Treatment Outcomes of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy on Extra-cranial Oligometastatic and Oligoprogressive Breast Cancer: Mature Results from a Single Institution Experience

AIMS

Evidence shows stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is used as a non-invasive ablative therapy in the treatment of multisite oligometastatic (OM) and oligoprogressive (OP) diseases originating from metastatic breast cancer. This study aims to report the treatment outcomes and to investigate what factors that are prognostic in terms of local control, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients receiving SABR for extracranial OM and OP diseases originating from metastatic breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review on treatment records of patients with OM and OP from metastatic breast cancer who underwent SABR at a single was carried out. SABR was performed with daily image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) using a dedicated robotic SABR machine. Local control, PFS and OS were calculated using Kaplan-Meier statistics and the post-treatment toxicity data was scored following the CTCAE v4.0 protocol. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression tests were used in the subgroup analysis of prognostic factors on PFS and OS including patients' age, types of follow-up imaging (staging CT only vs whole-body MR/PET), metastases status (OM vs OP), primary breast cancer tumour grade, hormone receptors (ER/PR/HER2) status, change of systemic treatments at SABR, number of metastases, SABR treatment sites and doses.

RESULTS

56 metastatic breast cancer patients (38 patients with OM and 18 patients with OP) were involved in this retrospective review. The median follow-up was 35.6 months (range 4.0-132.9 months). The estimated local control at 1 , 2 and 5 years were 90.9%, 88.7% and 88.7%, respectively. The estimated median PFS was 19.2 months (95%CI 10.3-28.1 months); the PFS at 1, 2 and 5 years were 63.3%, 44.4% and 33.2%. The estimated OS at 1, 2 and 5 years were 98.0%, 91.9% and 74.3%, respectively with the estimated median OS of 105.1 months (95%CI 51.5-158.7 months). The vast majority of patients tolerated the treatment well with the commonest acute side effects as grade 1 fatigue. There were no statistically significant factors found in OS regression analysis. The types of follow-up imaging, metastases status, oestrogen receptor status, and number of metastases for SABR were statistically significant factors (p < 0.05) in the multivariate Cox regression analysis on PFS.

CONCLUSION

There are limited studies published on the efficacy and post-treatment toxicities of metastatic breast cancer OM and OP SABR with adequate length of follow-up. This study confirmed that SABR was a safe, non-invasive treatment option for patients with extracranial OM and OP diseases originated from primary breast cancer in terms of the acceptable post-treatment toxicities.

Timing of Radiotherapy (RT) After Radical Prostatectomy (RP): Long-term outcomes in the RADICALS-RT trial [NCT00541047]

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer has been uncertain. RADICALS-RT compared efficacy and safety of adjuvant RT versus an observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure.

METHODS

RADICALS-RT was a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with ≥1 risk factor (pT3/4, Gleason 7-10, positive margins, pre-op PSA≥10ng/ml) for recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Patients were randomised 1:1 to adjuvant RT ("Adjuvant-RT") or an observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure ("Salvage-RT") defined as PSA≥0.1ng/ml or 3 consecutive rises. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned RT schedule (52.5Gy/20 fractions or 66Gy/33 fractions) and treatment centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom-from-distant metastasis, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with Salvage-RT (control) to 95% at 10yr with Adjuvant-RT. Secondary outcome measures were bPFS, freedom-from-non-protocol hormone therapy, safety and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used; HR<1 favours Adjuvant-RT.

FINDINGS

Between Oct-2007 and Dec-2016, 1396 participants from UK, Denmark, Canada and Ireland were randomised: 699 Salvage-RT, 697 Adjuvant-RT. Allocated groups were balanced with median age 65yr. 93% (649/697) Adjuvant-RT reported RT within 6m after randomisation; 39% (270/699) Salvage-RT reported RT during follow-up. Median follow-up was 7.8 years. With 80 distant metastasis events, 10yr FFDM was 93% for Adjuvant-RT and 90% for Salvage-RT: HR=0.68 (95%CI 0·43-1·07, p=0·095). Of 109 deaths, 17 were due to prostate cancer. Overall survival was not improved (HR=0.980, 95%CI 0.667-1.440, p=0.917). Adjuvant-RT reported worse urinary and faecal incontinence one year after randomisation (p=0.001); faecal incontinence remained significant after ten years (p=0.017).

INTERPRETATION

Long-term results from RADICALS-RT confirm adjuvant RT after radical prostatectomy increases the risk of urinary and bowel morbidity, but does not meaningfully improve disease control. An observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy.

Single Dose vs. Fractionated High-Dose Rate Brachytherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: Long Term Results

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

To evaluate long-term freedom from biochemical relapse (FFbR) and overall survival (OS) after single-dose high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) compared with 2 or 3 fraction schedules.

MATERIALS/METHODS

HDR-BT, delivering 1 × 19 Gy or 1 × 20 Gy (A = 49), 2 × 13 Gy (B = 138) or 3 × 10.5 Gy (C = 106), was given to patients with intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer as their sole treatment. Patients were staged with pelvic MRI and isotope bone scan. Transperineal transrectal ultrasound guided implantation was followed by MRI based CTV definition based on GEC ESTRO guidelines. Biochemical relapse was assessed using the Phœnix definition (PSA nadir plus 2 µg/L). Patients were evaluated prospectively from 6 months after implant and bi-annually thereafter. Estimates of freedom from biochemical relapse, and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method and the log-rank test to test for significance. Univariate and multivariate hazard ratios (HR) were obtained using Cox's proportional hazard model. For multivariate modelling a stepwise reduction method was used.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 123, 116 and 120 months (p = 0.4), (A, B, C, respectively). Neo-adjuvant and adjuvant androgen deprivation treatment was given to 80% of all patients, median duration was 9 months for A and 6 months for B and C. K-M estimates of FFbR, at 8 and 10 years, were 67% and 64% (Group A), 78% and 72% (Group B), and 80% and 76% (Group C). Differences in FFbR between dose groups was not significant (p = 0.2). Similarly, no significant difference was seen in OS. Eight and 10-year estimates were 81% and 75% (A), 85% and 74% (B), and 90% and 83% (C); p = 0.5. Hazard Ratios for risk of biochemical recurrence were significant for ADT administration (yes/no) and overall risk category, in multivariate analyses. Only the latter was significant in univariate analysis for risk of death, Gleason risk (low, intermediate, high), MRI tumor stage risk and overall risk category were significant in univariate analyses. Only tumor stage and Gleason risk were significant in multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

Concerns around the efficacy of 19-20 Gy single dose HDR BT as monotherapy, based on early data, may have been unfounded. Long-term outcome data up to 10 years show no significant difference in PSA control and overall survival compared to 2 and 3 fractions of HDR-BT.

Prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy—first UK experience

AIMS

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) combines image-guided radiotherapy with hypofractionation, both of which will probably result in improvements in patient outcomes in prostate cancer. Most clinical experience with this technique resides in North America. Here we present the first UK cohort to receive SBRT for prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-one prostate cancer patients (10 low risk, 35 intermediate risk and 6 high risk) were treated with 36.25 Gy in five fractions over 1-2 weeks and gold seed image guidance. All patients had toxicity International Prostate Symptom score (IPSS) and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group recorded prospectively and prostate-specific antigen was measured 3-6 monthly during follow-up.

RESULTS

The median IPSS was 6, 11, 8 and 5 at baseline, 1-3 weeks, 4-6 weeks and 7-12 weeks after treatment. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity of grade 2 was seen in 22% and 14%, respectively, at 1-3 weeks after treatment; no patient had grade 3+ toxicity at this time point, although two patients had grade 3 urinary frequency recorded during treatment. The median follow-up for the 42 patients who did not receive androgen deprivation was 14.5 months. Prostate-specific antigen at 13-18 months after treatment was 1.3 ng/ml.

CONCLUSION

Prostate SBRT is a promising treatment for organ-confined prostate cancer and is currently being investigated in a UK-led phase III trial.

Can I look at my list? An evaluation of a 'prompt sheet' within an oncology outpatient clinic

AIMS

We introduced a patient 'prompt sheet' into our clinic between January 2004 and January 2005. The aim was to determine whether it would facilitate communication and help patients in obtaining their desired level of information about their illness, and assist with decision making. We conducted an audit survey to investigate the way follow-up takes place in our oncology clinic, to determine what works and what does not work in the clinic, and to examine how patients access the most useful information and to assess the utility of, and patient satisfaction with, a locally developed pilot prompt sheet.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single questionnaire was designed to elicit information on patients' information needs, overall satisfaction with the oncology clinic, and uptake and perceived usefulness of the prompt sheet. We carried out an audit survey in the form of a Likert-scale questionnaire (33 questions), followed immediately afterwards by a semi-structured interview. A specialist nurse asked a range of open questions about what was good and bad about the clinic and the prompt sheets.

RESULTS

Despite efforts to ensure that all patients received the prompt-sheet leaflets, only 254 out of 300 (85%) received them. Of these, 195 (65%) felt that they were 'very helpful', and 30 (10%) found them 'fairly helpful'. However, 15 (5%) had no strong feelings and only three found them either fairly or completely unhelpful. One-third of the patients were able to ask more questions about their disease as a result of the prompt sheet, although they felt the doctor was busy and did not want to take up too much of their time. Men with prostate cancer found the prompt sheet particularly helpful to ask questions.

CONCLUSION

This satisfaction audit suggests that our pilot prompt sheet is helpful to patients attending oncology outpatient appointments, particularly for men with prostate cancer. We aim to adapt the present prompt sheet on the basis of the replies obtained, and re-audit in the future.

High Dose Rate Iridium-192 Brachytherapy as a Component of Radical Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Localised Prostate Cancer

AIMS

To assess the treatment outcomes and toxicity of conformal high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost as a means of radiation dose escalation in patients with localised prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between December 1998 and July 2004, 65 consecutive patients with localised prostate cancer (magnetic resonance imaging-staged T1-3 N0 M0) were treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) followed by two fractions of HDR iridium-192 brachytherapy. The patients selected this treatment modality in preference to entering an ongoing randomised phase 3 trial. Any pre-treatment serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Gleason score were included. The primary end point was biochemical disease-free progression. Late treatment-related morbidity was graded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 67.3 years (range 47.9-80). Sixty patients (92.3%) had intermediate- to high-risk disease defined by clinical stage, presenting PSA and Gleason score/World Health Organisation (WHO) grade. With a median follow-up of 3.5 years (range 0.6-5.8), two patients had died of metastatic disease and another four patients had PSA relapse, giving a 3-year actuarial biochemical disease-free progression of 90.8%. Three patients (4.6%) had acute grade 3 genitourinary toxicity, in the form of urinary retention. Late grade 3 and 4 genitourinary toxicities occurred in four patients (6.2%) and one patient (1.5%), respectively. No late gastrointestinal toxicities were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the combined modality of conformal HDR brachytherapy and EBRT is a feasible treatment modality with acceptable acute and late toxicities, comparable with those of EBRT alone. It offers an attractive conformal treatment modality with the potential of further dose escalation in the treatment of localised prostate cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to preoperative chemoradiation or radiation in rectal cancer: should we be more cautious?

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a term originally used to describe the administration of chemotherapy preoperatively before surgery. The original rationale for administering NACT or so-called induction chemotherapy to shrink or downstage a locally advanced tumour, and thereby facilitate more effective local treatment with surgery or radiotherapy, has been extended with the introduction of more effective combinations of chemotherapy to include reducing the risks of metastatic disease. It seems logical that survival could be lengthened, or organ preservation rates increased in resectable tumours by NACT. In rectal cancer NACT is being increasingly used in locally advanced and nonmetastatic unresectable tumours. Randomised studies in advanced colorectal cancer show high response rates to combination cytotoxic therapy. This evidence of efficacy coupled with the introduction of novel molecular targeted therapies (such as Bevacizumab and Cetuximab), and long waiting times for radiotherapy have rekindled an interest in delivering NACT in locally advanced rectal cancer. In contrast, this enthusiasm is currently waning in other sites such as head and neck and nasopharynx cancer where traditionally NACT has been used. So, is NACT in rectal cancer a real advance or just history repeating itself? In this review, we aimed to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the separate approaches of neoadjuvant, concurrent and consolidation chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer, drawing on theoretical principles, preclinical studies and clinical experience both in rectal cancer and other disease sites. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may improve outcome in terms of disease-free or overall survival in selected groups in some disease sites, but this strategy has not been shown to be associated with better outcomes than postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. In particular, there is insufficient data in rectal cancer. The evidence for benefit is strongest when NACT is administered before surgical resection. In contrast, the data in favour of NACT before radiation or chemoradiation (CRT) is inconclusive, despite the suggestion that response to induction chemotherapy can predict response to subsequent radiotherapy. The observation that spectacular responses to chemotherapy before radical radiotherapy did not result in improved survival, was noted 25 years ago. However, multiple trials in head and neck cancer, nasopharyngeal cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, small-cell lung cancer and cervical cancer do not support the routine use of NACT either as an alternative, or as additional benefit to CRT. The addition of NACT does not appear to enhance local control over concurrent CRT or radiotherapy alone. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy before CRT or radiation should be used with caution, and only in the context of clinical trials. The evidence base suggests that concurrent CRT with early positioning of radiotherapy appears the best option for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and in all disease sites where radiation is the primary local therapy.

A phase II study of weekly paclitaxel in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacokinetic behavior of single-agent paclitaxel given weekly to elderly patients with lung cancer.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Previously untreated patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer were eligible for the study if they were at least 70 years of age and had preserved organ function. Paclitaxel was administered over 1 h at a dose of 90 mg/m(2) for 6 consecutive weeks on an 8-week cycle. The pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel were assessed during the first and sixth week of therapy in a subgroup of eight patients.

RESULTS

A total of 35 patients (median age, 76 years; range, 70-85) were enrolled. The overall response rate was 23%. Median time to failure was 5.2 months, whereas the median survival time was 10.3 months. Survival rates after 1 and 2 years were 45 and 22%, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia (5.8%), hyperglycemia (17.6%), neuropathy (5.8%), and infection (8.8%). Two patients died from treatment-related toxicity. There was no significant difference (P = 0.18) between the total body clearance of paclitaxel on the first (17.4 +/- 2.9 liters/h/m(2), mean +/- SD) and sixth (15.8 +/- 4.1 liters/h/m(2)) week of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Paclitaxel administered as a weekly 1-h infusion at a dose of 90 mg/m(2) is a safe and effective therapy for elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Its pharmacokinetics in elderly patients do not appear to differ from historical data for younger patients, and there was no suggestion of a change in drug clearance after repeated weekly dosing.