Virtual HDR CyberKnife SBRT for Localized Prostatic Carcinoma: 5-Year Disease-Free Survival and Toxicity Observations

HDR brachytherapy versus robotic-based and linac-based stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy in the treatment of liver metastases - A dosimetric comparison study of three radioablative techniques

Purpose

The aim of our study was to compare dosimetric aspects of three radioablation modalities - direct high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) and virtually planned stereotactic body radiation therapy performed on CyberKnife (SBRTck) and Elekta Versa HD LINAC (SBRTe) applied in patients with liver metastases.

Material and methods

We selected 30 patients with liver metastases, who received liver interstitial HDR-BT and virtually prepared plans for SBRTck and SBRTe. In all the cases, the prescribed dose was a single fraction of 25 Gy. Treatment delivery time, doses delivered to PTV and organs at risk, as well as conformity indices, were calculated and compared.

Results

The longest median treatment delivery time was observed in SBRTck in contrast to HDR-BT and SBRTe which were significantly shorter and comparable. HDR-BT plans achieved better coverage of PTV (except for D98%) in contrast to SBRT modalities. Between both SBRT modalities, SBRTck plans resulted in better dose coverage in Dmean, D50%, and D90% values compared to SBRTe without difference in D98%. The SBRTe was the most advantageous considering the PCI and R100%. SBRTck plans achieved the best HI, while R50% value was comparable between SBRTe and SBRTck. The lowest median doses delivered to uninvolved liver volume (V5Gy, V9.1Gy) were achieved with HDR-BT, while the difference between SBRT modalities was insignificant. SBRT plans were better regarding more favourable dose distribution in the duodenum and right kidney, while HDR-BT achieved lower doses in the stomach, heart, great vessels, ribs, skin and spinal cord. There were no significant differences in bowel and biliary tract dose distribution between all selected modalities.

Conclusions

HDR-BT resulted in more favourable dose distribution within PTVs and lower doses in organs at risk, which suggests that this treatment modality could be regarded as an alternative to other local ablative therapies in carefully selected patients' with liver malignancies. Future studies should further address the issue of comparing treatment modalities in different liver locations and clinical scenarios.

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.

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.

Overview of the current role of stereotactic body radiotherapy in the treatment of unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is well accepted for low- and intermediate-favorable risk prostate cancer. Available evidence about the application of SBRT in unfavorable- and high-risk prostate cancer is less solid. During last year's multiple variations in treatment, techniques have been reported making comparisons more complicated. This review's objective is to review current evidence in application of SBRT in intermediate unfavourable and high-risk prostate cancer and to outline variations in SBRT treatment techniques and relevant results.

Ultrahypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: How Far Can We Go?

Following adoption of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy as a standard for localised prostate cancer, ultrahypofractioned radiotherapy delivered in five to seven fractions is rapidly being embraced by clinical practice and international guidelines. However, the question remains: how low can we go? Can radiotherapy for prostate cancer be delivered in fewer than five fractions? The current review summarises the evidence that radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer can be safely and effectively delivered in fewer than five fractions using high dose rate brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy. We also discuss important lessons learned from the single-fraction high dose rate brachytherapy experience.

[Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: Results, limits and prospects]

Still an emerging approach a few years ago, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has ranked as a valid option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Inherent properties of prostatic adenocarcinoma (low α/β) make it the perfect candidate. We propose a critical review of the literature trying to put results into perspective to identify their strengths, limits and axes of development. Technically sophisticated, the stereotactic irradiation of the prostate is well tolerated. Despite the fact that median follow-up of published data is still limited, ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy seems very efficient for the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancers. Data seem satisfying for high-risk cancers as well. New developments are being studied with a main interest in treatment intensification for unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk cancers. Advantage is taken of the sharp dose gradient of stereotactic radiotherapy to offer safe reirradiation to patients with local recurrence in a previously irradiated area.

High-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Rationale, current applications, and clinical outcome

Background

High‐dose‐rate brachytherapy (HDR BRT) has been enjoying rapid acceptance as a treatment modality offered to selected prostate cancer patients devoid of risk group, employed either in monotherapy setting or combined with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and is currently one of the most active clinical research areas.

Recent findings

This review encompasses all the current evidence to support the use of HDR BRT in various clinical scenario and shines light to the HDR BRT rationale, as an ultimately conformal dose delivery method enabling safe dose escalation to the prostate.

Conclusion

Valid long‐term data, both in regard to the oncologic outcomes and toxicity profile, support the current clinical indication spectrum of HDR BRT. At the same time, this serves as solid, rigid ground for emerging therapeutic applications, allowing the technique to remain in the spotlight alongside stereotactic radiosurgery.

Reproducibility and accuracy of a target motion mitigation technique for dose-escalated prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To quantitate the accuracy, reproducibility and prostate motion mitigation efficacy rendered by a target immobilization method used in an intermediate-risk prostate cancer dose-escalated 5×9Gy SBRT study.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An air-inflated (150 cm³) endorectal balloon and Foley catheter with three electromagnetic beacon transponders (EBT) were used to mitigate and track intra-fractional target motion. A 2 mm margin was used for PTV expansion, reduced to 0 mm at the interface with critical OARs. EBT-detected ≥ 2 mm/5 s motions mandated treatment interruption and target realignment prior to completion of planned dose delivery. Geometrical uncertainties were measured with an in-house ESAPI script.

RESULTS

Quantitative data were obtained in 886 sessions from 189 patients. Mean PTV dose was 45.8 ± 0.4 Gy (D95 = 40.5 ± 0.4 Gy). A mean of 3.7 ± 1.7 CBCTs were acquired to reach reference position. Mean treatment time was 19.5 ± 12 min, 14.1 ± 11 and 5.4 ± 5.9 min for preparation and treatment delivery, respectively. Target motion of 0, 1-2 and >2 mm/10 min were observed in 59%, 30% and 11% of sessions, respectively. Temporary beam-on hold occurred in 7.4% of sessions, while in 6% a new reference CBCT was required to correct deviations. Hence, all sessions were completed with application of the planned dose. Treatment preparation time > 15 min was significantly associated with the need of a second reference CBCT. Overall systematic and random geometrical errors were in the order of 1 mm.

CONCLUSION

The prostate immobilization technique explored here affords excellent accuracy and reproducibility, enabling normal tissue dose sculpting with tight PTV margins.

Phase 3 multicenter randomized trial of PSMA PET/CT prior to definitive radiation therapy for unfavorable intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer [PSMA dRT]: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Definitive radiation therapy (dRT) is an effective initial treatment of intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa). PSMA PET/CT is superior to standard of care imaging (CT, MRI, bone scan) for detecting regional and distant metastatic PCa. PSMA PET/CT thus has the potential to guide patient selection and the planning for dRT and improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

This is a multicenter randomized phase 3 trial (NCT04457245). We will randomize 312 patients to proceed with standard dRT (control Arm, n = 150), or undergo a PSMA PET/CT scan at the study site (both 18F-DCFPyL and 68Ga-PSMA-11 can be used) prior to dRT planning (intervention arm, n = 162). dRT will be performed at the treating radiation oncologist facility. In the control arm, dRT will be performed as routinely planned. In the intervention arm, the treating radiation oncologist can incorporate PSMA PET/CT findings into the RT planning. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is administered per discretion of the treating radiation oncologist and may be modified as a result of the PSMA PET/CT results. We assume that approximately 8% of subjects randomized to the PSMA PET arm will be found to have M1 disease and thus will be more appropriate candidates for long-term systemic or multimodal therapy, rather than curative intent dRT. PET M1 patients will thus not be included in the primary endpoint analysis. The primary endpoint is the success rate of patients with unfavorable IR and HR PCa after standard dRT versus PSMA PET-based dRT. Secondary Endpoints (whole cohort) include progression free survival (PFS), metastasis-free survival after initiation of RT, overall survival (OS), % of change in initial treatment intent and Safety.

DISCUSSION

This is the first randomized phase 3 prospective trial designed to determine whether PSMA PET/CT molecular imaging can improve outcomes in patients with PCa who receive dRT. In this trial the incorporation of PSMA PET/CT may improve the success rate of curative intent radiotherapy in two ways: to optimize patient selection as a biomarker and to personalizes the radiotherapy plan.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UCLA IND#147591 ○ Submission: 02.27.2020 ○ Safe-to-proceed letter issued by FDA: 04.01.2020 UCLA IRB #20-000378 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04457245 . Date of Registry: 07.07.2020. Essen EudraCT 2020-003526-23.

Dosimetric feasibility of neurovascular bundle-sparing stereotactic body radiotherapy with periprostatic hydrogel spacer for localized prostate cancer to preserve erectile function

Objective:

We aim to test the hypothesis that neurovascular bundle (NVB) displacement by rectal hydrogel spacer combined with NVB delineation as an organ at risk (OAR) is a feasible method for NVB-sparing stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Methods:

Thirty-five men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer who underwent rectal hydrogel spacer placement and pre-, post-spacer prostate MRI studies were treated with prostate SBRT (36.25 Gy in five fractions). A prostate radiologist contoured the NVB on both the pre- and post-spacer T2W MRI sequences that were then registered to the CT simulation scan for NVB-sparing radiation treatment planning. Three SBRT treatment plans were developed for each patient: (1) no NVB sparing, (2) NVB-sparing using pre-spacer MRI, and (3) NVB-sparing using post-spacer MRI. NVB dose constraints include maximum dose 36.25 Gy (100%), V34.4 Gy (95% of dose) <60%, V32Gy <70%, V28Gy <90%.

Results:

Rectal hydrogel spacer placement shifted NVB contours an average of 3.1 ± 3.4 mm away from the prostate, resulting in a 10% decrease in NVB V34.4 Gy in non-NVB-sparing plans (p < 0.01). NVB-sparing treatment planning reduced the NVB V34.4 by 16% without the spacer (p < 0.01) and 25% with spacer (p < 0.001). NVB-sparing did not compromise PTV coverage and OAR endpoints.

Conclusions:

NVB-sparing SBRT with rectal hydrogel spacer significantly reduces the volume of NVB treated with high-dose radiation. Rectal spacer contributes to this effect through a dosimetrically meaningful displacement of the NVB that may significantly reduce RiED. These results suggest that NVB-sparing SBRT warrants further clinical evaluation.

Advances in knowledge:

This is a feasibility study showing that the periprostatic NVBs can be spared high doses of radiation during prostate SBRT using a hydrogel spacer and nerve-sparing treatment planning.

Dose-response with stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A multi-institutional analysis of prostate-specific antigen kinetics and biochemical control

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The optimal dose for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is still unknown. This study evaluated the dose-response relationships for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decay and biochemical recurrence (BCR) among 4 SBRT dose regimens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 1908 men with low-risk (50.0%), favorable intermediate-risk (30.9%), and unfavorable intermediate-risk (19.1%) prostate cancer treated with prostate SBRT across 8 institutions from 2003 to 2018, we examined 4 regimens (35 Gy/5 fractions [35/5, n = 265, 13.4%], 36.25 Gy/5 fractions [36.25/5, n = 711, 37.3%], 40 Gy/5 fractions [40/5, n = 684, 35.8%], and 38 Gy/4 fractions [38/4, n = 257, 13.5%]). Between dose groups, we compared PSA decay slope, nadir PSA (nPSA), achievement of nPSA ≤0.2 and ≤0.5 ng/mL, and BCR-free survival (BCRFS).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 72.3 months. Median nPSA was 0.01 ng/mL for 38/4, and 0.17-0.20 ng/mL for 5-fraction regimens (p < 0.0001). The 38/4 cohort demonstrated the steepest PSA decay slope and greater odds of nPSA ≤0.2 ng/mL (both p < 0.0001 vs. all other regimens). BCR occurred in 6.25%, 6.75%, 3.95%, and 8.95% of men treated with 35/5, 36.25/5, 40/5, and 38/4, respectively (p = 0.12), with the highest BCRFS after 40/5 (vs. 35/5 hazard ratio [HR] 0.49, p = 0.026; vs. 36.25/5 HR 0.42, p = 0.0005; vs. 38/4 HR 0.55, p = 0.037) including the entirety of follow-up, but not for 5-year BCRFS (≥93% for all regimens, p ≥ 0.21).

CONCLUSION

Dose-escalation was associated with greater prostate ablation and PSA decay. Dose-escalation to 40/5, but not beyond, was associated with improved BCRFS. Biochemical control remains excellent, and prospective studies will provide clarity on the benefit of dose-escalation.

Tumor Control Probability Modeling and Systematic Review of the Literature of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Dose escalation improves localized prostate cancer disease control, and moderately hypofractionated external beam radiation is noninferior to conventional fractionation. The evolving treatment approach of ultrahypofractionation with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allows possible further biological dose escalation (biologically equivalent dose [BED]) and shortened treatment time.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Biological Effects of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy/SBRT included a subgroup to study the prostate tumor control probability (TCP) with SBRT. We performed a systematic review of the available literature and created a dose-response TCP model for the endpoint of freedom from biochemical relapse. Results were stratified by prostate cancer risk group.

RESULTS

Twenty-five published cohorts were identified for inclusion, with a total of 4821 patients (2235 with low-risk, 1894 with intermediate-risk, and 446 with high-risk disease, when reported) treated with a variety of dose/fractionation schemes, permitting dose-response modeling. Five studies had a median follow-up of more than 5 years. Dosing regimens ranged from 32 to 50 Gy in 4 to 5 fractions, with total BED (α/β = 1.5 Gy) between 183.1 and 383.3 Gy. At 5 years, we found that in patients with low-intermediate risk disease, an equivalent doses of 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) of 71 Gy (31.7 Gy in 5 fractions) achieved a TCP of 90% and an EQD2 of 90 Gy (36.1 Gy in 5 fractions) achieved a TCP of 95%. In patients with high-risk disease, an EQD2 of 97 Gy (37.6 Gy in 5 fractions) can achieve a TCP of 90% and an EQD2 of 102 Gy (38.7 Gy in 5 fractions) can achieve a TCP of 95%.

CONCLUSIONS

We found significant variation in the published literature on target delineation, margins used, dose/fractionation, and treatment schedule. Despite this variation, TCP was excellent. Most prescription doses range from 35 to 40 Gy, delivered in 4 to 5 fractions. The literature did not provide detailed dose-volume data, and our dosimetric analysis was constrained to prescription doses. There are many areas in need of continued research as SBRT continues to evolve as a treatment modality for prostate cancer, including the durability of local control with longer follow-up across risk groups, the efficacy and safety of SBRT as a boost to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and the impact of incorporating novel imaging techniques into treatment planning.

Prostate SBRT: Comparison the Efficacy and Toxicity of Two Different Dose Fractionation Schedules

Background: CyberKnife SBRT is capable of producing dosimetry comparable to that created by HDR brachytherapy. Our original CyberKnife prostate SBRT schedule of 3,800 cGy/4 fractions (“high dose”) was based upon favorable published prostate HDR brachytherapy experience. Subsequently, our trial was modified to allow a lower dose of 3,400 cGy/5 fractions (“moderate dose”) in selected cases.

Methods: Two hundred eighty-nine low and intermediate-risk patients were treated to either high dose (178 pts) or moderate dose (111 pts). The dose selection was individualized; high dose more commonly used in younger, intermediate-risk patients, and moderate dose more commonly used in older, low-risk patients.

Results: Median PSA reached 5-year nadir levels of 0.034 ng/mL in the high dose, vs. 0.1 ng/mL in the moderate dose groups, respectively (p = 0.044 by year 4), with 62 vs. 44% reaching an ablation PSA nadir (<0.1 ng/mL) by year 5, respectively. Five year biochemical relapse free survival rates measured 98.3% for moderate dose and 94.3% for high dose groups, respectively (p = 0.1946). Five-year actuarial grade 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity rates measured 11.6 vs. 8.7% for high dose vs. moderate dose groups, respectively, with a far lower incidence of grade ≥3 GU and grade ≥2 GI toxicity rates in both groups.

Conclusions: Both regimens are efficacious in their respective, selected groups. Both arms have low grade ≥3 GU toxicity and ≥grade 2 GI toxicity. In favor of the original high dose regimen, it has longer follow-up, produces a lower PSA nadir value and is more likely to eventually produce an ablation PSA nadir (<0.1 ng/mL). In favor of the lower dose regimen, it also produces a low PSA nadir, and does so with a slightly lower grade 2 GU toxicity rate. As a lower PSA nadir could be the initial predictor a lower clinical relapse rate far beyond 5 years, even if no difference is apparent within that time frame, a practical strategy could be to more strongly consider the high dose regimen in those with the greatest potential longevity, while for those with a more limited longevity, particularly if they have minimal negative prognostic factors, the moderate dose regimen could be more attractive.

Dosimetric accuracy of delivering SBRT using dynamic arcs on Cyberknife

PURPOSE

Several studies have demonstrated potential improvements in treatment time through the use of dynamic arcs for delivery of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) on Cyberknife. However, the delivery system has a finite accuracy, so that potential exists for dosimetric uncertainties. This study estimates the expected dosimetric accuracy of dynamic delivery of SBRT, based on realistic estimates of the uncertainties in delivery parameters.

METHODS

Five SBRT patient cases (prostate A - conventional, prostate B - brachytherapy-type, lung, liver, partial left breast) were retrospectively studied. Treatment plans were produced for a fixed arc trajectory using fluence optimization, segmentation, and direct aperture optimization. Dose rate uncertainty was modeled as a smoothly varying random fluctuation of ± 1.0%, ±2.0% or ± 5.0% over a time period of 10, 30 or 60 s. Multileaf collimator uncertainty was modeled as a lag in position of each leaf up to 0.25 or 0.5 mm. Robot pointing error was modeled as a shift of the target location, with the direction of the shift chosen as a random angle with respect to the multileaf collimator and with a random magnitude in the range 0.0-1.0 mm at the delivery nodes and with an additional random magnitude of 0.5-1.0 mm in between the delivery nodes. The impact of the errors was investigated using dose-volume histograms.

RESULTS

Uncertainty in dose rate has the effect of varying the total monitor units delivered, which in turn produces a variation in mean dose to the planning target volume. The random sampling of dose rate error produces a distribution of mean doses with a standard deviation proportional to the magnitude of the dose rate uncertainty. A lag in multileaf collimator position of 0.25 or 0.5 mm produces a small impact on the delivered dose. In general, an increase in the PTV mean dose of around 1% is observed. An error in robot pointing of the order of 1 mm produces a small increase in dose inhomogeneity to the planning target volume, sometimes accompanied by an increase in mean dose by around 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon the limited data available on the dose rate stability and geometric accuracy of the Cyberknife system, this study estimates that dynamic arc delivery can be accomplished with sufficient accuracy for clinical application. Dose rate variation produces a change in dose to the planning target volume according to the perturbation of total monitor units delivered, while multileaf collimator lag and robot pointing error typically increase the mean dose to the planning target volume by up to 1%.

Treatment planning optimization with beam motion modeling for dynamic arc delivery of SBRT using Cyberknife with multileaf collimation

PURPOSE

The use of dynamic arcs for delivery of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) on Cyberknife is investigated, with a view to improving treatment times. This study investigates the required modeling of robot and multileaf collimator (MLC) motion between control points in the trajectory and then uses this to develop an optimization method for treatment planning of a dynamic arc with Cyberknife. The resulting plans are compared in terms of dose-volume histograms and estimated treatment times with those produced by a conventional beam arrangement.

METHODS

Five SBRT patient cases (prostate A - conventional, prostate B - brachytherapy-type, lung, liver, and partial left breast) were retrospectively studied. A suitable arc trajectory with control points spaced at 5° was proposed and treatment plans were produced for typical clinical protocols. The optimization consisted of a fluence optimization, segmentation, and direct aperture optimization using a gradient descent method. Dose delivered by the moving MLC was either taken to be the dose delivered discretely at the control points or modeled using effective fluence delivered between control points. The accuracy of calculated dose was assessed by recalculating after optimization using five interpolated beams and 100 interpolated apertures between each optimization control point. The resulting plans were compared using dose-volume histograms and estimated treatment times with those for a conventional Cyberknife beam arrangement.

RESULTS

If optimization is performed based on discrete doses delivered at the arc control points, large differences of up to 40% of the prescribed dose are seen when recalculating with interpolation. When the effective fluence between control points is taken into account during optimization, dosimetric differences are <2% for most structures when the plans are recalculated using intermediate nodes, but there are differences of up to 15% peripherally. Treatment plan quality is comparable between the arc trajectory and conventional body path. All plans meet the relevant clinical goals, with the exception of specific structures which overlap with the planning target volume. Median estimated treatment time is 355 s (range 235-672 s) for arc delivery and 675 s (range 554-1025 s) for conventional delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

The method of using effective fluence to model MLC motion between control points is sufficiently accurate to provide for accurate inverse planning of dynamic arcs with Cyberknife. The proposed arcing method produces treatment plans with comparable quality to the body path, with reduced estimated treatment delivery time.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy with optional focal lesion ablative microboost in prostate cancer: Topical review and multicenter consensus

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) is gaining interest by the recent publication of the first phase III trials on prostate SBRT and the promising results of many other phase II trials. Before long term results became available, the major concern for implementing SBRT in PCa in daily clinical practice was the potential risk of late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. A number of recently published trials, including late outcome and toxicity data, contributed to the growing evidence for implementation of SBRT for PCa in daily clinical practice. However, there exists substantial variability in delivering SBRT for PCa. The aim of this topical review is to present a number of prospective trials and retrospective analyses of SBRT in the treatment of PCa. We focus on the treatment strategies and techniques used in these trials. In addition, recent literature on a simultaneous integrated boost to the tumor lesion, which could create an additional value in the SBRT treatment of PCa, was described. Furthermore, we discuss the multicenter consensus of the FLAME consortium on SBRT for PCa with a focal boost to the macroscopic intraprostatic tumor nodule(s).

[Stereotactic body radiotherapy. How to better protect normal tissues?]

The use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has increased rapidly over the past decade. Optimal preservation of normal tissues is a major issue because of their high sensitivity to high doses per session. Extreme hypofractionation can convert random errors into systematic errors. Optimal preservation of organs at risk requires first of all a rigorous implementation of this technique according to published guidelines. The robustness of the imaging modalities used for planning, and training medical and paramedical staff are an integral part of these guidelines too. The choice of SBRT indications, dose fractionation, dose heterogeneity, ballistics, are also means of optimizing the protection of normal tissues. Non-coplanarity and tracking of moving targets allow dosimetric improvement in some clinical settings. Automatic planning could also improve normal tissue protection. Adaptive SBRT, with new image guided radiotherapy modalities such as MRI, could further reduce the risk of toxicity.

GETUG-AFU 31: a phase I/II multicentre study evaluating the safety and efficacy of salvage stereotactic radiation in patients with intraprostatic tumour recurrence after external radiation therapy-study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is the third most important cancer in terms of mortality in men. No standard local treatment exists for patients with an intraprostatic recurrence after radiotherapy. Stereotatic body radiotherapy (SBRT) could be a curative treatment for local recurrence. The phase I/II primary objective is the selection of the recommended dose for salvage-SBRT and to estimate the efficacy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We plan to perform a multicentre prospective phase I/II study including at least 47 patients. Eligible patients are patients with biochemical recurrence occurring at least 2 years after external radiotherapy for prostatic adenocarcinoma by the Phoenix definition (prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir +2 ng/mL) and histologically proven intraprostatic recurrence only (stage T1-T2 on relapse, PSA level ≤10 ng/mL, PSA doubling time >10 months, absence of pelvic or metastatic recurrence proven by choline or PSMA positron emission tomography scan, and pelvic and prostatic assessment by multiparametric MRI). The phase I primary objective is the selection of the recommended dose for salvage-SBRT (5×6, 6×6 or 5×5 Gy) based on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). The dose of salvage-SBRT will be selected using a time-to-event continual reassessment method based on DLT defined as grade ≥3 gastrointestinal or urinary toxicity or any other grade 4 adverse event. The phase II primary outcome is to estimate the efficacy of the salvage-SBRT in terms of biochemical relapse-free survival rate (Phoenix definition: increase in serum total PSA ≥2 ng/mL above the nadir). Phase II secondary outcomes are acute and late toxicities, quality of life, clinical progression-free survival defined as the time interval between the date of registration and the date of clinical progression or death irrespective of the cause.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has received ethical approval from the Ethics committee 'Ile-de-France III'. Academic dissemination will occur through publication and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03438552.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: When and for Whom?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize recent evidence concerning the use of moderately hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy, defined as 2.4-3.4 Gy per fraction, and ultrahypofractionated external beam radiotherapy (also known as stereotactic body radiotherapy [SBRT]), defined as at least 5 Gy per fraction, in men with localized prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Taken together, a number of recently completed randomized trials show that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy confers similar biochemical control compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy without increasing late toxicity. These effects appear to extend across all baseline clinical risk groups. Several single-arm phase II studies, as well as a recently published large-scale randomized trial comparing SBRT with conventional fractionation, show very promising biochemical control and favorable acute and late treatment-related morbidity with the use of SBRT in predominantly low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. As it is associated with similar prostate cancer control and toxicity while improving patient convenience and reducing cost, moderate hypofractionation is a preferred alternative to conventional fractionation in a majority of men with localized prostate cancer choosing radiotherapy as their primary treatment modality. To date, studies conducted largely in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer report encouraging oncologic outcomes and acceptable toxicity with SBRT. Mature results of phase III trials evaluating five-fraction SBRT regimens are eagerly awaited.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Over 6,000 Patients Treated On Prospective Studies

PURPOSE

Utilization of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for treatment of localized prostate cancer is increasing. Guidelines and payers variably support the use of prostate SBRT. We therefore sought to systematically analyze biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), physician-reported toxicity, and patient-reported outcomes after prostate SBRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic search leveraging Medline via PubMed and EMBASE for original articles published between January 1990 and January 2018 was performed. This was supplemented by abstracts with sufficient extractable data from January 2013 to March 2018. All prospective series assessing curative-intent prostate SBRT for localized prostate cancer reporting bRFS, physician-reported toxicity, and patient-reported quality of life with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Meta-analyses were performed with random-effect modeling. Extent of heterogeneity between studies was determined by the I2 and Cochran's Q tests. Meta-regression was performed using Hartung-Knapp methods.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight unique prospective series were identified comprising 6116 patients. Median follow-up was 39 months across all patients (range, 12-115 months). Ninety-two percent, 78%, and 38% of studies included low, intermediate, and high-risk patients. Overall, 5- and 7-year bRFS rates were 95.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.3%-97.5%) and 93.7% (95% CI, 91.4%-95.5%), respectively. Estimated late grade ≥3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity rates were 2.0% (95% CI, 1.4%-2.8%) and 1.1% (95% CI, 0.6%-2.0%), respectively. By 2 years post-SBRT, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite urinary and bowel domain scores returned to baseline. Increasing dose of SBRT was associated with improved biochemical control (P = .018) but worse late grade ≥3 GU toxicity (P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate SBRT has substantial prospective evidence supporting its use, with favorable tumor control, patient-reported quality of life, and levels of toxicity demonstrated. SBRT has sufficient evidence to be supported as a standard treatment option for localized prostate cancer while ongoing trials assess its potential superiority.

Long-term Outcomes of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Low-Risk and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

Importance

Stereotactic body radiotherapy harnesses improvements in technology to allow the completion of a course of external beam radiotherapy treatment for prostate cancer in the span of 4 to 5 treatment sessions. Although mounting short-term data support this approach, long-term outcomes have been sparsely reported.

Objective

To assess long-term outcomes after stereotactic body radiotherapy for low-risk and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study analyzed individual patient data from 2142 men enrolled in 10 single-institution phase 2 trials and 2 multi-institutional phase 2 trials of stereotactic body radiotherapy for low-risk and intermediate-risk prostate cancer between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2012. Statistical analysis was performed based on follow-up from January 1, 2013, to May 1, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The cumulative incidence of biochemical recurrence was estimated using a competing risk framework. Physician-scored genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxic event outcomes were defined per each individual study, generally by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group or Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scoring systems. After central review, cumulative incidences of late grade 3 or higher toxic events were estimated using a Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

A total of 2142 men (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [9.5] years) were eligible for analysis, of whom 1185 (55.3%) had low-risk disease, 692 (32.3%) had favorable intermediate-risk disease, and 265 (12.4%) had unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. The median follow-up period was 6.9 years (interquartile range, 4.9-8.1 years). Seven-year cumulative rates of biochemical recurrence were 4.5% (95% CI, 3.2%-5.8%) for low-risk disease, 8.6% (95% CI, 6.2%-11.0%) for favorable intermediate-risk disease, 14.9% (95% CI, 9.5%-20.2%) for unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, and 10.2% (95% CI, 8.0%-12.5%) for all intermediate-risk disease. The crude incidence of acute grade 3 or higher genitourinary toxic events was 0.60% (n = 13) and of gastrointestinal toxic events was 0.09% (n = 2), and the 7-year cumulative incidence of late grade 3 or higher genitourinary toxic events was 2.4% (95% CI, 1.8%-3.2%) and of late grade 3 or higher gastrointestinal toxic events was 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.8%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, stereotactic body radiotherapy for low-risk and intermediate-risk disease was associated with low rates of severe toxic events and high rates of biochemical control. These data suggest that stereotactic body radiotherapy is an appropriate definitive treatment modality for low-risk and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Beam selection for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy using Cyberknife with multileaf collimation

The Cyberknife system (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) enables radiotherapy using stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) with a large number of non-coplanar beam orientations. Recently, a multileaf collimator has also been available to allow flexibility in field shaping. This work aims to evaluate the quality of treatment plans obtainable with the multileaf collimator. Specifically, the aim is to find a subset of beam orientations from a predetermined set of candidate directions, such that the treatment quality is maintained but the treatment time is reduced. An evolutionary algorithm is used to successively refine a randomly selected starting set of beam orientations. By using an efficient computational framework, clinically useful solutions can be found in several hours. It is found that 15 beam orientations are able to provide treatment quality which approaches that of the candidate beam set of 110 beam orientations, but with approximately half of the estimated treatment time. Choice of an efficient subset of beam orientations offers the possibility to improve the patient experience and maximise the number of patients treated.

A new plan quality objective function for determining optimal collimator combinations in prostate cancer treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy using CyberKnife

Stereotactic body radiation therapy with CyberKnife for prostate cancer has long treatment times compared with conventional radiotherapy. This arises the need for designing treatment plans with short execution times. We propose an objective function for plan quality evaluation, which was used to determine an optimal combination between small and large collimators based on short treatment times and clinically acceptable dose distributions. Data from 11 prostate cancer patients were used. For each patient, 20 plans were created based on all combinations between one small (⌀ 10–25 mm) and one large (⌀ 35–60 mm) Iris collimator size. The objective function was assigned to each combination as a penalty, such that plans with low penalties were considered superior. This function considered the achievement of dosimetric planning goals, tumor control probability, normal tissue complication probability, relative seriality parameter, and treatment time. Two methods were used to determine the optimal combination. First, we constructed heat maps representing the mean penalty values and standard deviations of the plans created for each collimator combination. The combination giving a plan with the smallest mean penalty and standard deviation was considered optimal. Second, we created two groups of superior plans: group A plans were selected by histogram analysis and group B plans were selected by choosing the plan with the lowest penalty from each patient. In both groups, the most used small and large collimators were assumed to represent the optimal combination. The optimal combinations obtained from the heat maps included the 25 mm as a small collimator, giving small/large collimator sizes of 25/35, 25/40, 25/50, and 25/60 mm. The superior-group analysis indicated that 25/50 mm was the optimal combination. The optimal Iris combination for prostate cancer treatment using CyberKnife was determined to be a collimator size between 25 mm (small) and 50 mm (large).

ONE SHOT - single shot radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: study protocol of a single arm, multicenter phase I/II trial

Background

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging treatment alternative for patients with localized prostate cancer. Promising results in terms of disease control and toxicity have been reported with 4 to 5 SBRT fractions. However, question of how far can the number of fractions with SBRT be reduced is a challenging research matter. As already explored by some authors in the context of brachytherapy, monotherapy appears to be feasible with an acceptable toxicity profile and a promising outcome. The aim of this multicenter phase I/II prospective trialis to demonstrate early evidence of safety and efficacy of a single-fraction SBRT approach for the treatment of localized disease.

Methods

Patients with low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer without significant tumor in the transitional zone will be treated with a single SBRT fraction of 19 Gy to the whole prostate gland with urethra-sparing (17 Gy). Intrafractional motion will be monitored with intraprostatic electromagnetic transponders. The primary endpoint of the phase I part of the study will be safety as assessed by CTCAE 4.03 grading scale, while biochemical relapse-free survival will be the endpoint for the phase II. The secondary endpoints include acute and late toxicity, quality of life, progression-free survival, and prostate-cancer specific survival.

Discussion

This is the first multicenter phase I/II trial assessing the efficacy and safety of a single-dose SBRT treatment for patients with localized prostate cancer. If positive, results of ONE SHOT may help to design subsequent phase III trials exploring the role of SBRT monotherapy in the exclusive radiotherapy treatment of localized disease.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03294889; Registered 27 September 2017.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: An Institutional Experience Using MRI-guided Treatment Planning

With 222,500 new cases estimated for 2017, prostate cancer makes up approximately 10% of all new cancer diagnoses in the United States and is the third most common cancer after breast and lung cancer. In 2013, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) policy model recognized that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may be used as an alternative to standard treatment modalities, i.e. intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), to treat prostate cancer. In this study, we report outcomes for a cohort of 30 patients with prostate cancer treated with SBRT at our institution. We also describe, in detail, the technical aspects of SBRT planning and delivery for these patients, specifically the use of MRI in determining treatment volumes and detecting gross lesions.

After institutional review board (IRB) approval, a retrospective analysis was done of 30 males with the diagnosis of prostate cancer treated in the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Baylor College of Medicine between January 2011 and June 2016. All patients received image-guided SBRT. Treatment planning was performed using a non-contrast computed tomography (CT) scan as well as a contrast thin-slice open MRI with the patient in the treatment position. Patient comparisons were done using the Mann-Whitney U, Fishers Exact, and Kaplan-Meier tests.

Thirty patients were treated between January 2011 and June 2016. Twenty-six had follow-up data available and were included in the analysis. Median follow-up was 32 months (range 2-72 months). Mean and median ages at diagnosis were both 68.5 years. A total of 64% of the patients had foci on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or a palpable nodule on an exam. The median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis was 7.35 ng/mL (range 2.8-13), and the median PSA nadir after treatment was 0.4 ng/mL (range 0.01-4.5). The biochemical disease-free recurrence rate per Phoenix definition was 96%, with only one patient experiencing a biochemical recurrence four years after treatment. The patient with a recurrence was T2c, high-intermediate risk with a Gleason score of 7(3+4). He had a focus visible on MRI. Overall survival was 96%, with the only patient death unrelated to his prostate cancer. There was no statistical significance associated with recurrence and nodule on MRI (p=0.318), T-stage (p=0.222), Gleason score (p=0.890), risk group (p=0.654), age (p=0.692), or race (p=0.509). There were no grade three or four acute or long-term toxicities.

SBRT of the prostate is an effective method for treating prostate cancer. We saw excellent PSA control and minimal acute or long-term toxicities after a median of three years of follow-up.

Changes in prostate orientation due to removal of a Foley catheter

PURPOSE

Investigate the impact on prostate orientation caused by use and removal of a Foley catheter, and the dosimetric impact on men prospectively treated with prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

METHODS

Twenty-two men underwent a CT simulation with a Foley in place (FCT), followed immediately by a second treatment planning simulation without the Foley (TPCT). The change in prostate orientation was determined by rigid registration of three implanted transponders between FCT and TPCT and compared to measured orientation changes during treatment. The impact on treatment planning and delivery was investigated by analyzing the measured rotations during treatment relative to both CT scans, and introducing rotations of ±15° in the treatment plan to determine the maximum impact of allowed rotations.

RESULTS

Removing the Foley caused a statistically significant prostate rotation (P < 0.0028) compared to normal biological motion in 60% of patients. The largest change in rotation due to removing a Foley occurs about the left-right axis (tilt) which has a standard deviation two to five times larger than changes in rotation about the Sup-Inf (roll) and Ant-Post (yaw) axes. The change in tilt due to removing a Foley for prone and supine patients was -1.1° ± 6.0° and 0.3° ± 7.4°, showing no strong directional bias. The average tilt during treatment was -1.6° ± 7.1° compared to the TPCT and would have been -2.0° ± 7.1° had the FCT been used as the reference. The TPCT was a better or equivalent representation of prostate tilt in 82% of patients, vs 50% had the FCT been used for treatment planning. However, 92.7% of fractions would still have been within the ±15° rotation limit if only the FCT were used for treatment planning. When rotated ±15°, urethra V_{105% = 38.85Gy}  < 20% was exceeded in 27% of the instances, and prostate (CTV) coverage was maintained above D_95%  > 37 Gy in all but one instance.

CONCLUSIONS

Removing a Foley catheter can cause large prostate rotations. There does not appear to be a clear dosimetric benefit to obtaining the CT scan with a Foley catheter to define the urethra given the changes in urethral position from removing the Foley catheter. If urethral sparing is desired without the use of a Foley, utilization of an MRI to define the urethra may be necessary, or a pseudo-urethral planning organ at risk volume (PRV) may be used to limit dosimetric hot spots.

Rectal/urinary toxicity after hypofractionated vs conventional radiotherapy in low/intermediate risk localized prostate cancer: systematic review and meta analysis

Purpose

The aim of this review was to compare radiation toxicity in Localized Prostate Cancer (LPC) patients who underwent conventional fractionation (CV), hypofractionated (HYPO) or extreme hypofractionated (eHYPO) radiotherapy. We analyzed the impact of technological innovation on the management of prostate cancer, attempting to make a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Methods

PubMed database has been explored for studies concerning acute and late urinary/gastrointestinal toxicity in low/intermediate risk LPC patients after receiving radiotherapy. Studies were then gathered into 5 groups: detected acute and chronic toxicity data from phase II non randomized trials were analyzed and Odds Ratio (OR) was calculated by comparing the number of patients with G0-1 toxicity and those with toxicity > G2 in the studied groups. A meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials was also carried out.

Results

The initial search yielded 575 results, but only 32 manuscripts met all eligibility requirements: in terms of radiation-induced side effects, such as gastrointestinal and genitourinary acute and late toxicity, hypofractionated 3DCRT seemed to be more advantageous than 3DCRT with conventional fractionation as well as IMRT with conventional fractionation compared to 3DCRT with conventional fractionation; furthermore, IMRT hypofractionated technique appeared more advantageous than IMRT with conventional fractionation in late toxicities. Randomized trials meta-analysis disclosed an advantage in terms of acute gastrointestinal and late genitourinary toxicity for Hypofractionated schemes.

Conclusions

Although our analysis pointed out a more favorable toxicity profile in terms of gastrointestinal acute side effects of conventional radiotherapy schemes compared to hypofractionated ones, prospective randomized trials are needed to better understand the real incidence of rectal and urinary toxicity in patients receiving radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

The evolution of brachytherapy for prostate cancer

Brachytherapy (BT), using low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent seed implantation or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary source implantation, is an acceptable treatment option for select patients with prostate cancer of any risk group. The benefits of HDR-BT over LDR-BT include the ability to use the same source for other cancers, lower operator dependence, and - typically - fewer acute irritative symptoms. By contrast, the benefits of LDR-BT include more favourable scheduling logistics, lower initial capital equipment costs, no need for a shielded room, completion in a single implant, and more robust data from clinical trials. Prospective reports comparing HDR-BT and LDR-BT to each other or to other treatment options (such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or surgery) suggest similar outcomes. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure rates for patients with low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease are >85%, 69-97%, and 63-80%, respectively. Brachytherapy with EBRT (versus brachytherapy alone) is an appropriate approach in select patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease. The 10-year rates of overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer-specific mortality are >85%, <10%, and <5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated with HDR-BT and LDR-BT are rare, at <4% in most series, and quality of life is improved in patients who receive brachytherapy compared with those who undergo surgery.

Salvage robotic SBRT for local prostate cancer recurrence after radiotherapy: preliminary results of the Oscar Lambret Center

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no standard option for local salvage treatment for local prostate cancer recurrence after radiotherapy. Our objective was to investigate the feasibility and efficiency of Robotic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) in this clinical setting.

METHODS/MATERIALS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who were treated at our institution with SBRT for local prostate cancer recurrence after External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT) or brachytherapy. Multidisciplinary staff approved the treatment, and recurrence was biopsy-proven when feasible. A dose of 36 Gy was prescribed in six fractions. Treatment was delivered every other day.

RESULTS

Between August 2011 and February 2014, 23 patients were treated with SBRT for intra-prostate cancer recurrence with a median follow up of 22 months (6 to 40). Twenty patients had biopsy-proven recurrence. For 19 patients, EBRT was the initial treatment and in four patients, brachytherapy was the initial treatment; the median relapse-time from initial treatment was 65 months (28 to 150). At relapse, 10 patients had an extra-capsular extension. Fourteen patients were treated with androgen deprivation that could be stopped after a median of 1 month after SBRT (range 0-24). A PSA decrease occurred in 82.6% of the patients after SBRT. The 2-year disease-free survival and overall survival rates were 54 and 100%, respectively. Disease progression was observed for nine patients (39.1%) (five local, three metastatic and one nodal progression) after a median of 20 months (7-40 months). The median nadir PSA was 0.35 ng/ml and was achieved after a median of 8 months (1 to 30) after treatment. We observed no grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Two patients presented with grade 3 toxicities (two Cystitis and one neuralgia). Other toxicities included urinary toxicities (five grade 2 and nine grade 1) and rectal toxicities (two grade 2 and two grade 1).

CONCLUSION

SBRT for local prostate cancer recurrence seems feasible and well tolerated with a short follow up. Prospective evaluation is needed.

Technical Note: System for evaluating local hypothermia as a radioprotector of the rectum in a small animal model

PURPOSE

The protective effects of induced or even accidental hypothermia on the human body are widespread with several medical uses currently under active research. In vitro experiments using human cell lines have shown hypothermia provides a radioprotective effect that becomes more pronounced at large, single-fraction doses common to stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatments. This work describes the development of a system to evaluate local hypothermia for a radioprotective effect of the rat rectum during a large dose of radiation relevant to prostate SBRT. This includes the evaluation of a 3D-printed small animal rectal cooling device and the integration with a small animal irradiator.

METHODS

A 3-cm long, dual-lumen rectal temperature control apparatus (RTCA) was designed in SOLIDWORKS CAD for 3D printing. The RTCA was capable of recirculating flow in a device small enough for insertion into the rat rectum, with a metal support rod for strength as well as visibility during radiation treatment planning. The outer walls of the RTCA comprised of thin heat shrink plastic, achieving efficient heat transfer into adjacent tissues. Following leak-proof testing, fiber optic temperature probes were used to evaluate the temperature over time when placed adjacent to the cooling device within the rat rectum. MRI thermometry characterized the relative temperature distribution in concentric ROIs surrounding the probe. Integration with an image-guided small animal irradiator and associated treatment planning system included evaluation for imaging artifacts and effect of brass tubing on dose calculation.

RESULTS

The rectal temperature adjacent to the cooling device decreased from body temperature to 15°C within 10-20 min from device insertion and was maintained at 15 ± 3°C during active cooling for the evaluated time of one hour. MR thermometry revealed a steep temperature gradient with increasing distance from the cooling device with the desired temperature range maintained within the surrounding few millimeters.

CONCLUSIONS

A 3D-printed rectal cooling device was fabricated for the purpose of inducing local hypothermia in the rat rectum. The RTCA was simply integrated with an image-guided small animal irradiator and Monte Carlo-based treatment planning system to facilitate an in vivo investigation of the radioprotective effect of hypothermia for late rectal toxicity following a single large dose of radiation.

The Role of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

It is now accepted that prostate cancer has a low alpha/beta ratio, establishing a strong basis for hypofractionation of prostate radiotherapy. This review focuses on the rationale for hypofractionation and presents the evidence base for establishing moderate hypofractionation for localised disease as the new standard of care. The emerging evidence for extreme hypofractionation in managing localized and oligometastatic prostate cancer is reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

The 5-year efficacy and toxicity outcomes from four phase III studies have been published within the last 12 months. These studies randomizing over 6000 patients to conventional fractionation (1.8-2.0 Gy per fraction) or moderate hypofractionation (3.0-3.4 Gy per fraction). They demonstrate hypofractionation to be non-inferior to conventional fractionation. Moderate hypofractionation for localized prostate cancer is safe and effective. There is a growing body of evidence in support of extreme hypofractionation for localized prostate cancer. Extreme hypofractionation may have a role in managing prostate oligometastases, but further studies are needed.

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

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

Predictors of multidomain decline in health-related quality of life after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer involves high-dose-per-fraction radiation treatments. Its use is increasing, but concerns remain about treatment-related toxicity. The authors assessed the incidence and predictors of a global decline in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after prostate SBRT.

METHODS

From 2008 to 2014, 713 consecutive men with localized prostate cancer received treatment with SBRT according to a prospective institutional protocol. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) HRQOL data were collected at baseline and longitudinally for 5 years. EPIC-26 is comprised of 5 domains. The primary endpoint was defined as a decline exceeding the clinically detectable threshold in ≥4 EPIC-26 domains, termed multidomain decline.

RESULTS

The median age was 69 years, 46% of patients had unfavorable intermediate-risk or high-risk disease, and 20% received androgen-deprivation therapy. During 1 to 3 months and 6 to 60 months after SBRT, 8% to 15% and 10% to 11% of patients had multidomain declines, respectively. On multivariable analysis, lower baseline bowel HRQOL (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.7; P < .01) and baseline depression (odds ratio, 5.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-24.3; P = .02) independently predicted for multidomain decline. Only 3% to 4% of patients had long-term multidomain declines exceeding twice the clinical threshold, and 30% of such declines appeared to be related to prostate cancer treatment or progression of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate SBRT has minimal long-term impact on multidomain decline, and the majority of more significant multidomain declines appear to be unrelated to treatment. This emphasizes the importance of focusing not only on the side effects of prostate cancer treatment but also on other comorbid illnesses that contribute to overall HRQOL. Cancer 2017;123:1635-1642. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Emerging Technologies and Techniques in Radiation Therapy

The past decade has brought an improved ability to precisely target and deliver radiation as well as other focal prostate-directed therapy. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), proton beam radiation, high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy, as well as nonradiotherapy treatments such as cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound are several therapeutic modalities that have been investigated for the treatment of prostate cancer in an attempt to reduce toxicity while improving cancer control. However, high-risk prostate cancer requires a comprehensive treatment of the prostate as well as areas at risk for cancer spread. Therefore, most new radiation treatment (SBRT, HDR, and proton beam radiation) modalities have been largely investigated in combination with regional radiation therapy. Though the evidence is evolving, the use of SBRT, HDR, and proton beam radiation is promising. Nonradiation focal therapy has been proposed mainly for partial gland treatment in men with low-risk disease, and its use in high-risk prostate cancer patients remains experimental.

A comparison of robotic arm versus gantry linear accelerator stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer diagnosed in men in the United States besides skin cancer. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT; 6–15 Gy per fraction, up to 45 minutes per fraction, delivered in five fractions or less, over the course of approximately 2 weeks) is emerging as a popular treatment option for prostate cancer. The American Society for Radiation Oncology now recognizes SBRT for select low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. SBRT grew from the notion that high doses of radiation typical of brachytherapy could be delivered noninvasively using modern external-beam radiation therapy planning and delivery methods. SBRT is most commonly delivered using either a traditional gantry-mounted linear accelerator or a robotic arm-mounted linear accelerator. In this systematic review article, we compare and contrast the current clinical evidence supporting a gantry vs robotic arm SBRT for prostate cancer. The data for SBRT show encouraging and comparable results in terms of freedom from biochemical failure (>90% for low and intermediate risk at 5–7 years) and acute and late toxicity (<6% grade 3–4 late toxicities). Other outcomes (eg, overall and cancer-specific mortality) cannot be compared, given the indolent course of low-risk prostate cancer. At this time, neither SBRT device is recommended over the other for all patients; however, gantry-based SBRT machines have the abilities of treating larger volumes with conventional fractionation, shorter treatment time per fraction (~15 minutes for gantry vs ~45 minutes for robotic arm), and the ability to achieve better plans among obese patients (since they are able to use energies >6 MV). Finally, SBRT (particularly on a gantry) may also be more cost-effective than conventionally fractionated external-beam radiation therapy. Randomized controlled trials of SBRT using both technologies are underway.

Comparison of outcomes and toxicities among radiation therapy treatment options for prostate cancer

We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

MATERIAL AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Dosimetric benefits of hemigland stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy

OBJECTIVE

Compared with standard, whole-gland (WG) therapies for prostate cancer, focal approaches may provide equivalent oncologic outcomes with fewer adverse effects. The purpose of this study was to compare organ-at-risk (OAR) dosimetry between hemigland (HG) and WG stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans.

METHODS

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy-based SBRT plans were designed to treat the left HG, right HG and WG in eight patients, using five fractions of 8 Gy. OARs of interest included the contralateral HG, rectum, urinary bladder, urethra, penile bulb and contralateral neurovascular bundle.

RESULTS

Rectal V80% (the percentage of a normal structure receiving a dose of 80%) and V90% were significantly lower with HG plans than with WG plans (median values of 4.4 vs 2.5 cm(3) and 2.1 vs 1.1 cm(3), respectively, p < 0.05 by Student's t-test). Bladder V50% was also reduced significantly in HG plans (32.3 vs 17.4 cm(3), p < 0.05), with a trend towards reduction of V100% (3.4 vs 1.3 cm(3), p = 0.09). Urethral maximum dose and mean doses to the penile bulb and contralateral neurovascular bundle were also reduced significantly (42.0 vs 39.7 Gy, p < 0.00001; 13.3 vs 9.2 Gy, p < 0.05; and 40.2 vs 19.3 Gy, p < 0.00001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Targeting an HG volume rather than a WG volume when delivering SBRT can offer statistically significant reductions for all OARs. Given the large magnitude of the reduction in dose to these OARs, it is anticipated that HG SBRT could offer a superior toxicity profile when compared with WG SBRT. This is likely to be most relevant in the context of salvaging a local failure after radiation therapy.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The dosimetric feasibility of HG SBRT is demonstrated. When compared with WG SBRT plans, the HG plans demonstrate statistically significant and large magnitude reduction in doses to the rectum, bladder, urethra, penile bulb and contralateral neurovascular bundle, suggesting the possibility of improved toxicity outcomes with HG SBRT. This is likely to be most relevant in the context of salvaging a local failure after radiation therapy.