1
|
Patel K, Rydzewski NR, Schott EE, Cooley-Zgela TC, Ning H, Cheng JY, Pinto PA, Salerno KE, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B, Choyke P, Citrin DE. A Phase I Trial of Focal Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e426-e427. [PMID: 37785396 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.1587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy (RT) is an increasingly recognized entity with no standard management. NCT03253744 was a phase I trial with a primary objective of identifying the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of a course of image-guided, focal, salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with local recurrence after prior definitive RT. Additional objectives included biochemical control and imaging response on mpMRI and 18F-DCFPyL (PSMA) PET/CT. MATERIALS/METHODS SBRT was prescribed to three dose levels (DLs): 40Gy (DL1), 42.5Gy (DL2), and 45Gy (DL3) in 5 fractions. The prescription dose was delivered to a PTV defined by mpMRI and PSMA imaging and biopsy confirmed tumor volume. Dose escalation followed a 3+3 design with a 3-patient expansion at the MTD. Toxicities above baseline were scored using CTCAE v5.0 criteria for two years after completion of SBRT. Escalation was halted if 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. DLTs were defined as any persistent (>4 days) grade 3 toxicity occurring within the first 3 weeks after SBRT, and any grade 3 GU or grade 4 GI toxicity thereafter. Imaging response was compared between baseline and 6-months by the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS Between 08/2018 and 05/2022, 8 patients underwent salvage SBRT to 11 intraprostatic lesions with a median follow-up of 27 months. No DLTs were observed on DL1. Two patients were enrolled on DL2 and both experienced grade 3 GU toxicities, prompting de-escalation and expansion (n = 6) on DL1, the MTD. The most common toxicities were grade 2 GU toxicities: acute urinary urgency/frequency, acute weak urinary stream, and noninfective cystitis. One patient at DL1 had a self-limited episode of grade 2 GI toxicity (proctitis). No grade 3 GI toxicities were observed. All but two patients achieved an undetectable PSA nadir. Only one of these experienced biochemical failure (nadir + 2.0) at 33 months with suspicion of distant metastatic failure on restaging PET/CT. Imaging response was demonstrated by MRI in all lesions with heterogeneity in volumetric response (6% to 100%). A significant (p<0.01) response on PSMA PET/CT was observed for all measured parameters (SUVMax, SUVMean, GTVPSMA, Total Lesion PSMA [SUVMean × GTVPSMA]). Of the 11 lesions, 1 (9%) demonstrated a complete response (CR) by MRI and 9 (82%) by PSMA PET/CT. A single lesion increased in volume by 0.06 cc (16%) at 6-month PSMA PET/CT compared to baseline in the only patient who did not achieve an undetectable PSA nadir and did not have imaging suggestive of distant failure. CONCLUSION On this phase I dose escalation study of salvage SBRT for isolated intraprostatic local failure after definitive RT, the MTD was 40Gy in 5 fractions. producing a 100% 24-month bPFS, with one late failure at 33 months occurring after the 24-month study period. The most frequent clinically significant toxicity was late grade 2 GU toxicity. Imaging response was demonstrated in all lesions on MRI and PSMA PET/CT with exception of a single lesion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - N R Rydzewski
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - E E Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - T C Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - H Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - J Y Cheng
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - P A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - K E Salerno
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - L Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - E Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - B Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - P Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - D E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Salerno KE, Turkbey B, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Schott EE, Brennan AK, Roy S, Shankavaram U, Patel K, Cooley-Zgela T, McKinney Y, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Choyke P, Citrin DE. Detection of failure patterns using advanced imaging in patients with biochemical recurrence following low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2022; 21:442-450. [PMID: 35523680 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2022.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2021] [Revised: 01/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) This study describes the pattern of failure in patients with biochemical (BCR) recurrence after low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy as a component of definitive treatment for prostate cancer. METHODS Patients with BCR after LDR brachytherapy ± external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) were enrolled on prospective IRB approved advanced imaging protocols. Patients underwent 3T multiparametric MRI (mpMRI); a subset underwent prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-based PET/CT. Pathologic confirmation was obtained unless contraindicated. RESULTS Between January 2011 and April 2021, 51 patients with BCR after brachytherapy (n = 36) or brachytherapy + EBRT (n = 15) underwent mpMRI and were included in this analysis. Of 38 patients with available dosimetry, only two had D90<90%. The prostate and seminal vesicles were a site of failure in 66.7% (n = 34) and 39.2% (n = 20), respectively. PET/CT (n = 32 patients) more often identified lesions pelvic lymph nodes (50%; n = 16) and distant metastases (18.8%; n = 6), than mpMRI. Isolated nodal disease (9.8%; n = 5) and distant metastases (n = 1) without local recurrence were uncommon. Recurrence within the prostate was located in the transition zone in 48.5%, central or midline in 45.5%, and anterior in 36.4% of patients. CONCLUSION In this cohort of patients with BCR after LDR brachytherapy ± EBRT, the predominant recurrence pattern was local (prostate ± seminal vesicles) with frequent occurrence in the anterior prostate and transition zone. mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT provided complementary information to localize sites of recurrence, with PSMA PET/CT often confirming mpMRI findings and identifying occult nodal or distant metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kilian E Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Erica E Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Alexandra K Brennan
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Soumyajit Roy
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - Uma Shankavaram
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Krishnan Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Yolanda McKinney
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, NIH Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
| |
Collapse
|