Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy vs conventional fractionated radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis from Phase III randomized trials

Long-term Overall Survival after External Beam Radiotherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer

AIMS

Knowledge on survival probabilities is essential for determining optimal treatment strategies. We studied overall survival and associated prognostic factors in Dutch patients with localised prostate cancer (PCa) selected for external beam radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this single-centre retrospective cohort study, we identified all T1-T3 PCa patients (aged 55-80 years) in the radiotherapy planning database with a start date between January 2006 and December 2013, treated with 72-78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to the prostate ± seminal vesicles (n = 1536). Long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was predominantly prescribed in the case of extracapsular disease (>T3). Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were evaluated in Cox regression models for the intermediate-risk and high-risk groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 12 years for patients who were alive. Ten-year survival rates were 79.0% for low-risk (n = 120), 59.9% for intermediate-risk (n = 430) and 56.8% for high-risk patients (n = 986). A higher age, higher comorbidity score, active smoking and Gleason score ≥8 had a statistically significant negative impact on overall survival at multivariable analysis. ADT was associated with superior overall survival in the high-risk group translating into overall survival rates similar to the intermediate-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although PCa patients selected for external beam radiotherapy are typically in good health, their comorbidity score and smoking habits appeared to be dominant predictors for overall survival. Overall survival rates within the high-risk group varied, showing improved overall survival with ADT prescription and worse overall survival in the case of Gleason score ≥8.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Localized, Low-Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Current and Future Prospectives

At the time of diagnosis, the vast majority of prostate carcinoma patients have a clinically localized form of the disease, with most of them presenting with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In this setting, various curative-intent alternatives are available, including surgery, external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy can be considered as a valid alternative strategy for localized prostate cancer. High-dose-rate brachytherapy can be administered according to different schedules. Proton beam radiotherapy represents a promising strategy, but further studies are needed to make it more affordable and accessible. At the moment, new technologies such as MRI-guided radiotherapy remain in early stages, but their potential abilities are very promising.

Normal Tissue Integral Dose as a Result of Prostate Radiation Therapy: A Quantitative Comparison Between High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Modern External Beam Radiation Therapy Techniques

Purpose

Quantification of integral radiation dose delivered during treatment for prostate cancer is lacking. We performed a comparative quantification of dose to nontarget body tissues delivered via 4 common radiation techniques: conventional volumetric modulated arc therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, pencil-beam scanning proton therapy, and high-dose-rate brachytherapy.

Methods and Materials

Plans for each radiation technique were generated for 10 patients with typical anatomy. For brachytherapy plans, virtual needles were placed to achieve standard dosimetry. Standard planning target volume margins or robustness margins were applied as appropriate. A "normal tissue" structure (entire computed tomography simulation volume minus planning target volume) was generated for integral dose computation. Dose-volume histogram parameters for targets and normal structures were tabulated. Normal tissue integral dose was calculated by multiplying normal tissue volume by mean dose.

Results

Normal tissue integral dose was lowest for brachytherapy. Pencil-beam scanning protons, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and brachytherapy resulted in 17%, 57%, and 91% absolute reductions compared with standard volumetric modulated arc therapy, respectively. Mean nontarget tissues receiving 25%, 50%, and 75% of the prescription dose were reduced by 85%, 76%, and 83% for brachytherapy relative to volumetric modulated arc therapy, by 79%, 64%, and 74% relative to stereotactic body radiation therapy, and 73%, 60%, and 81% relative to proton therapy. All reductions observed using brachytherapy were statistically significant.

Conclusions

High-dose-rate brachytherapy is an effective technique for reducing dose to nontarget body tissues relative to volumetric modulated arc therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and pencil-beam scanning proton therapy.

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

Introduction

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

Material and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Dose-escalation in prostate cancer: Results of randomized trials

In 1998, an editorial from the International Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP) on the occasion of the publication of Phase I by Zelefsky et al. on 3D radiotherapy dose escalation asked the question: "will more prove better?". More than 20 years later, several prospective studies have supported the authors' conclusions, making dose escalation a new standard in prostate cancer. The data from prospective randomized studies were ultimately disappointing in that they failed to show an overall survival benefit from dose escalation. However, there is a clear and consistent benefit in biochemical recurrence-free survival, which must be weighed on an individual patient basis against the potential additional toxicity of dose escalation. Techniques and concepts have become more and more precise, such as intensity modulated irradiation, simultaneous integrated boost, hypofractionated dose-escalation, pelvic irradiation with involved node boost or focal dose-escalation on gross recurrence after prostatectomy. The objective here was to summarize the prospective data on dose escalation in prostate cancer and in particular on recent advances in the field. In 2022, can we finally say that more has proven better?

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.

Radiotherapy-Induced Digestive Injury: Diagnosis, Treatment and Mechanisms

Radiotherapy is one of the main therapeutic methods for treating cancer. The digestive system consists of the gastrointestinal tract and the accessory organs of digestion (the tongue, salivary glands, pancreas, liver and gallbladder). The digestive system is easily impaired during radiotherapy, especially in thoracic and abdominal radiotherapy. In this review, we introduce the physical classification, basic pathogenesis, clinical characteristics, predictive/diagnostic factors, and possible treatment targets of radiotherapy-induced digestive injury. Radiotherapy-induced digestive injury complies with the dose-volume effect and has a radiation-based organ correlation. Computed tomography (CT), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), ultrasound (US) and endoscopy can help diagnose and evaluate the radiation-induced lesion level. The latest treatment approaches include improvement in radiotherapy (such as shielding, hydrogel spacers and dose distribution), stem cell transplantation and drug administration. Gut microbiota modulation may become a novel approach to relieving radiogenic gastrointestinal syndrome. Finally, we summarized the possible mechanisms involved in treatment, but they remain varied. Radionuclide-labeled targeting molecules (RLTMs) are promising for more precise radiotherapy. These advances contribute to our understanding of the assessment and treatment of radiation-induced digestive injury.

A phase IB clinical trial of 15 Gy HDR brachytherapy followed by hypofractionated/SBRT in the management of intermediate-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

High dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy is commonly administered as a boost to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Our purpose was to compare toxicity with increasingly hypofractionated EBRT in combination with a single 15 Gy HDR boost for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Forty-two men were enrolled on this phase IB clinical trial to one of three EBRT dose cohorts: 10 fractions, seven fractions, or five fractions. Patients were followed prospectively for safety, efficacy, and health-related quality of life (Expanded Prostate Index Composite). Efficacy was assessed biochemically using the Phoenix definition.

RESULTS

With a median follow up of 36 months, the biochemical disease-free survival was 95.5%. One man developed metastatic disease at 5 years. There was no significant minimally important difference in EPIC PRO for either urinary, bowel, or sexual domains. There was one acute Grade 3 GI and GU toxicity, but no late Grade 3 GU or GI toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Fifteen gray HDR brachytherapy followed by a five fraction SBRT approach results in high disease control rates and low toxicity similar to previously reported HDR protocols with significant improvement in patient convenience and resource savings. While mature results with longer follow up are awaited, this treatment approach may be considered a safe and effective option for men with intermediate-risk disease.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in patients with intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world. The results of treatment after hypofractionated radiotherapy only have been reported from several small randomized clinical trials. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes of hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Methods

Relevant studies were identified through searching related databases till August 2018. Hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as pooled statistics for all analyses.

Results

The meta-analysis results showed that overall survival (HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.93–1.35, p = 0.219) and prostate cancer-specific survival (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.42–3.95, p = 0.661) were similar in two groups. The pooled data showed that biochemical failure was RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.76–1.07, p = 0.248. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events (grade ≥ 2) was higher in the hypofractionated radiotherapy (RR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.12–2.56, p = 0.012); conversely, for late grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal adverse events, a significant increase in the conventional radiotherapy was found (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.61–0.91, p = 0.003). Acute (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.89–1.15, p = 0.894) and late (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86–1.10, p = 0.692) genitourinary adverse events (grade ≥ 2) were similar for both treatment groups.

Conclusion

Results suggest that the efficacy and risk for adverse events are comparable for hypofractionated radiotherapy and conventional radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer.