Variability of α/β ratios for prostate cancer with the fractionation schedule: caution against using the linear-quadratic model for hypofractionated radiotherapy

Radiation Oncologists' Perspectives on Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: A Survey from Korean Oligometastasis Working Group

BACKGROUND

Interest in the oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC) is increasing, and various clinical studies have reported the benefits of metastasis-directed radiation therapy (MDRT) in OMPC. However, the recognition regarding the adopted definitions, methodologies of assessment, and therapeutic approaches is diverse among radiation oncologists. This study aims to evaluate the level of agreement for issues in OMPC among radiation oncologists.

METHODS

We generated 15 key questions (KQs) for OMPC relevant to definition, diagnosis, local therapies, and endpoints. Additionally, three clinical scenarios representing synchronous metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) (case 1), metachronous mPC with visceral metastasis (case 2), and metachronous mPC with castration-resistance and history of polymetastasis (case 3) were developed. The 15 KQs were adapted according to each scenario and transformed into 23 questions with 6-9 per scenario. The survey was distributed to 80 radiation oncologists throughout the Republic of Korea. Answer options with 0.0-29.9%, 30-49.9%, 50-69.9%, 70-79.9%, 80-89.9%, and 90-100% agreements were considered as no, minimal, weak, moderate, strong, and near perfect agreement, respectively.

RESULTS

Forty-five candidates voluntarily participated in this study. Among 23 questions, near perfect (n = 4), strong (n = 3), or moderate (n = 2) agreements were shown in nine. For the case recognized as OMPC with agreements of 93% (case 1), near perfect agreements on the application of definitive radiation therapy (RT) for whole metastatic lesions were achieved. While ≥70% agreements regarding optimal dose-fractionation for metastasis-directed RT (MDRT) has not been achieved, stereotactic body RT (SBRT) is favored by clinicians with higher clinical volume.

CONCLUSION

For the case recognized as OMPC, near perfect agreement for the application of definitive RT for whole metastatic lesions was reached. SBRT was more favored as a MDRT by clinicians with a higher clinical volume.

High-dose-rate Brachytherapy Monotherapy in Patients With Localised Prostate Cancer: Dose Modelling and Optimisation Using Computer Algorithms

AIMS

Interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is an effective therapy modality for patients with localized prostate carcinoma. The objectives of the study were to optimise the therapy regime variables using two models: response surface methodology (RSM) and artificial neural network (ANN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-one studies with 5651 patients were included (2078 patients presented as low-risk, 3077 patients with intermediate-risk, and 496 patients with high-risk). A comparison of these therapy schedules was carried out using an effective biologically effective dose (BEDef) that was calculated assuming the number of treatment days and dose (D) per day. The modelling and optimization of therapy parameters (BEDef and risk level) in order to obtain the maximum biochemical free survival (BFS) were carried out by the RSM and ANN models.

RESULTS

An optimal treatment schedule (BFS = 97%) for patients presented with low-risk biochemical recurrence would be D = 26 Gy applied in one application, 2 fractions at least 6 h apart, within an overall treatment time of 1 day (BEDef = 251 Gy) by the RSM and ANN model. For patients presented with intermediate- or high-risk an optimal treatment regime (BFS = 94% and 90%, respectively) would be D = 38 Gy applied in one application, 4 fractions at least 6 h apart, with an overall treatment time of 2 days (BEDef = 279 Gy) by the RSM and ANN models.

CONCLUSIONS

The RSM and ANN models determine almost the same optimal values for the set of predicted therapy parameters that make a feasible selection of an optimal treatment regime.

Evaluation of the trend of set-up errors during the treatment period using set-up margin in prostate radiotherapy

Accurate information on set-up error during radiotherapy is essential for determining the optimal number of treatments in hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. This necessitates careful control by the radiotherapy staff to assess the patient's condition. This study aimed to develop an evaluation method of the temporal trends in a patient's specific prostate movement during treatment using image matching and margin values. This study included 65 patients who underwent prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy (mean treatment time, 87.2 s). Set-up errors were assessed using bone, inter-, and intra-fraction marker matching across 39 fractions. The set-up margin was determined by dividing the four periods into 39 fractions using Stroom's formula and correlation coefficient. The intra-fraction set-up error was biased in the anterior-superior (AS) direction during treatment. The temporal trend of set-up errors during radiotherapy slightly increased based on bone matching and inter-fraction marker matching, with a 1.6-mm difference in the set-up margin fractions 11 to 20. The correlation coefficient of the mean prostate movement during treatment significantly decreased in the superior-inferior direction, while remaining high in the left-right and anterior-posterior directions. Image matching contributed significantly to the improvement of set-up errors; however, careful attention is needed for prostate movement in the AS direction, particularly during short treatment times. Understanding the trend of set-up errors during the treatment period is essential in numerical information sharing on patient condition and evaluating the margins for tailored hypo-fractionated radiotherapy, considering the facility's image-guided radiation therapy technology.

A Novel Framework for Thermoradiotherapy Treatment Planning

PURPOSE

Thermoradiotherapy combines radiation therapy with hyperthermia to increase therapeutic effectiveness. Currently, both modalities are optimized separately and in state-of-the-art research the enhanced therapeutic effect is evaluated using equivalent radiation dose in 2-Gy fractions (EQD2). This study proposes a novel thermoradiotherapy treatment planning framework with voxelwise EQD2 radiation therapy optimizing including thermal radiosensitization and direct thermal cytotoxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

To demonstrate proof-of-concept of the planning framework, 3 strategies consisting of 20 radiation therapy fractions were planned for 4 prostate cancer cases with substantially different temperature distributions: (1) Conventional radiation therapy plan of 60 Gy combined with 4 hyperthermia sessions (RT60 + HT), (2) standalone uniform dose escalation to 68 Gy without hyperthermia (RT68), and (3) uniform target EQD2 that maximizes the tumor control probability (TCP) accounting for voxelwise thermal effects of 4 hyperthermia sessions without increasing normal tissue doses (RTHT + HT). Assessment included dose, EQD2, TCP, and rectal normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), alongside robustness analyses for TCP and NTCP against parameter uncertainties.

RESULTS

The estimated TCP of around 76% for RT60 without hyperthermia was increased to an average of 85.9% (range, 81.3%-90.5%) for RT60 + HT, 92.5% (92.4%-92.5%) for RT68, and 94.4% (91.7%-96.6%) for RTHT + HT. The corresponding averaged rectal NTCPs were 8.7% (7.9%-10.0%), 14.9% (13.8%-17.1%), and 8.4% (7.5%-9.7%), respectively. RT68 and RTHT + HT exhibited slightly enhanced TCP robustness against parameter uncertainties compared with RT60 + HT, and RT68 presented higher and less robust rectal NTCP values compared with the other planning strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

This study introduces an innovative thermoradiotherapy planning approach, integrating thermal effects into EQD2-based radiation therapy optimization. Results demonstrate an ability to achieve enhanced and uniform target EQD2 and TCP across various temperature distributions without elevating normal tissue EQD2 or NTCP compared with conventional methods. Although promising for improving clinical outcomes, realizable enhancements depend on accurate tumor- and tissue-specific data and precise quantification of hyperthermic effects, which are seamlessly integrable in the planning framework as they emerge.

Lesion Dosimetry for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 Radiopharmaceutical Therapy Combined with Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Patients with Oligometastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

A single-institution prospective pilot clinical trial was performed to demonstrate the feasibility of combining [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Methods: Six patients with 9 prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive oligometastases received 2 cycles of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RPT followed by SBRT. After the first intravenous infusion of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (7.46 ± 0.15 GBq), patients underwent SPECT/CT at 3.2 ± 0.5, 23.9 ± 0.4, and 87.4 ± 12.0 h. Voxel-based dosimetry was performed with calibration factors (11.7 counts per second/MBq) and recovery coefficients derived from in-house phantom experiments. Lesions were segmented on baseline PSMA PET/CT (50% SUVmax). After a second cycle of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (44 ± 3 d; 7.50 ± 0.10 GBq) and an interim PSMA PET/CT scan, SBRT (27 Gy in 3 fractions) was delivered to all PSMA-avid oligometastatic sites, followed by post-PSMA PET/CT. RPT and SBRT voxelwise dose maps were scaled (α/β = 3 Gy; repair half-time, 1.5 h) to calculate the biologically effective dose (BED). Results: All patients completed the combination therapy without complications. No grade 3+ toxicities were noted. The median of the lesion SUVmax as measured on PSMA PET was 16.8 (interquartile range [IQR], 11.6) (baseline), 6.2 (IQR, 2.7) (interim), and 2.9 (IQR, 1.4) (post). PET-derived lesion volumes were 0.4-1.7 cm3 The median lesion-absorbed dose (AD) from the first cycle of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RPT (ADRPT) was 27.7 Gy (range, 8.3-58.2 Gy; corresponding to 3.7 Gy/GBq, range, 1.1-7.7 Gy/GBq), whereas the median lesion AD from SBRT was 28.1 Gy (range, 26.7-28.8 Gy). Spearman rank correlation, ρ, was 0.90 between the baseline lesion PET SUVmax and SPECT SUVmax (P = 0.005), 0.74 (P = 0.046) between the baseline PET SUVmax and the lesion ADRPT, and -0.81 (P = 0.022) between the lesion ADRPT and the percent change in PET SUVmax (baseline to interim). The median for the lesion BED from RPT and SBRT was 159 Gy (range, 124-219 Gy). ρ between the BED from RPT and SBRT and the percent change in PET SUVmax (baseline to post) was -0.88 (P = 0.007). Two cycles of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RPT contributed approximately 40% to the maximum BED from RPT and SBRT. Conclusion: Lesional dosimetry in patients with oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer undergoing [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RPT followed by SBRT is feasible. Combined RPT and SBRT may provide an efficient method to maximize the delivery of meaningful doses to oligometastatic disease while addressing potential microscopic disease reservoirs and limiting the dose exposure to normal tissues.

Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy with the 5-field technique, helical tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for localized prostate cancer

The outcomes of three methods of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer were evaluated. Between 2010 and 2018, 308 D'Amico intermediate- or high-risk patients were treated with 2.2 Gy daily fractions to a total dose of 74.8 Gy in combination with hormonal therapy. Overall, 165 patients were treated with 5-field IMRT using a sliding window technique, 66 were then treated with helical tomotherapy and 77 were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The median age of patients was 71 years. The median follow-up period was 75 months. Five-year overall survival (OS) and biochemical or clinical failure-free survival (FFS) rates were 95.5 and 91.6% in the 5-field IMRT group, 95.1 and 90.3% in the tomotherapy group and 93.0 and 88.6% in the VMAT group, respectively, with no significant differences among the three groups. The 5-year cumulative incidence of late grade ≥2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 7.3 and 6.2%, respectively, for all patients. Late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicities were less frequent in patients undergoing VMAT (0%) than in patients undergoing 5-field IMRT (7.3%) and those undergoing tomotherapy (11%) (P = 0.025), and this finding appeared to be correlated with the better rectal DVH parameters in patients undergoing VMAT. Other toxicities did not differ significantly among the three groups, although bladder dose-volume parameters were slightly worse in the tomotherapy group than in the other groups. Despite differences in the IMRT delivery methods, X-ray energies and daily registration methods, all modalities may be used as IMRT for localized prostate cancer.