Phase 3 Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is noninferior to conventionally or moderately hypofractionated regimens with respect to biochemical or clinical failure in patients with localized prostate cancer is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, international, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Men with stage T1 or T2 prostate cancer, a Gleason score of 3+4 or less, and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of no more than 20 ng per milliliter were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions over a period of 1 or 2 weeks) or control radiotherapy (78 Gy in 39 fractions over a period of 7.5 weeks or 62 Gy in 20 fractions over a period of 4 weeks). Androgen-deprivation therapy was not permitted. The primary end point was freedom from biochemical or clinical failure, with a critical hazard ratio for noninferiority of 1.45. The analysis was performed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 874 patients underwent randomization at 38 centers (433 patients in the SBRT group and 441 in the control radiotherapy group) between August 2012 and January 2018. The median age of the patients was 69.8 years, and the median PSA level was 8.0 ng per milliliter; the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk category was low for 8.4% of the patients and intermediate for 91.6%. At a median follow-up of 74.0 months, the 5-year incidence of freedom from biochemical or clinical failure was 95.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.3 to 97.4) in the SBRT group and 94.6% (95% CI, 91.9 to 96.4) in the control radiotherapy group (unadjusted hazard ratio for biochemical or clinical failure, 0.73; 90% CI, 0.48 to 1.12; P = 0.004 for noninferiority), which indicated the noninferiority of SBRT. At 5 years, the cumulative incidence of late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or higher genitourinary toxic effects was 26.9% (95% CI, 22.8 to 31.5) with SBRT and 18.3% (95% CI, 14.8 to 22.5) with control radiotherapy (P<0.001), and the cumulative incidence of late RTOG grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal toxic effects was 10.7% (95% CI, 8.1 to 14.2) and 10.2% (95% CI, 7.7 to 13.5), respectively (P = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Five-fraction SBRT was noninferior to control radiotherapy with respect to biochemical or clinical failure and may be an efficacious treatment option for patients with low-to-intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer as defined in this trial. (Funded by Accuray and others; PACE-B ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01584258.).

Elective pelvic nodal irradiation in the setting of ultrahypofractionated versus moderately hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Outcomes from 3 prospective clinical trials.

Background and purpose: Data is needed regarding the use of ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy (UHRT) in the context of prostate cancer elective nodal irradiation (ENI), and how this compares to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) ENI with CFRT or moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) to the prostate. Materials and methods: Between 2011-2019, 3 prospective clinical trials of unfavourable intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer receiving CFRT (78 Gy in 39 fractions to prostate; 46 Gy in 23 fractions to pelvis), MHRT (68 Gy in 25 fractions to prostate; 48 Gy to pelvis), or UHRT (35-40 Gy in 5 fractions to prostate +/- boost to 50 Gy to intraprostatic lesion; 25 Gy to pelvis) were conducted. Primary endpoints included biochemical failure (Phoenix definition), and acute and late toxicities (CTCAE v3.0/4.0). Results: Two-hundred-forty patients were enrolled: 90 (37.5 %) had CFRT, 90 (37.5 %) MHRT, and 60 (25 %) UHRT. Median follow-up time was 71.6 months (IQR 53.6-94.8). Cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (95 % CI) at 5-years was 11.7 % (3.5-19.8 %) for CFRT, 6.5 % (0.8-12.2 %) MHRT, and 1.8 % (0-5.2 %) UHRT, which was not significantly different between treatments (p = 0.38). Acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicity was significantly worse for UHRT versus CFRT and MHRT, but not for acute grade ≥ 3 genitourinary, or acute gastrointestinal toxicities. UHRT was not associated with worse late toxicities. Conclusion: ENI with UHRT resulted in similar oncologic outcomes to CFRT ENI with prostate CFRT/MHRT, with worse acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity but no differences in late toxicity. Randomized phase 3 trials of ENI using UHRT techniques are much anticipated.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: 10-Year Outcomes From Three Prospective Trials.

PURPOSE: SABR is growingly accepted for the treatment of localized prostate cancer with recent randomized trials showing noninferiority compared with conventional or moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy. The natural history of prostate cancer necessitates extended surveillance for recurrence; however, there are a few prospective studies reporting long-term outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study included patients with low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer from 3 Canadian clinical trials enrolled from 2006 to 2013. All patients received SABR to the prostate consisting of 35 to 40 Gy in 5 fractions over 11 to 29 days. Prostate specific antigen, distant metastasis, and vital status were prospectively recorded. The occurrence of a second malignancy after treatment was assessed by a chart review and classified using modified Cahan's criteria. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-seven patients were included. Median follow-up was 10.3 years (interquartile range, 7.8-12.7). Ten-year biochemical failure (95% confidence interval) was 7.7% (3.9%-11.5%); 10-year overall survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and freedom from metastasis were 84.1% (79.3%-89.1%), 99.2% (98.1%-100%), and 98.8% (97.5%-100%), respectively. Twenty-seven of 267 (10.1%) patients experienced a second malignancy (SM), with 6/27 patients (22.2%) classified as having a SM likely (n = 3) or possibly (n = 3) related to prior radiation therapy. Ten-year freedom from SM was 89.2%. CONCLUSIONS: SABR shows excellent long-term disease control for low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer. Patients treated for prostate cancer have a moderate risk of SM, consistent with background rates for the population.

Evolving Paradigms in Prostate Cancer: The Integral Role of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Primary Staging and Therapeutic Decision-Making.

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography or computed tomography (PET/CT) has emerged as a superior imaging option to conventional imaging for prostate cancer. The majority of early evidence and prospective trials evaluated PSMA PET/CT in the biochemical recurrence or metastatic setting. However, there has been an increasing number of prospective trials in the primary setting. The purpose of this narrative review was to describe the role of PSMA PET/CT in localized primary prostate cancer. This narrative review focuses on the prospective evidence available in this setting. We detail the current practice and future potential for PSMA PET/CT to be used in multiple stages of localized primary prostate cancer. The most common practice currently for PSMA PET/CT is in the primary nodal and metastatic staging of high-risk prostate cancer. We describe other roles of PSMA PET/CT, including in intermediate-risk prostate cancer as well as local staging and the impact on radiation therapy and surgical management. We also discuss the potential future roles of PSMA PET/CT in prediagnosis such as risk stratification for biopsy, prognosis, and specific surgical roles. Potential pitfalls of PSMA PET/CT are also addressed. PSMA PET/CT has already had a significant influence on prostate cancer, and there will continue to be a greater role for this imaging modality in localized primary prostate cancer.

The Proteogenomics of Prostate Cancer Radioresistance.

Prostate cancer is frequently treated with radiotherapy. Unfortunately, aggressive radioresistant relapses can arise, and the molecular underpinnings of radioresistance are unknown. Modern clinical radiotherapy is evolving to deliver higher doses of radiation in fewer fractions (hypofractionation). We therefore analyzed genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic data to characterize prostate cancer radioresistance in cells treated with both conventionally fractionated and hypofractionated radiotherapy. Independent of fractionation schedule, resistance to radiotherapy involved massive genomic instability and abrogation of DNA mismatch repair. Specific prostate cancer driver genes were modulated at the RNA and protein levels, with distinct protein subcellular responses to radiotherapy. Conventional fractionation led to a far more aggressive biomolecular response than hypofractionation. Testing preclinical candidates identified in cell lines, we revealed POLQ (DNA Polymerase Theta) as a radiosensitizer. POLQ-modulated radioresistance in model systems and was predictive of it in large patient cohorts. The molecular response to radiation is highly multimodal and sheds light on prostate cancer lethality. SIGNIFICANCE: Radiation is standard of care in prostate cancer. Yet, we have little understanding of its failure. We demonstrate a new paradigm that radioresistance is fractionation specific and identified POLQ as a radioresistance modulator.

Screening guidelines for individuals at increased risk for prostate cancer.

Individuals at increased risk for prostate cancer (PCa) are inconsistently defined in national and international guidelines. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) defines people at increased risk for PCa to include those with a concerning family history, West African/Caribbean/African-American individuals, and those who have germline mutations in known PCa-related genes. Recommendations for screening are also inconsistently defined in national and international guidelines. The NCCN and American Urological Association recommend that individuals at increased risk for PCa be screened with prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal exam starting at age 40. Defining increased risk groups and defining lifetime risk is an ongoing academic process that can be facilitated through patient registries of these cohorts at academic centers.

Prostate high dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer: Efficacy results from a randomized phase II clinical trial of one fraction of 19 Gy or two fractions of 13.5 Gy: A 9-year update.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: High dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy as a monotherapy is an accepted treatment for localized prostate cancer, but the optimal dose and fractionation schedule remain unknown. We report on the efficacy of a randomized Phase II trial comparing HDR monotherapy delivered as 27 Gy in 2 fractions vs. 19 Gy in 1 fraction with a median follow-up of 9 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Enrolled patients had low or intermediate-risk disease, <60 cc prostate volume and no androgen deprivation use. Patients were randomized to 27 Gy in 2 fractions delivered one week apart vs a single fraction of 19 Gy. RESULTS: 170 patients were randomized: median age 65 years, median follow-up 107 months and median baseline PSA 6.35 ng/ml. NCCN risk categories comprised low (19 %), favourable (51 %), and unfavourable intermediate risk (30 %). The median PSA at 8 years was 0.08 ng/ml in the 2-fraction arm vs. 0.89 ng/ml in the single-fraction arm. The cumulative incidence of local failure at 8 years was 11.2 % in the 2-fraction arm vs. 35.9 % in the single-fraction arm (p < 0.001). The incidence of distant failure at 8 years was 3.8 % in the 2-fraction arm and 2.5 % in the single-fraction arm (p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: HDR monotherapy delivered in two fractions of 13.5 Gy demonstrated a persistent cancer control rate at 8 years and was well-tolerated. Single-fraction monotherapy yielded poor oncologic control and is not recommended. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on optimal HDR monotherapy strategies for low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Prostate Radiotherapy in Low-volume Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The utility of prostate radiotherapy (RT) is unclear in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) receiving intensified systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the role of prostate RT in low-volume mHSPC. METHODS: Bibliographic databases and conference proceedings were searched through July 2023 for RCTs evaluating the addition of ARPIs or prostate RT to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy, defined as ADT or ADT plus docetaxel, for the initial treatment of mHSPC. We focused exclusively on aggregate data from the low-volume mHSPC subpopulation in these trials. We pooled the treatment arms into four groups: SOC, SOC plus ARPI, SOC plus RT, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). To compare treatment strategies, a fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was undertaken, while a Bayesian network meta-regression was performed to account for across-trial differences in docetaxel use as part of SOC and in proportions of patients with de novo presentation. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Ten RCTs comprising 4423 patients were eligible. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve scores were 0.0006, 0.45, 0.62, and 0.94 for SOC, SOC plus RT, SOC plus ARPI, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT, respectively. On a meta-regression, in a population with de novo mHSPC and no docetaxel use, we did not find sufficient evidence of a difference in OS between SOC plus ARPI plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% credible interval: 0.51-1.16) and SOC plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (HR: 1.10; 95% credible interval: 0.92-1.42). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: There was some evidence that SOC plus ARPI plus RT reduced mortality compared with the next best strategy of SOC plus ARPI in patients with low-volume de novo mHSPC. A meta-analysis with individual patient data or an RCT is needed to confirm these findings.

Developing and validating a simple urethra surrogate model to facilitate dosimetric analysis to predict genitourinary toxicity.

Purpose: The urethra is a critical structure in prostate radiotherapy planning; however, it is impossible to visualise on CT. We developed a surrogate urethra model (SUM) for CT-only planning workflow and tested its geometric and dosimetric performance against the MRI-delineated urethra (MDU). Methods: The SUM was compared against 34 different MDUs (within the treatment PTV) in patients treated with 36.25Gy (PTV)/40Gy (CTV) in 5 fractions as part of the PACE-B trial. To assess the surrogate's geometric performance, the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD), mean distance to agreement (MDTA) and the percentage of MDU outside the surrogate (UOS) were calculated. To evaluate the dosimetric performance, a paired t-test was used to calculate the mean of differences between the MDU and SUM for the D99, D98, D50, D2 and D1. The D(n) is the dose (Gy) to n% of the urethra. Results: The median results showed low agreement on DSC (0.32; IQR 0.21-0.41), but low distance to agreement, as would be expected for a small structure (HD 8.4mm (IQR 7.1-10.1mm), MDTA 2.4mm (IQR, 2.2mm-3.2mm)). The UOS was 30% (IQR, 18-54%), indicating nearly a third of the urethra lay outside of the surrogate. However, when comparing urethral dose between the MDU and SUM, the mean of differences for D99, D98 and D95 were 0.12Gy (p=0.57), 0.09Gy (p=0.61), and 0.11Gy (p=0.46) respectively. The mean of differences between the D50, D2 and D1 were 0.08Gy (p=0.04), 0.09Gy (p=0.02) and 0.1Gy (p=0.01) respectively, indicating good dosimetric agreement between MDU and SUM. Conclusion: While there were geometric differences between the MDU and SUM, there was no clinically significant difference between urethral dose-volume parameters. This surrogate model could be validated in a larger cohort and then used to estimate the urethral dose on CT planning scans in those without an MRI planning scan or urinary catheter.

Urethra contouring on computed tomography urethrogram versus magnetic resonance imaging for stereotactic body radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Accurate urethra contouring is critical in prostate SBRT. We compared urethra contouring on CT-urethrogram and T2-weighted MRI. The dice similarity coefficient, Jaccard index, Hausdorff distance and mean distance to agreement were evaluated. All four metrics indicate better agreement and less variability in urethra contouring on CT-urethrogram, compared to T2-weighted MRI.

Safety of Ultrahypofractionated Pelvic Nodal Irradiation in the Definitive Management of Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the evidence for ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation in patients with prostate cancer, with a focus on reported acute and late toxicities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A comprehensive search was conducted in 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception until March 23, 2023. Eligible publications included patients with intermediate- and high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer who underwent elective or therapeutic ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation. Primary outcomes included the presence of grade ≥2 rates of acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scales. Quality assessment was performed using National Institutes of Health tools for noncontrolled beforeand after (single arm) clinical trials, as well as single-arm observational studies. Because all outcomes were categorical variables, proportion was calculated to estimate the effect size and compare the outcomes after the intervention. RESULTS: We identified 16 publications that reported the use of ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy to treat the pelvis in prostate cancer. Seven publications met our criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, including 417 patients. The median total dose to the pelvic lymph nodes was 25 Gy (range, 25-28.5 Gy), with a median of 5 fractions. The prostate received a median dose of 40 Gy (range, 35-47.5 Gy). All studies used androgen deprivation therapy for a median duration of 18 months. The median follow-up period was 3 years (range, 0.5-5.6 years). The rates of acute grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were 8% (95% CI, 1%-15%) and 29% (95% CI, 18%-41%), respectively. For late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity, the rates were 13% (95% CI, 5%-21%) and 29% (95% CI, 17%-42%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrahypofractionated pelvic nodal irradiation appears to be a safe approach in terms of acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: A Radiosurgery Society Guide to the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer Illustrated by Challenging Cases.

Traditionally, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localized prostate cancer (PCa) involved lengthy courses with low daily doses. However, advancements in radiation delivery and a better understanding of prostate radiobiology have enabled the development of shorter courses of EBRT. Ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy, administering doses greater than 5 Gy per fraction, is now considered a standard of care regimen for localized PCa, particularly for intermediate-risk disease. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), a specific type of ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy employing advanced planning, imaging, and treatment technology to deliver in five or fewer fractions, is gaining prominence as a cost-effective, convenient, and safe alternative to longer radiotherapy courses. It is crucial to address practical considerations related to patient selection, fractionation scheme, target delineation, and planning objectives. This is especially important in challenging clinical situations where clear evidence for guidance may be lacking. The Radiosurgery Society endorses this case-based guide with the aim of providing a practical framework for delivering SBRT to the intact prostate, exemplified by two case studies. The article will explore common SBRT dose/fractionation schemes and dose constraints for organs-at-risk. Additionally, it will review existing evidence and expert opinions on topics such as SBRT dose escalation, the use of rectal spacers, the role of androgen deprivation therapy in the context of SBRT, SBRT in special patient populations (e.g., high-risk disease, large prostate, high baseline urinary symptom burdens, and inflammatory bowel disease), as well as new imaging-guidance techniques like Magnetic Resonance Imaging for SBRT delivery.

Randomized Trial of Concomitant Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Boost Versus Conventionally Fractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Boost for Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer (pHART2-RCT).

PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to report on the results of a phase 2 randomized trial of moderately hypofractionated (MH) versus conventionally fractionated (CF) radiation therapy to the prostate with elective nodal irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was a single-center, prospective, phase 2 randomized study. Patients with high-risk disease (cT3, prostate-specific antigen level >20 ng/mL, or Gleason score 8-10) were eligible. Patients were randomized to either MH using a simultaneous integrated boost (68 Gy in 25 fractions to prostate; 48 Gy to pelvis) or CF (46 Gy in 23 fractions with a sequential boost to the prostate of 32 Gy in 16 fractions), with long-term androgen deprivation therapy. The primary endpoint was grade ≥2 acute gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0). Secondary endpoints included late GI and GU toxicity, quality of life, and oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: One-hundred eighty patients were enrolled; 90 were randomized to and received MH and 90 to CF. The median follow-up was 67.4 months. Seventy-five patients (41.7%) experienced a grade ≥2 acute GI and/or GU toxicity, including 34 (37.8%) in the MH and 41 (45.6%) in the CF arms, respectively (P = .29). Late grade ≥2 GI (P = .07) and GU (P = .25) toxicity was not significantly different between arms; however, late grade ≥3 GI toxicity was worse in the MH group (P = .01). There were no statistically significant quality-of-life differences between the 2 treatments. There were no statistically significant differences observed in cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (P = .71) or distant metastasis (P = .31) and overall survival (P = .46). CONCLUSIONS: MH to the prostate and pelvis with androgen deprivation therapy for men with high-risk localized prostate cancer was not significantly different than CF with regard to acute toxicity, quality of life, and oncologic efficacy. However, late grade ≥3 GI toxicity was more common in the MH arm.

The march toward single-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer-Quo Vadimus?

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging treatment option for localized prostate cancer. There is increasing interest to reduce the number of fractions for prostate SBRT. METHODS: We provide a narrative review and summary of prospective trials of different fractionation schedules for prostate SBRT, focusing on efficacy, toxicities, and quality of life outcomes. RESULTS: There are two randomized phase 3 trials comparing standard external beam radiotherapy with ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy. HYPO-RT-PC compared 78 Gy in 39 fractions vs 42.7 Gy in 7 fractions (3D-CRT or IMRT) showing non-inferiority in 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and equivalent tolerability. PACE-B trial compared 78 Gy in 39-fraction or 62 Gy in 20-fraction vs 36.25 Gy in 5-fraction prostate SBRT, with no significant differences in toxicity outcomes at 2 years. Five-year efficacy data for PACE-B are expected in 2024. Five-fraction prostate SBRT is currently the most common and well-established fractionation schedule with multiple prospective phase 2 trials published to date. There is more limited data on 1-4 fraction prostate SBRT. All fractionation schedules had acceptable toxicity outcomes. Experience from a high-dose-rate brachytherapy randomized trial showed inferior efficacy with single-fraction compared to two-fraction brachytherapy. Hence, caution should be applied in adopting single-fraction prostate SBRT. CONCLUSION: Two-fraction SBRT is likely the shortest fractionation schedule that maintains the therapeutic ratio. Several randomized trials currently recruiting will likely provide us with more definite answers about whether two-fraction prostate SBRT should become a standard-of-care option. Enrollment of eligible patients into these trials should be encouraged.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsies: 2-year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial (PRECISE).

BACKGROUND: The prospective randomized PRECISE trial demonstrated that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with only targeted biopsy (TBx) was noninferior to systematic transrectal ultrasound biopsy (SBx) in the detection of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) ≥2 prostate cancer (PC). An unanswered question is the outcome for patients who avoided a biopsy because of negative MRI findings. OBJECTIVE: To explore the rate of PC diagnosis based on 2-yr MRI for PRECISE participants who had no biopsy and for patients who had a negative result or GG 1 on TBx in comparison to those with a negative result or GG 1 on SBx. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The PRECISE prospective trial was conducted at five Canadian academic centers. The present analysis was for trial participants who were not diagnosed with clinically significant PC (csPC) at baseline. Of 453 randomized patients, 146 were diagnosed with GG ≥2 at baseline and were excluded. Eligible patients for this study included 83 men from the MRI arm who had negative MRI findings and no biopsy, 120 from the overall cohort who had a negative SBx or TBx, and 72 from the overall cohort who were diagnosed with GG 1 disease. INTERVENTION: MRI at 2 yr in all men in the MRI and SBx arms and TBx for lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score of ≥3 or on the basis of clinical suspicion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was the proportion of men diagnosed with GG ≥2 cancer. Secondary outcomes included the MRI outcome and the proportion of men diagnosed with GG 1 PC. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Evaluable 2-yr MRI scans were available for 75 (56%) eligible patients in the MRI arm and 69 (49%) in the SBx arm. Of these patients, 55 (73%) in the MRI arm and 51 (67%) SBx arm had negative 2-yr MRI. Of the 76 patients in the SBx arm with 2-yr MRI, 16 (21%) had a biopsy, for which the result was negative in eight (10%), GG1 in two (2.6%), and GG ≥2 in six (7.9%) cases. Of the 75 men in the MRI arm with 2-yr MRI, eight (11%) were biopsied, for which the result was negative in four cases (5%) and GG ≥2 in the other four (5%). At 2 yr, including baseline biopsy results, 116/221 (52.5%) in the MRI arm and 113/204 (55%) in the SBx arm were free of GG ≥2 disease, treatment, death from any cause, or progression (OR 1.08; p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: After 2-yr follow-up including MRI for patients in both arms of PRECISE, there was no difference in the rate of csPC diagnosis between the MRI and SBx groups, even though 38% of men in the MRI group avoided an initial biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: The PRECISE trial compared systematic biopsy of the prostate to a strategy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy of any lesions suspicious for cancer on the scan. After 2 years of follow-up that included 2-year MRI with or without biopsy in both groups, there was no difference in the rate of diagnosis of significant cancer, even though 38% of men in the initial MRI arm avoided an initial biopsy, and 30% avoided biopsy altogether. The PRECISE trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02936258.

Dosimetric correlates of toxicities and quality of life following two-fraction stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: There is no evidence-based data to guide dose constraints in two-fraction prostate stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). Using individual patient-data from two prospective trials, we aimed to correlate dosimetric parameters with toxicities and quality of life (QoL) outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 60 patients who had two-fraction prostate SABR in the 2STAR (NCT02031328) and 2SMART (NCT03588819) trials. The prescribed dose was 26 Gy to the prostate+/-32 Gy boost to the dominant intraprostatic lesions. Toxicities and QoL data were prospectively collected using CTCAEv4 and EPIC-26 questionnaire. The outcomes evaluated were acute and late grade ≥ 2 toxicities, and late minimal clinical important changes (MCIC) in QoL domains. Dosimetric parameters for bladder, urethra, rectum, and penile bulb were evaluated. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 56 months (range: 39-78 months). The cumulative incidence of grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU), gastrointestinal (GI), and sexual toxicities were 62%, 3%, and 17% respectively in the acute setting (<3 months), and 57%, 15%, and 52% respectively in late setting (>6 months). There were 36%, 28%, and 29% patients who had late MCIC in urinary, bowel and sexual QoL outcomes respectively. Bladder 0.5 cc was significant predictor for late grade ≥ 2 GU toxicities, with optimal cut-off of 25.5 Gy. Penile bulb D5cc was associated of late grade ≥ 2 sexual toxicities (no optimal cut-off was identified). No dosimetric parameters were identified to be associated with other outcomes. CONCLUSION: Using real-life patient data from prospective trials with medium-term follow-up, we identified additional dose constraints that may mitigate the risk of late treatment-related toxicities for two-fraction prostate SABR.