Moderate Hypofractionation in High-Risk, Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer: Final Results of a Phase III Randomized Trial

[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.

Dosimetric Features of Ultra-Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Purpose

To report clinical and dosimetric characteristics of 5-fraction stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) using intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for localized prostate cancer.

Materials and Methods

All patients receiving IMPT SABR from 2017 to 2021 for localized prostate cancer at our institution were included. Five fractions were delivered every other day to the prostate +/- seminal vesicles [clinical target volume (CTV)] with 3 mm/3% robustness. A 4-field arrangement with 2 anterior oblique and 2 opposed lateral beams was used in most patients (97%), and most (99%) had a retroprostatic hydrogel spacer.

Results

A total of 534 patients with low (14%), favorable intermediate (45%), unfavorable intermediate (36%), high (4.0%), or very high-risk (0.6%) disease are evaluated. Prescription dose was 36.25 Gy (31%), 38 Gy (38%), or 40 Gy (31%) was prescribed. Median volume percentage of CTV receiving at least 100% of prescription dose [V100% (%)] was 100% [interquartile range: 99.99-100]. Rectum V50% (%), V80% (%), and V90% (%) were significantly lower in patients who had spacer, with a mean difference of -9.70%, -6.59%, and -4.42%, respectively, compared to those who did not have spacer. Femoral head dose was lower with a 4-field arrangement. Mean differences in left and right femoral head V40% (%) were -6.99% and -10.74%, respectively.

Conclusion

We provide a large, novel report of patients treated with IMPT SABR for localized prostate cancer. Four-field IMPT with hydrogel spacer provides significant sparing of rectum and femoral heads without compromising target coverage.

Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 3-year toxicity results of a multicentre randomized phase 3, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) is a standard treatment for prostate cancer patients. We compared 2 moderate HFRT regimens, with a biologically equivalent dose of 80 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, with a modest simultaneous integrated boost to the dominant intraprostatic lesion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized phase 3 trial with acute toxicity as the primary endpoint, comparing: 56 Gy in 4 weeks (16x3.5 Gy, 4 days/week, Arm A) with 67 Gy in 5 weeks (25x2.68 Gy, 5 days/week, Arm B). The H0 hypothesis is that both regimens are equivalent in terms of acute grade ≥ 2 gastro-intestinal toxicity, defined as a difference in acute grade ≥ 2 gastro-intestinal toxicity of ≤ 10 %. Here we report on acute and late toxicity.

RESULTS

We included 170 patients in Arm A and 172 patients in Arm B. The median follow-up time for all patients was 42 months. Acute grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was reported by 24 % of patients in both groups. Acute grade 2 and 3 urinary toxicity was observed in 52 % and 9 % of patients in Arm A and 53 % and 7 % in Arm B. Late grade 2 and grade ≥ 3 gastrointestinal toxicity occurred in 19 % and 4 % of patients in Arm A compared with 15 % and 4 % in Arm B. Late grade 2 and grade ≥ 3 urinary toxicity was observed in 37 % and 10 % of patients in Arm A and 36 % and 6 % in Arm B.

CONCLUSION

This analysis confirms that both HFRT regimens are safe and equivalent in terms of acute grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal toxicity.

Carbon Ion Radiation Therapy for Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

Purpose

Treatment outcomes of definitive photon radiation therapy for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) are reportedly unsatisfactory. Carbon ion radiation therapy (CIRT) has shown favorable tumor control in various malignancies, including radioresistant tumors. Therefore, we retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of CIRT for nmCRPC.

Methods and Materials

Patients with nmCRPC (N0M0) treated with CIRT at a total dose of 57.6 Gy (relative biologic effectiveness) in 16 fractions or 51.6 Gy (relative biologic effectiveness) in 12 fractions were included. The castration-resistant status received a diagnosis based on prostate-specific antigen kinetics showing a monotonic increase during primary androgen deprivation therapy or the need to change androgen deprivation therapy. Clinical factors associated with patient prognosis were explored. Twenty-three consecutive patients were identified from our database. The median follow-up period was 63.6 months (range, 14.1-120).

Results

Seven patients developed biochemical relapse, 6 had clinical relapse, and 4 died of the disease. The 5-year overall survival, local control rate, biochemical relapse-free survival, and clinical relapse-free survival were 87.5%, 95.7%, 70.3%, and 75.7%, respectively. One patient with diabetes mellitus requiring insulin injections and taking antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs developed grade 3 hematuria and bladder tamponade after CIRT. None of the patients developed grade 4 or worse toxicity.

Conclusions

The present findings indicate the acceptable safety and favorable efficacy of CIRT, encouraging further research on CIRT for nmCRPC.

Image-guided moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a multicentric retrospective study (IPOPROMISE)

BACKGROUND

Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy is a treatment option for the cure of localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients based on the results of randomized prospective trials, but there is a clinical concern about the relatively short length of follow-up, and real-world results on outcome and toxicity based on cutting-edge techniques are lacking. The objective of this study is to present the long-term results of a large multicentric series.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 1325 PCa patients treated with daily volumetric image-guided hypofractionated radiotherapy between 2007 and 2020 in 16 Centers. For survival endpoints, we used Kaplan-Meier survival curves and fitted univariate and multivariable Cox's proportional hazards regression models to study the association between the clinical variables and each survival type.

RESULTS

At the end of the follow-up, 11 patients died from PCa. The 15-year values of cancer-specific survival (CSS) and biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS) were 98.5% (95%CI 97.3-99.6%) and 85.5% (95%CI 81.9-89.4%), respectively. The multivariate analysis showed that baseline PSA, Gleason score, and the use of androgen deprivation therapy were significant variables for all the outcomes. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities of grade ≥ 2 were 7.0% and 16.98%, respectively. The 15-year late grade ≥ 2 GI and GU toxicities were 5% (95%CI 4-6%) and 6% (95%CI 4-8%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Real-world long-term results of this multicentric study on cutting-edge techniques for the cure of localized PCa demonstrated an excellent biochemical-free survival rate of 85.5% at 15 years, and very low rates of ≥ G3 late GU and GI toxicity (1.6% and 0.9% respectively), strengthening the results of the available published trials.

Radiation technique and outcomes following moderately hypofractionated treatment of low risk prostate cancer: a secondary analysis of RTOG 0415

BACKGROUND

While moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) for prostate cancer (PC) is commonly delivered by intensity modulated radiation therapy, IMRT has not been prospectively compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in this context. We conducted a secondary analysis of the phase III RTOG 0415 trial comparing survival and toxicity outcomes for low-risk PC following MHRT with IMRT versus 3D-CRT.

METHODS

RTOG 0415 was a phase III, non-inferiority trial randomizing low-risk PC patients to either MHRT or conventionally fractionated radiation with stratification by RT technique. A secondary analysis for differences in overall survival (OS), biochemical recurrence free survival (BRFS), or toxicity by EPIC scores and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) was performed.

RESULTS

1079 patients received the allocated intervention with a median follow up of 5.8 years. 79.1% of patients were treated with IMRT and radiation technique was balanced between arms. Across all patients, RT technique was not associated with significant differences in BRFS, OS, or rates of acute and late toxicities. For patients completing MHRT, there was a difference in the late GU toxicity distribution between 3D-CRT and IMRT but no difference in late grade 2 or greater GU or GI toxicity. Stratifying patients by RT technique and fractionation, no significant differences were observed in the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in EPIC urinary and bowel scores following RT.

CONCLUSIONS

RT technique did not impact clinical outcomes following MHRT for low-risk PC. Despite different late GU toxicity distributions in patients treated with MHRT by IMRT or 3D-CRT, there was no difference in late Grade 2 or greater GU or GI toxicity or patient reported toxicity. Increases in late GU and GI toxicity following MHRT compared to CFRT, as demonstrated in the initial publication of RTOG 0415, do not appear related to a 3D-CRT treatment technique.

Optimizing Clinical Implementation of Hypofractionation: Comprehensive Evidence Synthesis and Practical Guidelines for Low- and Middle-Income Settings

The global cancer burden, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), worsens existing disparities, amplified by the rising costs of advanced treatments. The shortage of radiation therapy (RT) services is a significant issue in LMICs. Extended conventional treatment regimens pose significant challenges, especially in resource-limited settings. Hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) and ultra-hypofractionated/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) offer promising alternatives by shortening treatment durations. This approach optimizes the utilization of radiotherapy machines, making them more effective in meeting the growing demand for cancer care. Adopting HRT/SBRT holds significant potential, especially in LMICs. This review provides the latest clinical evidence and guideline recommendations for the application of HRT/SBRT in the treatment of breast, prostate, and lung cancers. It emphasizes the critical importance of rigorous training, technology, stringent quality assurance, and safety protocols to ensure precise and secure treatments. Additionally, it addresses practical considerations for implementing these treatments in LMICs, highlighting the need for comprehensive support and collaboration to enhance patient access to advanced cancer care.

Long-Term Outcomes of a Prospective Study on Highly Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer for 3 Weeks

PURPOSE

Reports of radiation therapy for prostate cancer using dose fractions between moderate hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation are limited. This pilot study involved the application of highly hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in 15 fractions for 3 weeks and the number of fractions was intermediate between the 2 previously mentioned dose fractions. The long-term outcomes are reported.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From April 2014 to September 2015, patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer received 54 Gy in 15 fractions (3.6 Gy per fraction) for 3 weeks using IMRT without intraprostatic fiducial markers or a rectal hydrogel spacer. Neoadjuvant hormone therapy (HT) was administered for 4 to 8 months. Adjuvant HT was not administered to any patients. Rates of biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, overall survival, and the cumulative incidence of late grade ≥2 toxicities were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled in this prospective study; 24 of them were treated with highly hypofractionated IMRT (17% had low-risk and 83% had intermediate-risk disease). The median neoadjuvant HT duration was 5.3 months. The median follow-up period was 77 months (range, 57-87 months). Biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, and overall survival rates were 91.7%, 95.8%, and 95.8% at 5 years, and 87.5%, 86.3%, and 95.8% at 7 years, respectively. Neither grade ≥2 late gastrointestinal toxicity nor grade ≥3 late genitourinary toxicity was observed. The cumulative incidence rates of grade 2 genitourinary toxicity were 8.5% and 18.3% at 5 and 7 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Highly hypofractionated IMRT delivering 54 Gy in 15 fractions for 3 weeks for prostate cancer without intraprostatic fiducial markers facilitated favorable oncological outcomes without severe complications. This treatment approach may be a possible alternative to moderate hypofractionation, but further validation is needed.

Gender-Affirming Surgery and Cancer: Considerations for Radiation Oncologists for Pelvic Radiation in Transfeminine Patients

Access to gender-affirming surgery is increasing for many transgender and nonbinary people in the United States, and radiation oncologists must be equipped to care for patients who have undergone such surgery in the region of their planned radiation treatment field. There are no guidelines for radiation treatment planning after gender-affirming surgery, and most oncologists do not receive training in the unique needs of transgender people with cancer. We review common gender-affirming genitopelvic surgeries for transfeminine people, including vaginoplasty, labiaplasty, and orchiectomy, and summarize the existing literature on the treatment of cancers of the neovagina, anus, rectum, prostate, and bladder in these patients. We also describe our systematic treatment approach and rationale for pelvic radiation treatment planning.

Radiobiological Meta-Analysis of the Response of Prostate Cancer to Different Fractionations: Evaluation of the Linear-Quadratic Response at Large Doses and the Effect of Risk and ADT

The purpose of this work was to investigate the response of prostate cancer to different radiotherapy schedules, including hypofractionation, to evaluate potential departures from the linear-quadratic (LQ) response, to obtain the best-fitting parameters for low-(LR), intermediate-(IR), and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer and to investigate the effect of ADT on the radiobiological response. We constructed a dataset of the dose-response containing 87 entries/16,536 patients (35/5181 LR, 32/8146 IR, 20/3209 HR), with doses per fraction ranging from 1.8 to 10 Gy. These data were fit to tumour control probability models based on the LQ model, linear-quadratic-linear (LQL) model, and a modification of the LQ (LQmod) model accounting for increasing radiosensitivity at large doses. Fits were performed with the maximum likelihood expectation methodology, and the Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to compare the models. The AIC showed that the LQ model was superior to the LQL and LQmod models for all risks, except for IR, where the LQL model outperformed the other models. The analysis showed a low α/β for all risks: 2.0 Gy for LR (95% confidence interval: 1.7-2.3), 3.4 Gy for IR (3.0-4.0), and 2.8 Gy for HR (1.4-4.2). The best fits did not show proliferation for LR and showed moderate proliferation for IR/HR. The addition of ADT was consistent with a suppression of proliferation. In conclusion, the LQ model described the response of prostate cancer better than the alternative models. Only for IR, the LQL model outperformed the LQ model, pointing out a possible saturation of radiation damage with increasing dose. This study confirmed a low α/β for all risks.

Machine-learning with region-level radiomic and dosimetric features for predicting radiotherapy-induced rectal toxicities in prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study aims to build machine learning models to predict radiation-induced rectal toxicities for three clinical endpoints and explore whether the inclusion of radiomic features calculated on radiotherapy planning computerised tomography (CT) scans combined with dosimetric features can enhance the prediction performance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

183 patients recruited to the VoxTox study (UK-CRN-ID-13716) were included. Toxicity scores were prospectively collected after 2 years with grade ≥ 1 proctitis, haemorrhage (CTCAEv4.03); and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (RTOG) recorded as the endpoints of interest. The rectal wall on each slice was divided into 4 regions according to the centroid, and all slices were divided into 4 sections to calculate region-level radiomic and dosimetric features. The patients were split into a training set (75%, N = 137) and a test set (25%, N = 46). Highly correlated features were removed using four feature selection methods. Individual radiomic or dosimetric or combined (radiomic + dosimetric) features were subsequently classified using three machine learning classifiers to explore their association with these radiation-induced rectal toxicities.

RESULTS

The test set area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.549, 0.741 and 0.669 for proctitis, haemorrhage and GI toxicity prediction using radiomic combined with dosimetric features. The AUC value reached 0.747 for the ensembled radiomic-dosimetric model for haemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary results show that region-level pre-treatment planning CT radiomic features have the potential to predict radiation-induced rectal toxicities for prostate cancer. Moreover, when combined with region-level dosimetric features and using ensemble learning, the model prediction performance slightly improved.

Hyaluronic Acid Spacer for Hypofractionated Prostate Radiation Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer has been associated with greater acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxic effects compared with conventionally fractionated RT.

Objective

To evaluate whether a hyaluronic acid rectal spacer could (1) improve rectal dosimetry and (2) affect acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects for hypofractionated RT.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 2020 to June 2021 among 12 centers within the US, Australia, and Spain, with a 6-month follow-up. Adult patients with biopsy-proven, T1 to T2 prostate cancer with a Gleason score 7 or less and prostate-specific antigen level of 20 ng/mL or less (to convert to μg/L, multiply by 1) were blinded to the treatment arms. Of the 260 consented patients, 201 patients (77.3%) were randomized (2:1) to the presence or absence of the spacer. Patients were stratified by intended 4-month androgen deprivation therapy use and erectile quality.

Main Outcomes and Measures

For the primary outcome, we hypothesized that more than 70% of patients in the spacer group would achieve a 25% or greater reduction in the rectal volume receiving 54 Gy (V54). For the secondary outcome, we hypothesized that the spacer group would have noninferior acute (within 3 months) grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects compared with the control group, with a margin of 10%.

Results

Of the 201 randomized patients, 8 (4.0%) were Asian, 26 (12.9%) Black, 42 (20.9%) Hispanic or Latino, and 153 (76.1%) White; the mean (SD) age for the spacer group was 68.6 (7.2) years and 68.4 (7.3) years for the control group. For the primary outcome, 131 of 133 (98.5%; 95% CI, 94.7%-99.8%) patients in the spacer group experienced a 25% or greater reduction in rectum V54, which was greater than the minimally acceptable 70% (P < .001). The mean (SD) reduction was 85.0% (20.9%). For the secondary outcome, 4 of 136 patients (2.9%) in the spacer group and 9 of 65 patients (13.8%) in the control group experienced acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects (difference, -10.9%; 95% 1-sided upper confidence limit, -3.5; P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

The trial results suggest that rectal spacing with hyaluronic acid improved rectal dosimetry and reduced acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects. Rectal spacing should potentially be considered for minimizing the risk of acute grade 2 or higher toxic effects for hypofractionated RT.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04189913.

ESTRO-ACROP recommendations for evidence-based use of androgen deprivation therapy in combination with external-beam radiotherapy in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is no consensus concerning the appropriate use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) during primary and postoperative external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in the management of prostate cancer (PCa). Thus, the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) guidelines seeks to present current recommendations for the clinical use of ADT in the various indications of EBRT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE PubMed that evaluated EBRT and ADT in prostate cancer. The search focused on randomized, Phase II and III trials published in English from January 2000 to May 2022. In case topics were addressed in the absence of Phase II or III trials, recommendations were labelled accordingly based on the limited body of evidence. Localized PCa was classified according to D'Amico et al. classification in low-, intermediate and high risk PCa. The ACROP clinical committee identified 13 European experts who discussed and analyzed the body of evidence concerning the use of ADT with EBRT for prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Key issues were identified and are discussed: It was concluded that no additional ADT is recommended for low-risk prostate cancer patients, whereas for intermediate- and high-risk patients four to six months and two to three years of ADT are recommended. Likewise, patients with locally advanced prostate cancer are recommended to receive ADT for two to three years and when ≥ 2 high-risk factors (cT3-4, ISUP grade ≥ 4 or PSA ≥ 40 ng/ml) or cN1 is present ADT for three years plus additional Abiraterone for two years is recommended. For postoperative patients no ADT is recommended for adjuvant EBRT in pN0 patients whereas for pN1 patients adjuvant EBRT with long-term ADT is performed for at least 24 to 36 months. In the setting of salvage EBRT ADT is performed in biochemically persistent PCa patients with no evidence of metastatic disease. Long-term ADT (24 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with high risk of further progression (PSA ≥ 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group ≥ 4) and a life expectancy of over ten years, whereas short-term ADT (6 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with lower risk profile (PSA < 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group 4). Patients considered for ultra-hypofractionated EBRT as well as patients with image based local recurrence within the prostatic fossa or lymph node recurrence should participate in appropriate clinical trials evaluating the role of additional ADT.

CONCLUSION

These ESTRO-ACROP recommendations are evidence-based and relevant to the use of ADT in combination with EBRT in PCa for the most common clinical settings.

A novel hydrogel orthotopic injection model in moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: Adaptive degradation and durable imaging

Purpose

Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) holds an important position in prostate cancer management. Existing hydrogel spacers can protect the rectum from radiation damage, but need improvement. We explored the application of a novel hydrogel in MHRT with adaptive degradation and durable imaging functions.

Methods and materials

The hydrogels were irradiated with 6MV x-ray to detect the radio-resistance property. Male SD rats (n=45) underwent hydrogel injection between the prostate and rectum. CT was used for investigating the novel spacer's degradation and imaging functions over three months. The hydrogel's radiation-attenuation properties and biocompatibility were further assessed.

Results

Hydrogel weight and volume remained stable for six weeks post-injection. After MHRT ended, the hydrogel showed accelerated degradation characteristics and remained in the body for at most three months. CT values of hydrogels exceeded 300 Hounsfield units (HU) throughout treatment, significantly higher than in surrounding normal tissues. A significant dose drop behind the hydrogel was observed post-implantation. Biocompatibility tests of hydrogel found it safe enough for living organisms.

Conclusions

The novel hydrogel application was fully adaptable to prostate cancer MHRT modalities, largely stable during treatment, rapidly degraded after radiotherapy ended, and consistently maintained superior imaging performance and biocompatibility. This novel spacer will be an effective tool in the era of hypofractionated radiotherapy.

Expanding radiotherapy access in Sub-Saharan Africa: an analysis of travel burdens and patient-related benefits of hypofractionation

Purpose

The purpose of this project was to examine the travel burdens for radiotherapy patients in Nigeria, Tanzania, and South Africa, and to assess the patient-related benefits of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) for breast and prostate cancer patients in these countries. The outcomes can inform the implementation of the recent Lancet Oncology Commission recommendations on increasing the adoption of HFRT in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) to enhance radiotherapy access in the region.

Methods

Data were extracted from electronic patient records at the NSIA-LUTH Cancer Center (NLCC) in Lagos, Nigeria and the Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital (IALCH) in Durban, South Africa, from written records at the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital (UNTH) Oncology Center in Enugu, Nigeria, and from phone interviews at Ocean Road Cancer Institute (ORCI) in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Google Maps was used to calculate the shortest driving distance between a patient's home address and their respective radiotherapy center. QGIS was used to map the straight-line distances to each center. Descriptive statistics were used to compare transportation costs, time expenditures, and lost wages when using HFRT versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for breast and prostate cancer.

Results

Patients in Nigeria (n=390) traveled a median distance of 23.1 km to NLCC and 86.7 km to UNTH, patients in Tanzania (n=23) traveled a median distance of 537.0 km to ORCI, and patients in South Africa (n=412) traveled a median distance of 18.0 km to IALCH. Estimated transportation cost savings for breast cancer patients in Lagos and Enugu were 12,895 Naira and 7,369 Naira, respectively and for prostate cancer patients were 25,329 and 14,276 Naira, respectively. Prostate cancer patients in Tanzania saved a median of 137,765 Shillings in transportation costs and 80.0 hours (includes travel, treatment, and wait times). Mean transportation cost savings for patients in South Africa were 4,777 Rand for breast cancer and 9,486 Rand for prostate cancer.

Conclusion

Cancer patients in SSA travel considerable distances to access radiotherapy services. HFRT decreases patient-related costs and time expenditures, which may increase radiotherapy access and alleviate the growing burden of cancer in the region.

Genomic Classifiers in Personalized Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy Approaches: A Systematic Review and Future Perspectives Based on International Consensus

Current risk-stratification systems for prostate cancer (PCa) do not sufficiently reflect the disease heterogeneity. Genomic classifiers (GC) enable improved risk stratification after surgery, but less data exist for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT) or RT in oligo-/metastatic disease stages. To guide future perspectives of GCs for RT, we conducted (1) a systematic review on the evidence of GCs for patients treated with RT and (2) a survey of experts using the Delphi method, addressing the role of GCs in personalized treatments to identify relevant fields of future clinical and translational research. We performed a systematic review and screened ongoing clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Based on these results, a multidisciplinary international team of experts received an adapted Delphi method survey. Thirty-one and 30 experts answered round 1 and round 2, respectively. Questions with ≥75% agreement were considered relevant and included in the qualitative synthesis. Evidence for GCs as predictive biomarkers is mainly available to the postoperative RT setting. Validation of GCs as prognostic markers in the definitive RT setting is emerging. Experts used GCs in patients with PCa with extensive metastases (30%), in postoperative settings (27%), and in newly diagnosed PCa (23%). Forty-seven percent of experts do not currently use GCs in clinical practice. Expert consensus demonstrates that GCs are promising tools to improve risk-stratification in primary and oligo-/metastatic patients in addition to existing classifications. Experts were convinced that GCs might guide treatment decisions in terms of RT-field definition and intensification/deintensification in various disease stages. This work confirms the value of GCs and the promising evidence of GC utility in the setting of RT. Additional studies of GCs as prognostic biomarkers are anticipated and form the basis for future studies addressing predictive capabilities of GCs to optimize RT and systemic therapy. The expert consensus points out future directions for GC research in the management of PCa.

Comparative evaluation of hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer

Background

The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate an efficacy and toxicity profile of hypofractionated radiotherapy (67.5 Gy in 25 fractions) to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (78 Gy in 39 fractions) in prostate cancer patients with intermediate and high-risk disease.

Materials and methods

From January 2015 to December 2018, 168 patients were randomized to hypofractionated radiation treatment and conventional fractionated radiation treatment schedules of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the prostate and seminal vesicles. All the patients also received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiation therapy started after ADT.

Results

The median (range) follow-up was 51 (31-63) and 53 (33-64) months in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated regimes, respectively. The 3-year biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED) rates were 86.9% and 73.8% in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated groups, respectively (p = 0.032, significant). The 3-year bNED rates in patients at a high risk [i.e., pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 20 ng/mL, Gleason score ≥ 8, or T ≥ 2 c], were 87.9% and 73.5% (p = 0.007, significant) in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy groups, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found for late toxicity between the two groups, with 3-year grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity rates of 19% and 16.7% and 3-year grade 2 genitourinary toxicity rates of 15.5% and 11.9% in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Hypofractionated schedule is superior to the conventional fractionation schedule of radiation treatment in terms of bNED in intermediate and high grade prostate cancer patients. Also, the late toxicity is found to be equivalent between the two treatment groups.

Efficacy, toxicity, and quality-of-life outcomes of ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer: A single-arm phase 2 trial from Asia

AIMS

Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy (UHF-RT) is widely utilized in men with localized prostate cancer (PCa). There are limited data in Asian cohorts. We report the outcomes of a single-arm, phase II trial of UHF-RT from an Asian center.

METHODS

We recruited men with histologically confirmed, nonmetastatic localized PCa. UHF-RT regimens were 36.25 Gy (Cohort A) and 37.5 Gy (Cohort B) delivered in five fractions every other day over 1.5-2.5 weeks. Primary endpoint was physician-scored late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs). Quality-of-life (QoL) was assessed by Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) at baseline, 1- and 2-year post-UHF-RT.

RESULTS

Between March 2014 and August 2019, 105 men were recruited; four were subsequently excluded from analysis. Median age was 68.0 (Interquartile range (IQR): 63.8-73.0) years. 26 (24.8%) and 68 (64.8%) men had NCCN-defined low-and intermediate-risk PCa, respectively. No late ≥G3 GU or GI toxicities were reported in both cohorts. Peak incidence of acute ≥G2 GU AEs at 14 days post-UHF-RT was 23.6% (17/72) and 24.0% (6/25) in Cohorts A and B, respectively; ≥G2 GI AEs were observed in 9.7% (7/72) and 36.0% (9/25), respectively. Late ≥G2 GU and GI AEs occurred in 4.7% and 3.1% of Cohort A patients, and 5.0% in Cohort B at 12 months, with no AEs at 24 months. EPIC scores changed minimally across all domains. At a median follow-up of 44.9 months, we recorded one (1.3%) biochemical relapse by the Phoenix criteria (Cohort A).

CONCLUSION

UHF-RT is well tolerated in Asian men and can be a recommended fractionation schema for localized PCa.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients: Long-Term Results

Background: To evaluate outcomes in terms of survival and toxicity in a series of intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy (HyRT) + hormonal therapy (HT) with or without image guidance (IGRT) and to investigate the impact of different variables. Methods: This is a multi-centric study. From January 2005 to December 2019, we treated 313 intermediate-risk PCa patients (T2b−T2c, Gleason score 7, or pre-treatment PSA 10 to 20 ng/mL) with HyRT. Patients received 54.75 Gy in 15 fractions in 5 weeks plus 9 months of neo-adjuvant, concomitant, and adjuvant HT with or without IGRT. Results: Median follow-up was 91.6 months (range 5.1−167.8 months). Median OS was not reached, and the 8- and 10-year OS was 81.9% and 72.4%, respectively. Median CSS was not reached, and the 8- and 10-year CSS was 97.9% and 94.5%, respectively. PSA at first follow-up <0.8 ng/mL was significantly related to better oncological outcomes (CSS, bRFS, LRFS, cPFS, and MFS) in both univariate and multivariate analysis. After Propensity Score matching, grade 2−3 acute and cumulative late GU (p = 0.153 and p = 0.581, respectively) and GI (p = 0.196 and p = 0.925, respectively) toxicity were not statistically different in patients treated with or without IGRT. Conclusions: HyRT is effective and safe regardless of the use of IGRT. PSA at first follow-up is an easily accessible prognostic factor that may help the clinicians to identify patients who require a treatment intensification.

Impact of Race on Outcomes of High-Risk Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Moderately Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in an Equal Access Setting

BACKGROUND

Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) is an accepted treatment for localized prostate cancer; however, limited MHRT data address high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) and/or African American patients. We report clinical outcomes and toxicity profiles for individuals with HRPC treated in an equal access system.

METHODS

We identified patients with HRPC treated with MHRT at a US Department of Veterans Affairs referral center. Exclusion criteria included < 12 months follow-up and elective nodal irradiation. MHRT included 70 Gy over 28 fractions or 60 Gy over 20 fractions. Acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0. Clinical endpoints, including biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Clinical outcomes, acute toxicity, and late toxicity-free survival were compared between African American and White patients with logistic regression and log-rank testing.

RESULTS

Between November 2008 and August 2018, 143 patients with HRPC were treated with MHRT and followed for a median of 38.5 months; 82 (57%) were African American and 61 were White patients. Concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was provided for 138 (97%) patients for a median duration of 24 months. No significant differences between African American and White patients were observed for 5-year OS (73% [95% CI, 58%-83%] vs 77% [95% CI, 60%-97%]; P = .55), PCSS (90% [95% CI, 79%-95%] vs 87% [95 % CI, 70%-95%]; P = .57), DMFS (91% [95% CI, 80%-96%] vs 81% [95% CI, 62%-91%]; P = .55), or BRFS (83% [95% CI, 70%-91%] vs 71% [95% CI, 53%-82%]; P = .57), respectively. Rates of acute grade 3+ GU and GI were low overall (4% and 1%, respectively). Late toxicities were similarly favorable with no significant differences by race.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with HRPC treated with MHRT in an equal access setting demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes that did not differ by race, alongside acceptable rates of acute and late toxicities.

Phase II Study of ENZAlutamide Combined With Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy (ENZART) for Localized Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer

Background

Intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is usually treated by a combination of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and a short course of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). ADT is associated with multiple side effects, including weight gain, loss of libido, and hot flashes. In contrast, anti-androgen monotherapy is generally better tolerated in spite of higher rates of gynecomastia.

Objective

This study assessed the effectiveness of enzalutamide monotherapy combined with hypofractionated EBRT (Hypo-EBRT) for treating intermediate risk prostate cancer.

Method

This trial was a multicenter, open-label phase II study of 6 months of enzalutamide monotherapy combined with Hypo-EBRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Hypo-EBRT was initiated 8–12 weeks after initiating enzalutamide. The primary endpoint was PSA decline &gt;80% measured at the 25th week of enzalutamide administration. Secondary end-points included assessment of toxicity, changes in anthropomorphic body measurements, sexual hormones, and metabolic changes.

Results

Sixty-two patients were included in the study from January 2018 to February 2020. A PSA decline of &gt;80% was observed in all evaluable patients at the end of enzalutamide treatment and 92% achieved PSA values under 0.1 ngr/ml. All patients remain in PSA response (&lt;80% reduction of the initial values) 6 months after the end of enzalutamide treatment. The most frequent adverse events were hypertension, asthenia, and gynecomastia. There were no significant changes in bone density, body mass index (BMI), or patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

Conclusion

Enzalutamide monotherapy is very effective along with hEBRT in reducing PSA levels for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to confirm the potential use of this combination in future randomized trials.

Modulation of Peripheral Immune Cell Subpopulations After RapidArc/Moderate Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Findings and Comparison With 3D Conformal/Conventional Fractionation Treatment

Radiotherapy (RT) is an important therapeutic option in patients with localized prostate cancer (PC). Unfortunately, radiation treatment causes a decrease in peripheral lymphocytes and, consequently, influences the patients' immune status. Our aim was to study changes in peripheral blood immune cell subpopulations after RT and during 6 months' follow-up in 2 groups of PC patients irradiated with different techniques and dose fractions with curative intent. We also investigated the presence of correlation between immune cell modulation and genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity. We enrolled 44 patients treated with curative RT (RapidArc/hypofractionation regimen or 3D conformal/conventional fractionation) for localized PC. Total white blood cell (WBC), absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs), and peripheral immune cell subpopulations were analyzed at baseline, at the end of RT, and 3 and 6 months after the end of RT. WBC and ALC greatly decreased at the end of RT with a trend to recover at 6 months' follow-up in the hypofractionation group but not in the conventional one. Furthermore, B, total T, T CD4+, T CD8+, and NK cell values dropped significantly in both groups at the end of RT, with a minor decrease detectable in the hypofractionation group for B, total T, and T CD4+ lymphocytes with respect to the other technique/fractionation group. Double-negative T (DNT), double-positive T (DPT), and NKT cells significantly decreased at the end of RT with a slight tendency to recover values during follow-up, particularly in the hypofractionation group. No correlation with genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity was found. In this study, we showed, for the first time, the effects of RapidArc/moderate hypofractionation RT on immune cell subsets in patients treated for localized PC. Due to the growing interest in minority T-cell subpopulations for immunotherapy, we also reported longitudinal monitoring of the effects of RT on DNT, DPT, and NKT, which was never studied before. Our preliminary data highlight the importance of considering the effects of different RT techniques/fractionation regimens on peripheral immune cells, in the era of RT and immunotherapy combination.

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

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

Tomotherapy-based moderate hypofractionation for localized prostate cancer: a mono-institutional analysis

Background

To date, few studies have been published on image-guided helical tomotherapy (HT) in a moderate hypofractionation of localized PCa. We report outcome and toxicity of localized PCa patients treated with HT-based moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy.

Materials and methods

76 patients were retrospectively analyzed. A total dose of 60 Gy (20 × 3 Gy) or 67.5 Gy (25 × 2.7 Gy) was prescribed. The χ² test was used to analyze associations between toxicity and dosimetric and clinical parameters. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was used for multivariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis.

Results

median follow-up was 42.26 months [interquartile (IQR), 23-76). At 4-year, overall survival (OS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) were 91% and 89%, respectively. At multivariate analysis, smoking habitude was associated with MFS [hazard ratio (HR) 7.32, 95% CI: 1.57-34.16, p = 0.011]. Acute and late grade ≥ 2 gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicity was observed in 6.5% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. Acute and late grade ≥ 2 genito-urinary (GU) toxicity were 31.5% and 3.9%. Four-year late GI and GU grade ≥ 2 toxicity were 3% and 7%, respectively. Acute GI toxicity was associated with statins medication (p = 0.04) and androgen deprivation therapy (p = 0.013). Acute GU toxicity was associated with the use of anticoagulants (p = 0.029) and antiaggregants (p = 0.013).

Conclusions

HT-based moderate hypofractionation shows very low rates of toxicity. Smoking habitude is associated with the risk of developing metastases after radical treatment for localized PCa.

Moderate hypofractionated helical tomotherapy for older patients with localized prostate cancer: long-term outcomes of a phase I-II trial

BACKGROUND

Our previous study showed that two different regimens of moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) delivered with helical tomotherapy (HT) are well tolerated in older prostate cancer patients. We provide a longterm efficacy and toxicity after > 7 years of follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study recruited 33 patients from February 2009 to July 2011 (76 Gy/34F; Group-1); and 34 from July 2011 to February 2014 (71.6 Gy/28F; 50.4 Gy/25F for the risk of pelvic lymph nodes involvement (LNI) >15%; Group-2). The primary outcomes were biochemical failure (BF), biochemical failure and clinical disease failure (BCDF), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity.

RESULTS

The average ages of two groups were 80 and 77 years and the proportions of patients with LNI > 15% were 69.7% and 73.5%, respectively. At the final follow-up in February 2020, 27.3% and 20.6% cases experienced BF, with a median time until BF of 3.3 years. A total of 38.8% patients reached primary endpoints, in which 18 deaths were reported BCDF events (45.5% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.271). There was no significant difference in 7-year PFS (68.6% vs. 74.8%, p = 0.591), BCDF (45.5% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.271) and OS (71.9% vs. 87.5%, p = 0.376) for full set analysis and for subgroup analysis (all p > 0.05). The incidence of grade ≥ 2 late GU (6.2% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.127) and GI toxicities (9.4% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.554) was comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In older patients with localized prostate cancer, two moderate hypofractionated regimens were all well tolerated with similar, mild late toxicities and satisfactory survival, without necessity of prophylactic pelvic node irradiation.

Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients

Objective

Failure rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is > 50%, includes safety-problems, underpowered statistics, lack of efficacy, lack of funding or insufficient patient recruitment and is even more pronounced in oncology trials. We present results of a structured concept-development phase (CDP) for a phase III RCT on personalized radiotherapy (RT) in primary prostate cancer (PCa) patients implementing prostate specific membrane antigen targeting positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET).

Materials and methods

The 1 yr process of the CDP contained five main working packages: (i) literature search and scoping review, (ii) involvement of individual patients, patients’ representatives and patients’ self-help groups addressing the patients’ willingness to participate in the preparation process and the conduct of RCTs as well as the patient informed consent (PIC), (iii) involvement of national and international experts and expert panels (iv) a phase II pilot study investigating the safety of implementation of PSMA-PET for focal dose escalation RT and (v) in-silico RT planning studies assessing feasibility of envisaged dose regimens and effects of urethral sparing in focal dose escalation.

Results

(i) Systematic literature searches confirmed the high clinical relevance for more evidence on advanced RT approaches, in particular stereotactic body RT, in high-risk PCa patients. (ii) Involvement of patients, patient representatives and randomly selected males relevantly changed the PIC and initiated a patient empowerment project for training of bladder preparation. (iii) Discussion with national and international experts led to adaptions of inclusion and exclusion criteria. (iv) Fifty patients were treated in the pilot trial and in- and exclusion criteria as well as enrollment calculations were adapted accordingly. Parallel conduction of the pilot trial revealed pitfalls on practicability and broadened the horizon for translational projects. (v) In-silico planning studies confirmed feasibility of envisaged dose prescription. Despite large prostate- and boost-volumes of up to 66% of the prostate, adherence to stringent anorectal dose constraints was feasible. Urethral sparing increased the therapeutic ratio.

Conclusion

The dynamic framework of interdisciplinary working programs in CDPs enhances robustness of RCT protocols and may be associated with decreased failure rates. Structured recommendations are warranted to further define the process of such CDPs in radiation oncology trials.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09434-2.

Long-Term Outcomes of Dose-Escalated Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer

This retrospective study aimed to provide some clinical outcomes regarding effectiveness, toxicity, and quality of life in PCa patients treated with dose-escalated moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT). Patients received HFRT to a total dose of 66 Gy in 22 fractions (3 Gy/fraction) delivered via volume modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in 2011-2016. Treatment effectiveness was measured by the biochemical failure-free survival rate. Toxicity was assessed according to the criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and quality of life according to the criteria of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). In this regard, quality of life (QoL) was measured longitudinally, at a median of 2 and 5 years after RT. Enrolled patients had low-risk (40.2%), intermediate-risk (47.5%), and high-risk (12.3%) PCa. Median follow-up was 75 months. The biochemical failure-free survival rate was 94.2%. The incidence of acute grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity was 9.84% and 28.69%, respectively. The incidence rate of late grade 2 or higher GI and GU toxicity was 1.64% and 4.10%, respectively. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) scores showed that the majority of patients maintained their QoL. HFRT to 66 Gy with VMAT was associated with adequate biochemical control, low toxicity and good reported GU and GI quality of life.

Management of prostate cancer in older patients

The incidence of prostate cancer among older men has increased in many countries, including Asian countries. However, older patients are ineligible for inclusion in large randomized trials, and the existing guidelines for the management of patients with prostate cancer do not provide specific treatment recommendations for older men. Therefore, generation of evidence for older patients with prostate cancer is a key imperative. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology has produced and updated several guidelines for management of prostate cancer in older men since 2010. Regarding localized prostate cancer, both surgery and radiotherapy are considered as feasible treatment options for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer even in older men, whereas watchful waiting and active surveillance are useful options for a proportion of these patients. With regard to advanced disease, androgen-receptor axis targets and taxane chemotherapy are standard treatment modalities, although dose modification and prevention of adverse events need to be considered. Management strategy for older patients with prostate cancer should take cognizance of not only the chronological age but also psychological and physical condition, socio-economic status and patient preferences. Geriatric assessment and patient-reported health-related quality of life are important tools for assessing health status of older patients with prostate cancer; however, there is a paucity of evidence of the impact of these tools on the clinical outcomes. Personalized management according to the patient's health status and tumour characteristics as well as socio-economic condition may be necessary for treatment of older patients with prostate cancer.

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.

Could Five Be the New Twenty-Five? Long-term Oncologic Outcomes from a Phase II, Prospective, 5-Fraction Pre-operative Radiation Therapy Trial in Patients with Localized Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Purpose

Management of adult soft tissue sarcomas entails a multidisciplinary approach with surgery and radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy. The use of preoperative irradiation has been well established, and although conventional fractionation involves daily treatments over the course of 5 weeks, higher doses per fraction may be beneficial due to the radiobiologic profile of sarcoma. In this study we report long-term oncologic outcomes from a single-institution, phase II study evaluating a 5-fraction hypofractionated course of preoperative radiation.

Methods and materials

Preoperative hypofractionated radiation therapy was administered to 35 Gy in 5 fractions every other day followed by resection 4 to 6 weeks later. If given, chemotherapy consisted of a doxorubicin-ifosfamide-based regimen delivered neoadjuvantly. The primary endpoint was local control. Additional survival and pathologic outcomes, including overall and distant metastasis-free survival, tumor, and treatment-related pathology, as well as acute and late toxicity were examined.

Results

Thirty-two patients were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm phase II trial. At a median follow-up of 36.4 months (range, 3-56), no patient developed a local recurrence, and the 3-year overall and distant metastasis-free survival was 82.2% and 69%, respectively. Major acute postoperative wound complications occurred in 25% of patients. Grade 2 and 3 fibrosis occurred in 21.7% and 13% of patients, respectively. The 2-year median and mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score for all patients was 28 and 27.4, respectively.

Conclusions

A condensed course of preoperative hypofractionated radiation therapy leads to excellent rates of local control and survival with acceptable toxicity profiles. Potential studies ideally with phase II or III randomized trials would help corroborate these findings and other preoperative hypofractionated results in soft tissue sarcomas.

Prospective Randomized Phase II Study of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) vs. Conventional Fractionated Radiotherapy (CFRT) for Chinese Patients with Early-Stage Localized Prostate Cancer

Background: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has potential radiobiologic and economic advantages over conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) in localized prostate cancer (PC). This study aimed to compare the effects of these two distinct fractionations on patient-reported quality of life (PRQOL) and tolerability. Methods: In this prospective phase II study, patients with low- and intermediate-risk localized PC were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the SBRT (36.25 Gy/5 fractions/2 weeks) or CFRT (76 Gy/38 fractions/7.5 weeks) treatment groups. The primary endpoint of variation in PRQOL at 1 year was assessed by changes in the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire scores and analysed by z-tests and t-tests. Results: Sixty-four eligible Chinese men were treated (SBRT, n = 31; CFRT, n = 33) with a median follow-up of 2.3 years. At 1 year, 40.0%/46.9% of SBRT/CFRT patients had a >5-point decrease in bowel score (p = 0.08/0.28), respectively, and 53.3%/46.9% had a >2-point decrease in urinary score (p = 0.21/0.07). There were no significant differences in EPIC score changes between the arms at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, but SBRT was associated with significantly fewer grade ≥ 1 acute and 1-year late gastrointestinal toxicities (acute: 35% vs. 87%, p < 0.0001; 1-year late: 64% vs. 84%, p = 0.03), and grade ≥ 2 acute genitourinary toxicities (3% vs. 24%, p = 0.04) compared with CFRT. Conclusion: SBRT offered similar PRQOL and less toxicity compared with CFRT in Chinese men with localized PC.

PSMA-PET/MRI-Based Focal Dose Escalation in Patients with Primary Prostate Cancer Treated with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (HypoFocal-SBRT): Study Protocol of a Randomized, Multicentric Phase III Trial

Technical advances in radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning and delivery have substantially changed RT concepts for primary prostate cancer (PCa) by (i) enabling a reduction of treatment time, and by (ii) enabling safe delivery of high RT doses. Several studies proposed a dose-response relationship for patients with primary PCa and especially in patients with high-risk features, as dose escalation leads to improved tumor control. In parallel to the improvements in RT techniques, diagnostic imaging techniques like multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and positron-emission tomography targeting prostate-specific-membrane antigen (PSMA-PET) evolved and enable an accurate depiction of the intraprostatic tumor mass for the first time. The HypoFocal-SBRT study combines ultra-hypofractionated RT/stereotactic body RT, with focal RT dose escalation on intraprostatic tumor sides by applying state of the art diagnostic imaging and most modern RT concepts. This novel strategy will be compared with moderate hypofractionated RT (MHRT), one option for the curative primary treatment of PCa, which has been proven by several prospective trials and is recommended and carried out worldwide. We suspect an increase in relapse-free survival (RFS), and we will assess quality of life in order to detect potential changes.

Salvage hypofractionated accelerated versus standard radiotherapy for the treatment of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (SHARE): the protocol of a prospective, randomized, open-label, superiority, multi-institutional trial

BACKGROUND

While several phase III trials have investigated the role of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer, prospective data reporting the outcomes of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the postoperative treatment setting are sparse. Therefore, this study is designed to assess the efficacy and treatment-related toxicity of hypofractionated salvage radiotherapy for the treatment of biochemical recurrence in men who underwent radical prostatectomy. The primary objective of this trial is to investigate whether hypofractionated radiotherapy improves biochemical control compared with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. In addition, treatment-related toxicity, quality of life, and survival will be evaluated as secondary endpoints.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, multi-institutional trial (the SHARE study), patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer will be randomized to receive either hypofractionated radiotherapy (65 Gy in 2.5-Gy fractions) or conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (66 Gy in 2-Gy fractions). Prostate bed irradiation or elective pelvic nodal irradiation including the prostate bed will be performed using intensity-modulated radiotherapy and daily image guidance. Treatment efficacy will be assessed using the serum tumor marker prostate-specific antigen, and toxicity will be evaluated through both physician- and patient-reported outcomes. Quality of life will also be investigated.

DISCUSSION

This study is designed to demonstrate whether hypofractionated radiotherapy is beneficial in terms of biochemical control and toxicity compared with standard salvage radiotherapy. If hypofractionated radiotherapy is shown to be superior to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy, it will mean that improved biochemical control can be achieved, accompanied by greater patient convenience and more efficient use of medical resources.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03920033. Registered on 18 April 2019.

Comparison of radical prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer

Purpose

We evaluated clinical outcomes of high-risk prostate cancer patients receiving external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or radical prostatectomy (RP).

Materials and Methods

Patients were classified as high-risk prostate cancer and received definitive treatment between 2005 and 2015. Patients with previous pelvic radiotherapy, positive lymph node or distant metastasis were excluded. The primary outcomes were prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).

Results

Of 583 patients met the inclusion criteria (77 EBRT and 506 RP), the estimated 10-year PCSS was 97.0% in the RP and 95.9% in the EBRT (p = 0.770). No significant difference was seen in the DMFS (p = 0.540), whereas there was a trend in favor of RP over EBRT in overall survival (OS) (p = 0.068). Propensity score matching analysis with confounding variables was done, with 183 patients (66 EBRT and 117 RP) were included. No significant difference in DMFS, PCSS or OS was found.

Conclusion

Our data demonstrated similar oncologic PCSS, OS, and DMFS outcomes between EBRT and RP patients.

Ten Year Results of Extensive Nodal Radiotherapy and Moderately Hypofractionated Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Unfavorable Intermediate-, High-, and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

Several phase III randomized trials of moderate hypofractionation, including a higher proportion of high-risk prostate cancer patients treated only to the prostate, failed to demonstrate the superiority of hypofractionated regimens. There is only one randomized phase III trial, of moderately hypofractionated high-dose radiotherapy to the prostate-only versus pelvic irradiation and prostate boost, with a sufficiently long follow-up. It demonstrated better biochemical and disease-free survival when lymph nodal radiotherapy was added. Here we present the 10-year results of our experience based on an Institutional protocol adopted after a phase I–II study, on patients with unfavorable intermediate- (UIR), high- (HR), and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (PCa) treated with pelvic lymph nodal irradiation (WPRT) and moderately hypofractionated high-dose (HD) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the prostate. Prognostic factors for relapse, as well as acute and late gastro-intestinal (GI) and genito-urinary (GU) toxicity were also analyzed.

Abstract

Aims: To report 10-year outcomes of WPRT and HD moderately hypofractionated SIB to the prostate in UIR, HR, and VHR PCa. Methods: From 11/2005 to 12/2015, 224 UIR, HR, and VHR PCa patients underwent WPRT at 51.8 Gy/28 fractions and SIB at 74.2 Gy (EQD2 88 Gy) to the prostate. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was prescribed in up to 86.2% of patients. Results: Median follow-up was 96.3 months (IQR: 71–124.7). Median age was 75 years (IQR: 71.3–78.1). At last follow up, G3 GI–GU toxicity was 3.1% and 8%, respectively. Ten-year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) was 79.8% (95% CI: 72.3–88.1%), disease-free survival (DFS) 87.8% (95% CI: 81.7–94.3%), overall survival (OS) 65.7% (95% CI: 58.2–74.1%), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) 94.9% (95% CI: 91.0–99.0%). Only two patients presented local relapse. At univariate analysis, VHR vs. UIR was found to be a significant risk factor for biochemical relapse (HR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.17–6.67, p = 0.021). After model selection, only Gleason Score ≥ 8 emerged as a significant factor for biochemical relapse (HR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.12–4.9, p = 0.023). Previous TURP (HR = 3.5, 95% CI: 1.62–7.54, p = 0.001) and acute toxicity ≥ G2 (HR = 3.1, 95% CI = 1.45–6.52, p = 0.003) were significant risk factors for GU toxicity ≥ G3. Hypertension was a significant factor for GI toxicity ≥ G3 (HR = 3.63, 95% CI: 1.06–12.46, p = 0.041). ADT (HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.12–0.8, p = 0.015) and iPsa (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16–0.83, p = 0.0164) played a protective role. Conclusions: WPRT and HD SIB to the prostate combined with long-term ADT, in HR PCa, determine good outcomes with acceptable toxicity.

Treatment Strategies for High-Risk Localized and Locally Advanced and Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

The definitions of locally advanced and oligometastatic prostate cancer are ambiguous, and there are no standard treatments for these. Although multidisciplinary treatment combining systemic and local treatment may be effective, there are many unresolved issues such as the choice of local treatment, use of new endocrine agents and chemotherapy, and selection of optimal patients. The present article discusses the definitions, diagnoses, and treatment of very high-risk prostate cancer and oligometastatic prostate cancer.

Abstract

Despite the significant advances in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer, patients with very high-risk features such as being locally advanced (clinical stage T3–4 or minimal nodal involvement), having a high Gleason pattern, or with oligometastasis may still have a poor prognosis despite aggressive treatment. Multidisciplinary treatment with both local and systemic therapies is thought to be effective, however, unfortunately, there is still no standard treatment. However, in recent years, local definitive therapy using a combination of radiotherapy and androgen deprivation is being supported by several randomized clinical trials. This study reviews the current literature with a focus on the definition of very high-risk prostate cancer, the role of modern imaging, and its treatment options.

A Multi-Institutional Phase 2 Trial of High-Dose SAbR for Prostate Cancer Using Rectal Spacer

PURPOSE

High-dose SABR for prostate cancer offers the radiobiologic potency of the most intensified radiation therapy regimens but was associated with >90% rates of ulceration of the anterior rectal wall on endoscopic assessment; this infrequently progressed to severe rectal toxicity in prior prospective series. A multi-institutional phase 2 prospective trial was conducted to assess whether placement of a perirectal hydrogel spacer would reduce acute periprostatic rectal ulcer events after high-dose (>40 Gy) SABR.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible patients included men with stage ≤T2c localized grade group 1 to 3 prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≤15 ng/mL, American Urological Association Symptom Index = AUA-SI scores ≤18, and a gland volume ≤80 cm³. Patients underwent perirectal hydrogel spacer placement, followed by SABR of 45 Gy in 5 fractions every other day to the prostate only. Androgen deprivation was not allowed except for cytoreduction. The rectal wall was directly assessed by serial anoscopy during follow-up to determine whether the spacer would reduce acute periprostatic rectal ulcer events from >90% to <70% within 9 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Forty-four men were enrolled and 43 were eligible for protocol analysis. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 48 months. Acute periprostatic ulcers were observed in 6 of 42 patients (14.3%; 95% confidence interval, 6.0%-27%; P < .001) at a median of 2.9 months posttreatment (range, 1.7-5.6 months). All ulcers (grade 1, 5 ulcers; grade 2, 1 ulcer) resolved on repeat anoscopy within 8 months of incidence. There were no grade ≥3 late gastrointestinal toxicities; the incidence of late grade-2 gastrointestinal toxicities was 14.3%, with a prevalence at 3 years of 0%. No toxicities greater than grade 3 occurred in any domain. Four-year freedom from biochemical failure was 93.8% (95% CI, 85.2%-100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Temporary hydrogel spacer placement before high-dose SABR treatment for localized prostate cancer and use of strict dose constraints are associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of rectal ulcer events compared with prior phase 1/2 trial results.

Therapeutic Sequences in the Treatment of High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Paving the Way Towards Multimodal Tailored Approaches

Various definitions are currently in use to describe high-risk prostate cancer. This variety in definitions is important for patient counseling, since predicted outcomes depend on which classification is applied to identify patient’s prostate cancer risk category. Historically, strategies for the treatment of localized high-risk prostate cancer comprise local approaches such as surgery and radiotherapy, as well as systemic approaches such as hormonal therapy. Nevertheless, since high-risk prostate cancer patients remain the group with higher-risk of treatment failure and mortality rates, nowadays, novel treatment strategies, comprising hypofractionated-radiotherapy, second-generation antiandrogens, and hadrontherapy, are being explored in order to improve their long-term oncological outcomes. This narrative review aims to report the current management of high-risk prostate cancer and to explore the future perspectives in this clinical setting.

Toxicity after moderately hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated prostate radiotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature

BACKGROUND

Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) currently represents the standard RT approach for all prostate cancer (PCa) risk categories. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available literature, focusing on acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) of moderate hypofractionation for localized PCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search was performed and two independent reviewers selected the records according to the following Population (P) Intervention (I) Comparator (C) and Outcomes (O) (PICO) question: "In patients affected by localized PCa (P), moderately hypofractionated RT (defined as a treatment schedule providing a single dose per fraction of 3-4.5 Gy) (I) can be considered equivalent to conventionally fractionated RT (C) in terms of G > 2 GI and GU acute and late adverse events (O)?". Bias assessment was performed using Cochrane Cochrane Collaboration's Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias.

RESULTS

Thirteen records were identified and a meta-analysis was performed. Risk of acute GI and GU > 2 adverse events in the moderately hypofractionated arm was increased by 9.8 % (95 %CI 4.8 %-14.7 %; I² = 57 %) and 1.5 % (95 % CI -1.5 %-4.4 %; I² = 0%), respectively.

DISCUSSION

Overall, majority of trials included in our meta-analysis suggested that moderately hypofractionated RT is equivalent, in terms of GI and GU adverse events, to conventional fractionation. Pooled analysis showed a trend to increased GI toxicity after hypofractionated treatment, but this might be related to dose escalation rather than hypofractionation.

Prostate hypofractionated radiotherapy (62Gy at 3.1Gy per fraction) with injection of hyaluronic acid: final results of the RPAH1 study

OBJECTIVES

The present multicenter Phase II study evaluated the rate of late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities at 3 years, after hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFR) of prostate cancer with injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) between the prostate and the rectum.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2013, 36 patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated by HFR/IMRT-IGRT. 20 fractions of 3.1 Gy were delivered, 5 days per week for a total dose of 62 Gy. A transperineal injection of 10cc of HA was performed between the rectum and the prostate. Late toxicities were evaluated between 3 and 36 months after the end of treatment (CTCAE v4).

RESULTS

Median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen was 8 ng ml-1. Among the 36 included patients, 2 were not evaluated because they withdrew the study in the first 3 months of follow-up, and 4 withdrew between 3 and 36 months, the per protocol population was therefore composed.Late grade ≥2 GI toxicities occurred in 4 (12%) patients with 3 (9%) Grade 2 rectal bleedings and one diarrhoea. Therefore, the inefficacy hypothesis following Fleming one-stage design cannot be rejected. None of the patients experienced late Grade 3-4 toxicities. Among the 30 patients completing the 36 months' visit, none still had a grade ≥2 GI toxicity. Late grade ≥2 genitourinary (GU) toxicities occurred in 14 (41%) patients. The most frequent toxicities were dysuria and pollakiuria. Four patients still experienced a grade ≥2 GU toxicity at 36 months.The biochemical relapse rate (nadir +2 ng ml-1) was 6% (2 patients). Overall, HA was very well tolerated with no pain or discomfort.

CONCLUSION

Despite the inefficacy of HA injection was not rejected, we observed the absence of Grade 3 or 4 rectal toxicity as well as a rate of Grade 2 rectal bleeding below 10% at 36 months of follow-up. Late urinary toxicities are the most frequent but the rate decreases largely at 3 years.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

With an injection of HA, hypofractionated irradiation in 4 weeks is well tolerated with no Grade 3 or 4 GI toxicity and a rate of Grade 2 rectal bleeding below 10% at 36 months of follow-up.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy recommendations for localized prostate cancer in Brasil

OBJECTIVE

Several prospective randomized trials have shown that hypofractionation has the same efficacy and safety as the conventional fractionation in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. There are many benefits of hypofractionation, including a more convenient schedule for the patients and better use of resources, which is especially important in low- and middle-income countries like Brasil. Based on these data, the Brazilian Society of Radiotherapy (Sociedade Brasileira de Radioterapia) organized this consensus to guide and support the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer in Brasil.

METHODS

The relevant literature regarding moderate hypofractionation (mHypo) and ultra-hypofractionation (uHypo) was reviewed and discussed by a group of experts from public and private centers of different parts of Brasil. Several key questions concerning clinical indications, outcomes and technological requirements for hypofractionation were discussed and voted. For each question, consensus was reached if there was an agreement of at least 75% of the panel members.

RESULTS

The recommendations are described in this article.

CONCLUSION

This initiative will assist Brazilian radiation oncologists and medical physicists to safely treat localized prostate cancer patients with hypofractionation.

How Has Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy Changed in Italy between 2004 and 2011? An Analysis of the National Patterns-Of-Practice (POP) Database by the Uro-Oncology Study Group of the Italian Society of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO)

Simple Summary

This is a safety and efficacy analysis from a very large dataset of patients affected by localized prostate cancer having received radiotherapy with or without concomitant androgen deprivation therapy in twelve academic and non-academic Italian Institutions. The aim of this retrospective "real life" study was to provide additional data on clinical presentation, diagnostic workup, radiation therapy management and toxicity as collected within the framework of POP III. Though the usual limitations for a retrospective analysis apply, it nevertheless may expand the current knowledge in this area showing the progress of radiation therapy techniques and clinical outcomes in the period between 2004 and 2011 after a significant period of follow up.

Abstract

Background and purpose: Two previous “Patterns Of Practice” surveys (POP I and POP II), including more than 4000 patients affected by prostate cancer treated with radical external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) between 1980 and 2003, established a “benchmark” Italian data source for prostate cancer radiotherapy. This report (POP III) updates the previous studies. Methods: Data on clinical management and outcome of 2525 prostate cancer patients treated by EBRT from 2004 to 2011 were collected and compared with POP II and, when feasible, also with POP I. This report provides data on clinical presentation, diagnostic workup, radiation therapy management, and toxicity as collected within the framework of POP III. Results: More than 50% of POP III patients were classified as low or intermediate risk using D’Amico risk categories as in POP II; 46% were classified as ISUP grade group 1. CT scan, bone scan, and endorectal ultrasound were less frequently prescribed. Dose-escalated radiotherapy (RT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), image guided radiotherapy (IGRT), and hypofractionated RT were more frequently offered during the study period. Treatment was commonly well tolerated. Acute toxicity improved compared to the previous series; late toxicity was influenced by prescribed dose and treatment technique. Five-year overall survival, biochemical relapse free survival (BRFS), and disease specific survival were similar to those of the previous series (POP II). BRFS was better in intermediate- and high-risk patients treated with ≥ 76 Gy. Conclusions: This report highlights the improvements in radiotherapy planning and dose delivery among Italian Centers in the 2004–2011 period. Dose-escalated treatments resulted in better biochemical control with a reduction in acute toxicity and higher but acceptable late toxicity, as not yet comprehensively associated with IMRT/IGRT. CTV-PTV margins >8 mm were associated with increased toxicity, again suggesting that IGRT—allowing for tighter margins—would reduce toxicity for dose escalated RT. These conclusions confirm the data obtained from randomized controlled studies.

Comparison of hypofractionation and standard fractionation for post-prostatectomy salvage radiotherapy in patients with persistent PSA: single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Hypofractionated post-prostatectomy radiotherapy is emerging practice, however with no randomized evidence so far to support it's use. Additionally, patients with persistent PSA after prostatectomy may have aggressive disease and respond less well on standard salvage treatment. Herein we report outcomes for conventionally fractionated (CFR) and hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFR) in patients with persistent postprostatectomy PSA who received salvage radiotherapy to prostate bed.

METHODS

Single institution retrospective chart review was performed after Institutional Review Board approval. Between May 2012 and December 2016, 147 patients received salvage postprostatectomy radiotherapy. PSA failure-free and metastasis-free survival were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analysis was performed to test association of fractionation regimen and other clinical factors with treatment outcomes. Early and late toxicity was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients who had persistent PSA (≥ 0.1 ng/mL) after prostatectomy were identified. Median follow-up was 67 months (95% CI 58-106 months, range, 8-106 months). Thirty-six patients (52.2%) received CFR, 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 2 Gy per fraction, and 33 patients (47.8%) received HFR, 52.5 Gy in 20 fractions, 2.63 Gy per fraction. Forty-seven (68%) patients received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). 5-year PSA failure- and metastasis-free survival rate was 56.9% and 76.9%, respectively. Thirty patients (43%) experienced biochemical failure after salvage radiotherapy and 16 patients (23%) experienced metastatic relapse. Nine patients (13%) developed metastatic castration-resistant disease and died of advanced prostate cancer. Median PSA failure-free survival was 72 months (95% CI; 41-72 months), while median metastasis-free survival was not reached. Patients in HFR group were more likely to experience shorter PSA failure-free survival when compared to CFR group (HR 2.2; 95% CI 1.0-4.6, p = 0.04). On univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with PSA failure-free survival were radiotherapy schedule (CFR vs HFR, HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.6, p = 0.04), first postoperative PSA (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.0-1.04, p = 0.03), and concomitant ADT (HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-8.6, p = 0.02). On multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with PSA failure-free survival were radiotherapy schedule (HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.37-6.74, p = 0.006) and concomitant ADT (HR 4.41, 95% CI 1.6-12.12, p = 0.004). On univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with metastasis-free survival were the first postoperative PSA (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.12, p = 0.002), seminal vesicle involvement (HR 3.48, 95% CI 1.26-9.6,p = 0.02), extracapsular extension (HR 7.02, 95% CI 1.96-25.07, p = 0.003), and surgical margin status (HR 2.86, 95% CI 1.03-7.97, p = 0.04). The first postoperative PSA (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, p = 0.02) and extracapsular extension (HR 4.24, 95% CI 1.08-16.55, p = 0.04) remained significantly associated with metastasis-free survival on multivariate analysis. Three patients in CFR arm (8%) experienced late genitourinary grade 3 toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, commonly used hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen was associated with lower biochemical control compared to standard fractionation in patients with persistent PSA receiving salvage radiotherapy. Reason for this might be lower biological dose in HFR compared to CFR group. However, this observation is limited due to baseline imbalances in ADT use, ADT duration and Grade Group distribution between two radiotherapy cohorts. In patients with persistent PSA post-prostatectomy, the first postoperative PSA is an independent risk factor for treatment failure. Additional studies are needed to corroborate our observations.

Acute toxicity of 4-week versus 5-week hypofractionated radiotherapy in localised prostate cancer

Aim:

To compare the acute radiation-induced bowel and bladder toxicities of two hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) regimens in localised prostate cancer (PCa).

Materials and methods:

This trial consists of patients with histologically confirmed stage T1-T3aN0M0 PCa, a prostate-specific antigen concentration of 40 ng/mL or lower, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to 56 Gy in 16 fractions over 4 weeks (arm A) or 70·2 Gy in 26 fractions over 5 weeks (arm B). Acute bowel and bladder toxicities were assessed using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria.

Results:

Between June 2018 and December 2019, 40 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with 4-week (n = 20) and 5-week HFRT (n = 20). In the third month after completion of radiotherapy, the cumulative incidence of acute bowel and bladder toxicities of arms A and B was 20 versus 5% and 70 versus 85%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse bowel and bladder toxicities of the 5-week regimen was non-inferior to 4-week HFRT [bowel toxicity: 5% (arm A) versus 5% (arm B), bladder toxicity: 50% (arm A) versus 60% (arm B), p = 0·52).

Findings:

The 5-week regimen of HFRT is non-inferior to 4-week HFRT in terms of acute bowel and bladder toxicities.

Feeding the Controversy: When Pelvic Irradiation Improves Outcomes in High-Risk and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.

Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: Treatment Options

BACKGROUND

There are many treatment options for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer with radiotherapy and surgery representing the main local therapeutic strategies.

SUMMARY

Depending on the risk of disease recurrence, we can stratify patients into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, which will guide patients' treatment. For low-risk patients, active surveillance is an option. Brachytherapy is also an option for low- and intermediate-risk patients and can be used as a boost following external beam radiotherapy for high-risk patients. For intermediate- and high-risk patients, radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy should be considered. Moreover, in addition to radiotherapy, concomitant androgen deprivation therapy may be needed. Finally, after radical prostatectomy and depending on pathological, biological and clinical factors, radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation therapy can be proposed as an adjuvant or salvage treatment. Key Messages: With radiotherapy and surgery being well-established treatment options for localized prostate cancer patients with equally good overall survival rates, priority must be given to patients' choice concerning the logistics and the toxicity profile of each option.

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.

Hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated image-guided volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a phase II randomized trial from China

Purpose: To determine the safety of hypofractionated imaging-guided (IG) volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (IG-VMAT; 70 Gy/28 fractions over 5.5 weeks) versus conventionally fractionated regimen (IG-VMAT; 80 Gy/40 fractions over 8 weeks) in Chinese patients with localized prostate cancer.

Method: In this randomized non-comparative phase II trial, 92 patients with localized prostate cancer were assigned to receive either hypofractionated IG-VMAT (HFRT; 70 Gy/2.5Gy/28f) or conventionally fractionated IG-VMAT (CFRT; 80 Gy/2Gy/40f). Primary endpoint was grade 2 or higher late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity at 2 years. The GI/GU toxicity and biochemical relapse–free survival (bRFS) were compared between the two treatment groups.

Results: Median follow-up was 26 months. The incidence of grade 2 or higher late GI/GU toxicity was low in both groups; the 5-year cumulative incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 2 or higher GI/GU toxicity at 2 years was 7.6% with HFRT versus 10.3% with CFRT (P = 0.707). Biochemical control was not significantly different between the two groups; the 2-year bRFS was 94.6% for HFRT versus 95.0% for CFRT (P = 0.704).

Conclusion: Hypofractionated IG-VMAT appears to be equivalent to conventionally fractionated IG-VMAT in terms of toxicity in Chinese patients with localized prostate cancer.