC patients (94 low risk [LR], 106 intermediate risk [IR]) underwent CK irradiation every other day (fraction dose [fd] 7.25 Gy, total dose [TD] 36.25 Gy, time 9 days). PSA varied from 1.1 to 19.5 (median 7.7) and T stage from T1c to T2c. The percentage of patients with Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT), GI (gastrointestinal) and GU (genitourinary) toxicity (EORTC/RTOG scale), and PSA were checked at 1, 4 and 8 months, and thereafter every 6 months - up to a total of 26 months - post-treatment.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients without ADT increased from 47.5% to 94.1% after 26 months. The maximum percentage of acute G3 adverse effects was 0.6% for GI, 1% for GU and G2 - 2.1% for GI and 8.5% for GU. No late G3 toxicity was observed. The maximum percentage of late G2 toxicity was 0.7% for GI and 3.4% for GU. Median PSA decreased from 7.7 to 0.1 ng/ml during FU. One patient relapsed and was treated with salvage brachytherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that CK-based radioablation in low and intermediate risk PC patients is an effective treatment modality enabling OTT reduction and presents a very low percentage of adverse effects.