Long-Term Second Malignancies in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Second malignancy is a rare but potentially lethal event after prostate brachytherapy, but data remain scarce on its long-term risk. The objective of this study is to estimate the number of pelvic second malignancies following brachytherapy compared to radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients treated with low-dose 125I brachytherapy and RP in British Columbia from 1999 to 2010. Kaplan-Meier estimates for pelvic (bladder and rectum), invasive pelvic, any second malignancy, and death from any second malignancy were assessed. Cox multivariable analyses were performed adjusting for initial treatment type, age, post-RP adjuvant/salvage external beam radiation therapy status, and smoking history. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred seventy-eight brachytherapy and 9089 RP patients were included. Median age was 66 years (interquartile range [IQR] 61-71) and 63 years (IQR 58-67), respectively. Median follow-up time to event or censured was 14 years (IQR 11.5-17.3). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for pelvic second malignancy at 15 and 20 years were 6.4% and 9.8%, respectively, after brachytherapy, and 3.2% and 4.2% after RP. Time to any second malignancy and time to death from any second malignancy were not significantly different (P > .05). On Cox multivariable analysis, brachytherapy, compared to surgery, was an independent factor for pelvic (hazard ratio [HR] 1.81 [95% CI 1.45-2.26], P < .001) and invasive pelvic second malignancy (HR 2.13 [95% CI 1.61-2.83], P < .001). Increased age and smoking were also associated with higher estimates of events (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for age, post-RP adjuvant/salvage external beam radiation therapy status, and smoking status, numerically higher long-term HRs of pelvic and invasive pelvic second malignancy in patients treated with brachytherapy compared to RP were noted.

Real-world evaluation of access-driven Canadian treatment sequences in progressive prostate cancer (REACTIVATE).

INTRODUCTION: The results of the phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial showed that Radium-223 (Ra-223) improves overall survival (OS) and delays onset of first symptomatic skeletal event vs. placebo in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The purpose of the REACTIVATE study was to inform the optimal placement of Ra-233 in the treatment sequence by evaluating clinical outcomes and healthcare resource utilization using real-world data from multiple Canadian provinces. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed patient outcomes according to Ra-223 placement using administrative databases of four Canadian provinces, encompassing 4301 patients with mCRPC who received at least two lines of life-prolonging therapy (LPT) for mCRPC. Outcomes included OS, event-free survival (EFS), and healthcare resource utilization. Each province was analyzed separately. RESULTS: OS, measured from the start of second-line LPT, differed between provinces: those in Ontario receiving second-line Ra-223 had a longer OS vs. those receiving it in third-line or later (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.95). There was no difference between lines of therapy in patients in British Columbia (HR 1.165, 95% CI, 0.894-1.518, p=0.2576), and OS was numerically worse but not statistically significant in patients receiving Ra-223 in second-line in Quebec (HR 1.44, 95% CI, 0.93-2.24). Other outcomes also varied across provinces, with second-line use of Ra-223 being associated with longer EFS and reduced healthcare utilization vs. third-line use in Ontario but not in Quebec. CONCLUSIONS: Significant heterogeneity exists in the management and outcomes of mCRPC between provinces, particularly regarding the placement of Ra-223 in the treatment sequence.

Single vs. multiple fraction non-inferiority trial of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for the comprehensive treatment of oligo-metastases/progression: SIMPLIFY-SABR-COMET.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy delivery regimens can vary between a single fraction (SF) and multiple fractions (MF) given daily for up to several weeks depending on the location of the cancer or metastases. With limited evidence comparing fractionation regimens for oligometastases, there is support to explore toxicity levels to nearby organs at risk as a primary outcome while using SF and MF stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) as well as explore differences in patient-reported quality of life and experience. METHODS: This study will randomize 598 patients in a 1:1 ratio between the standard arm (MF SABR) and the experimental arm (SF SABR). This trial is designed as two randomized controlled trials within one patient population for resource efficiency. The primary objective of the first randomization is to determine if SF SABR is non-inferior to MF SABR, with respect to healthcare provider (HCP)-reported grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) that are related to SABR. Primary endpoint is toxicity while secondary endpoints include lesional control rate (LCR), and progression-free survival (PFS). The second randomization (BC Cancer sites only) will allocate participants to either complete quality of life (QoL) questionnaires only; or QoL questionnaires and a symptom-specific survey with symptom-guided HCP intervention. The primary objective of the second randomization is to determine if radiation-related symptom questionnaire-guided HCP intervention results in improved reported QoL as measured by the EuroQoL-5-dimensions-5levels (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. The primary endpoint is patient-reported QoL and secondary endpoints include: persistence/resolution of symptom reporting, QoL, intervention cost effectiveness, resource utilization, and overall survival. DISCUSSION: This study will compare SF and MF SABR in the treatment of oligometastases and oligoprogression to determine if there is non-inferior toxicity for SF SABR in selected participants with 1-5 oligometastatic lesions. This study will also compare patient-reported QoL between participants who receive radiation-related symptom-guided HCP intervention and those who complete questionnaires alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05784428. Date of Registration: 23 March 2023.

Upfront Versus Delayed Systemic Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer Treated With SABR in the Phase 2 SABR-5 Trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal sequencing of local and systemic therapy for oligometastatic cancer has not been established. This study retrospectively compared progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and SABR-related toxicity between upfront versus delay of systemic treatment until progression in patients in the SABR-5 trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The single-arm phase 2 SABR-5 trial accrued patients with up to 5 oligometastases across SABR-5 between November 2016 and July 2020. Patients received SABR to all lesions. Two cohorts were retrospectively identified: those receiving upfront systemic treatment along with SABR and those for whom systemic treatment was delayed until disease progression. Patients treated for oligoprogression were excluded. Propensity score analysis with overlap weighting balanced baseline characteristics of cohorts. Bootstrap sampling and Cox regression models estimated the association of delayed systemic treatment with PFS, OS, and grade ≥2 toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 319 patients with oligometastases underwent treatment on SABR-5, including 121 (38%) and 198 (62%) who received upfront and delayed systemic treatment, respectively. In the weighted sample, prostate cancer was the most common primary tumor histology (48%) followed by colorectal (18%), breast (13%), and lung (4%). Most patients (93%) were treated for 1 to 2 metastases. The median follow-up time was 34 months (IQR, 24-45). Delayed systemic treatment was associated with shorter PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15-2.13; P = .005) but similar OS (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.51-1.59; P = .65) compared with upfront systemic treatment. Risk of grade 2 or higher SABR-related toxicity was reduced with delayed systemic treatment (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed systemic treatment is associated with shorter PFS without reduction in OS and with reduced SABR-related toxicity and may be a favorable option for select patients seeking to avoid initial systemic treatment. Efforts should continue to accrue patients to histology-specific trials examining a delayed systemic treatment approach.

Linear accelerator maintenance cost analysis.

PURPOSE: Medical linear accelerators are the most costly standard equipment used in radiation oncology, however the service costs for these machines are not well understood. With an increasing demand for linear accelerators due to a global increase in cancer incidence, it is important to understand the expected maintenance costs of a larger global installed base so that these costs can be incorporated into budgeting. The purpose of this investigation is to analyze the costs for medical linear accelerator service and maintenance at our institution, in order to estimate the service cost ratio. METHODS: We collected the costs of parts used for all service work done on 32 medical linear accelerators over a two year period. The data was segregated by center, machine, linear accelerator type, and failure area in the machine. RESULTS: We found the service cost ratio (excluding software support expenses) to be 3.13% [2.74%, 3.52%,]. We observed a variability of parts costs, and overall variability of the service cost ratio to be between 2.14% and 5.25%. This result is lower than other estimates for service costs for medical equipment in general and medical linear accelerators specifically. Two-thirds of the service costs were due to labor costs, which indicate the importance of a well-trained service technician workforce. CONCLUSIONS: We estimated the service cost ratio for medical linear accelerators to be 3.13% [3.52%, 2.74%] of the initial capital cost. This result was lower than other estimates of the service cost ratio.

Outcome of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after PSMA PET/CT-directed radiotherapy or surgery without systemic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) and surgery are potential treatment options in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) following primary prostate cancer treatment. This study examines the value of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT)-informed surgery and RT in patients with BCR treated without systemic therapy. METHODS: This is a post-hoc subgroup analysis of a prospective clinical trial. Inclusion criteria were: histologically proven prostate cancer at initial curative-intent treatment, BCR after primary treatment with curative intent, having five or fewer lesions identified on [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT, and treatment with either PET/CT-directed RT or surgery without systemic therapy. The biochemical progression-free survival after PSMA ligand PET/CT-directed RT and surgery was determined. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed for the association of patients' characteristics, tumor-specific variables, and PSMA PET/CT imaging results with biochemical progression at the last follow-up. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (30 in surgery and 28 in radiotherapy groups) met the inclusion criteria. A total of 87 PSMA-positive lesions were detected: 16 local recurrences (18.4%), 54 regional lymph nodes (62.1%), 6 distant lymph nodes (6,8%), and 11 osseous lesions (12.7%). A total of 85.7% (24 of 28) and 70.0% (21 of 30) of patients showed a ≥ 50% decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after RT and surgery, respectively. At a median follow-up time of 21 months (range, 6-32 months), the median biochemical progression-free survival was 19 months (range, 4 to 23 months) in the radiotherapy group, as compared with 16.5 months (range, 4 to 28 months) in the surgery group. On multivariate Cox regression analysis, the number of PSMA positive lesions (2-5 lesions compared to one lesion), and the anatomic location of the detected lesions (distant metastasis vs. local relapse and pelvic nodal relapse) significantly correlated with biochemical progression at the last follow-up, whereas other clinical, tumor-specific, and imaging parameters did not. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that RT or surgery based on [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT are associated with high PSA response rates. The number and site of lesions detected on the PSMA PET/CT were predictive of biochemical progression on follow-up. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of targeting these sites on patient relevant outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered September 14, 2016; NCT02899312; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02899312.

Should organs at risk (OARs) be prioritized over target volume coverage in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for oligometastases? a secondary analysis of the population-based phase II SABR-5 trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for oligometastases may improve survival, however concerns about safety remain. To mitigate risk of toxicity, target coverage was sacrificed to prioritize organs-at-risk (OARs) during SABR planning in the population-based SABR-5 trial. This study evaluated the effect of this practice on dosimetry, local recurrence (LR), and progression-free survival (PFS). METHODS: This single-arm phase II trial included patients with up to 5 oligometastases between November 2016 and July 2020. Theprotocol-specified planning objective was to cover 95 % of the planning target volume (PTV) with 100 % of the prescribed dose, however PTV coverage was reduced as needed to meet OAR constraints. This trade-off was measured using the coverage compromise index (CCI), computed as minimum dose received by the hottest 99 % of the PTV (D99) divided by the prescription dose. Under-coverage was defined as CCI < 0.90. The potential association between CCI and outcomes was evaluated. RESULTS: 549 lesions from 381 patients were assessed. Mean CCI was 0.88 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.89), and 196 (36 %) lesions were under-covered. The highest mean CCI (0.95; 95 %CI, 0.93-0.97) was in non-spine bone lesions (n = 116), while the lowest mean CCI (0.71; 95 % CI, 0.69-0.73) was in spine lesions (n = 104). On multivariable analysis, under-coverage did not predict for worse LR (HR 0.48, p = 0.37) or PFS (HR 1.24, p = 0.38). Largest lesion diameter, colorectal and 'other' (non-prostate, breast, or lung) primary predicted for worse LR. Largest lesion diameter, synchronous tumor treatment, short disease free interval, state of oligoprogression, initiation or change in systemic treatment, and a high PTV Dmax were significantly associated with PFS. CONCLUSION: PTV under-coverage was not associated with worse LR or PFS in this large, population-based phase II trial. Combined with low toxicity rates, this study supports the practice of prioritizing OAR constraints during oligometastatic SABR planning.

An Updated Analysis of the Survival Endpoints of ASCENDE-RT.

PURPOSE: Using the primary endpoint of time to biochemical progression (TTP), Androgen Suppression Combined with Elective Nodal and Dose Escalated Radiation Therapy (ASCENDE-RT) randomized National Comprehensive Cancer Network patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer to low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (LDR-PB) or dose-escalated external beam boost (DE-EBRT). Randomization to the LDR-PB arm resulted in a 2-fold reduction in biochemical progression compared with the DE-EBRT group at a median follow-up of 6.5 years (P < .001). Herein, the primary endpoint and secondary survival endpoints of the ASCENDE-RT trial are updated at a 10-year median follow-up. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to either the LDR-PB or the DE-EBRT arm (1:1). All patients received 1 year of androgen deprivation therapy and 46 Gy in 23 fractions of pelvic RT. Patients in the DE-EBRT arm received an additional 32 Gy in 16 fractions, and those in the LDR-PB arm received an 125I implant prescribed to a minimum peripheral dose of 115 Gy. Two hundred patients were randomized to the DE-EBRT arm and 198 to the LDR-PB arm. RESULTS: The 10-year Kaplan-Meier TTP estimate was 85% ± 5% for LDR-PB compared with 67% ± 7% for DE-EBRT (log rank P < .001). Ten-year time to distant metastasis (DM) was 88% ± 5% for the LDR-PB arm and 86% ± 6% for the DE-EBRT arm (P = .56). There were 117 (29%) deaths. Ten-year overall survival (OS) estimates were 80% ± 6% for the LDR-PB arm and 75% ± 7% for the DE-EBRT arm (P = .51). There were 30 (8%) patients who died of prostate cancer: 12 (6%) in the LDR-PB arm, including 2 treatment-related deaths, and 18 (9%) in the DE-EBRT arm. CONCLUSIONS: Men randomized to the LDR-PB boost arm of the ASCENDE-RT trial continue to experience a large advantage in TTP compared with those randomized to the DE-EBRT arm. ASCENDE-RT was not powered to detect differences in its secondary survival endpoints (OS, DM, and time to prostate cancer-specific death) and none are apparent.

Pan-Canadian consensus recommendations for proton beam therapy access in Canada.

PURPOSE: Proton Beam Therapy (PBT)is a treatment option for select cancer patients. It is currently not available in Canada. Assessment and referral processes for out-of-country treatment for eligible patients vary by jurisdiction, leading to variability in access to this treatment for Canadian cancer patients. The purpose of this initiative was to develop a framework document to inform consistent and equitable PBT access for appropriate patients through the creation of pan-Canadian PBT access consensus recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A modified Delphiprocess was used to develop pan-Canadian recommendations with input from 22 PBT clinical and administrative experts across all provinces, external peer-review by provincial cancer and system partners, and feedback from a targeted community consultation. This was conducted by electronic survey and live discussion. Consensus threshold was set at 70% agreement. RESULTS: Fourconsensus rounds resulted in a final set of 27 recommendations divided into three categories: patient eligibility (n = 9); program level (n = 10); and system level (n = 8). Patient eligibility included: anatomic site (n = 4), patient characteristics (n = 3), clinical efficacy (n = 2). Program level included: regulatory and staff requirements (n = 5), equipment and technologies (n = 4), quality assurance (n = 1). System level included: referral process (n = 5), costing, budget impact and quality adjusted life years (n = 2), eligible patient estimates (n = 1). Recommendations were released nationally in June 2021 and distributed to all 43 cancer programs in Canada. CONCLUSION: A pan-Canadian consensus-building approach was successful in creating an evidence-based, peer-reviewed suite of recommendations thatsupportapplication of consistent clinical criteria to inform treatment options, facility set-up and access to high quality proton therapy.

Treatment With Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Up to 5 Oligometastases in Patients With Cancer: Primary Toxic Effect Results of the Nonrandomized Phase 2 SABR-5 Clinical Trial.

Importance: After the publication of the landmark SABR-COMET trial, concerns arose regarding high-grade toxic effects of treatment with stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for oligometastases. Objective: To document toxic effects of treatment with SABR in a large cohort from a population-based, provincial cancer program. Design, Setting, and Participants: From November 2016 to July 2020, 381 patients across all 6 cancer centers in British Columbia were treated in this single-arm, phase 2 trial of treatment with SABR for patients with oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease. During this period, patients were only eligible to receive treatment with SABR in these settings in trials within British Columbia; therefore, this analysis is population based, with resultant minimal selection bias compared with previously published SABR series. Interventions: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy to up to 5 metastases. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rate of grade 2, 3, 4, and 5 toxic effects associated with SABR. Findings: Among 381 participants (122 women [32%]), the mean (SD; range) age was 68 (11.1; 30-97) years, and the median (range) follow-up was 25 (1-54) months. The most common histological findings were prostate cancer (123 [32%]), colorectal cancer (63 [17%]), breast cancer (42 [11%]), and lung cancer (33 [9%]). The number of SABR-treated sites were 1 (263 [69%]), 2 (82 [22%]), and 3 or more (36 [10%]). The most common sites of SABR were lung (188 [34%]), nonspine bone (136 [25%]), spine (85 [16%]), lymph nodes (78 [14%]), liver (29 [5%]), and adrenal (15 [3%]). Rates of grade 2, 3, 4, and 5 toxic effects associated with SABR (based on the highest-grade toxic effect per patient) were 14.2%; (95% CI, 10.7%-17.7%), 4.2% (95% CI, 2.2%-6.2%), 0%, and 0.3% (95% CI, 0%-0.8%), respectively. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or higher toxic effects associated with SABR at year 2 by Kaplan-Meier analysis was 8%, and for grade 3 or higher, 4%. Conclusions and Relevance: This single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial found that the incidence of grade 3 or higher SABR toxic effects in this population-based study was less than 5%. Furthermore, the rates of grade 2 or higher toxic effects (18.6%) were lower than previously published for SABR-COMET (29%). These results suggest that SABR treatment for oligometastases has acceptable rates of toxic effects and potentially support further enrollment in randomized phase 3 clinical trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02933242.

Predictors of Early Polymetastatic Relapse After SABR for up to 5 Oligometastases: A Secondary Analysis of the Phase II SABR-5 Trial.

PURPOSE: A subset of patients with oligometastatic cancer experience early widespread cancer dissemination and do not benefit from metastasis-directed therapy such as SABR. This study aimed to identify factors associated with early polymetastatic relapse (PMR). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The SABR-5 trial was a single arm phase 2 study conducted at all 6 regional cancer centers across British Columbia (BC), Canada. SABR for oligometastases was only offered on trial. Patients with up to 5 oligometastatic lesions (total, progressing, or induced) received SABR to all lesions. Patients were 18 years of age or older, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0 to 2 and life expectancy ≥6 months. This secondary analysis evaluated factors associated with early PMR, defined as disease recurrence within 6 months of SABR, which is not amenable to further local treatment. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed using binary logistic regression. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests assessed PMR-free survival and differences between risk groups, respectively. RESULTS: Between November 2016 and July 2020, 381 patients underwent treatment on SABR-5. A total of 16% of patients experienced PMR. Worse performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1-2 vs 0; hazard ratio [HR] = 2.01, P = .018), nonprostate/breast histology (HR = 3.64, P <.001), and oligoprogression (HR = 3.84, P <.001) were independent predictors for early PMR. Risk groups were identified with median PMR-free survival ranging from 5 months to not yet reached at the time of analysis. Rates of 3-year overall survival were 0%, 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48-58), 77% (95% CI, 73-81), and 93% (95% CI, 90-96) in groups 1 to 4, respectively (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Four distinct risk groups for early PMR are identified, which differ significantly in PMR-free survival and overall survival. The group with all 3 risk factors had a median PMR-free survival of 5 months and may not benefit from local ablative therapy alone. This model should be externally validated with data from other prospective trials.

Progression-Free Survival and Local Control After SABR for up to 5 Oligometastases: An Analysis From the Population-Based Phase 2 SABR-5 Trial.

PURPOSE: Despite increasing utilization of SABR for oligometastatic cancer, prospective outcomes are lacking. The purpose of this study was to determine progression-free survival (PFS), local control (LC), and prognostic factors from the population-based phase 2 SABR-5 trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The SABR-5 trial was a single-arm phase 2 study with the primary endpoint of toxicity, conducted at the 6 regional cancer centers across British Columbia (BC), Canada, during which time SABR for oligometastases was only offered on trial. Patients with up to 5 oligometastases (total or not controlled by prior treatment and including induced oligometastatic disease) underwent SABR to all lesions. Patients were 18 years of age or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0 to 2, and had life expectancy ≥ 6 months. The secondary outcomes of PFS and LC are presented here. RESULTS: Between November 2016 and July 2020, 381 patients underwent SABR on trial. Median follow-up was 27 months (interquartile range, 18-36). Median PFS was 15 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12-18). LC at 1 and 3 years were 93% (95% CI, 91-95) and 87% (95% CI, 84-90), respectively. On multivariable analysis, increasing tumor diameter (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P < .001), declining performance status (HR, 2.13; P < .001), disease-free interval <18 months (HR, 1.52; P = .003), 4 or more metastases at SABR (HR, 1.48; P = .048), initiation or change in systemic treatment (HR, 0.50; P < .001), and oligoprogression (HR, 1.56; P = .008) were significant independent predictors of PFS. Tumor diameter (sub-hazard ratio [SHR], 1.28; P < .001), colorectal histology (SHR, 4.33; P = .002), and "other" histology (SHR, 3.90; P < .001) were associated with worse LC. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based cohort including patients with genuine oligometastatic, oligoprogressive, and induced oligometastatic disease, the median PFS was 15 months and LC at 3 years was 87%. This supports ongoing efforts to randomize patients in phase 3 trials, even outside the original 1 to 5 metachronous oligometastatic paradigm.

After ASCENDE-RT: Biochemical and survival outcomes following combined external beam radiotherapy and low-dose-rate brachytherapy for high-risk and unfavourable intermediate-risk prostate cancer, a population-based analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of unfavorable intermediate-risk (UIR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer patients treated with combined external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDR-PB). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A population-based cohort of 568 prostate cancer patients treated with combined EBRT and LDR-PB from 2010 to 2016 was analyzed. All patients received EBRT followed by LDR-PB boost. Outcomes were compared with the results for the brachytherapy arm of the ASCENDE-RT trial. RESULTS: The median followup was 4.5 years. Sixty-nine percent (N = 391) had HR disease. Ninety-four percent of the HR and 57% of UIR were treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with a median duration of 12 months. The 5-year K-M biochemical progression-free survival (b-PFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and overall survival (OS) were 84 ± 2%, 90 ± 2%, and 88 ± 2%, similar to 89 ± 5%, 94 ± 4%, and 92 ± 4% for the ASCENDE-RT LDR-PB arm. The likelihood of achieving a PSA ≤0.2 ng/mL at 4 years was 88%, similar to 86% in the ASCENDE-RT LDR-PB arm. Thirty-three men (5.8%) would have been ineligible for ASCENDE-RT due to high-risk features. The 5-year K-M b-PFS, MFS and OS estimates were 86 ± 2%, 92 ± 1% and 89 ± 2% for the ASCENDE-RT eligible versus 56 ± 10% (p < 0.001), 73 ± 8% (p < 0.001), and 77 ± 9% (p = 0.098) for the ineligible patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based cohort, combining LDR-PB with pelvic EBRT (+/- ADT) achieves very favorable b-PFS that compares to the LDR-PB arm of the ASCENDE-RT, supporting the generalizability of those results. Men ineligible for ASCENDE-RT, based on prognostic features, have a much higher risk of biochemical recurrence and metastatic relapse.

Small cell carcinoma of the bladder: A population-based analysis of long-term outcomes after radical cystectomy and bladder conservation with chemoradiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to describe the oncological outcomes after radical cystectomy and chemo-radiation for localized small cell bladder cancer (SCBC). METHODS: This population-based analysis of localized SCBC from 1985-2018 in British Columbia included an analysis (analysis 1) of cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) of patients treated with curative-intent radical cystectomy (RC) and radiation (RT), and an analysis (analysis 2) of CSS and OS in patients treated with RC and chemoRT consistent with the SCBC Canadian consensus guideline. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients who were treated with curative intent were identified: 33 patients had RC and 44 had RT. For analysis 1, five-year OS was 29% and 39% for RC and RT, respectively (p=0.51), and five-year CSS was 35% and 52% for RC and RT, respectively (p=0.29). On multivariable analysis, higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the lack of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) were associated with worse OS, while higher CCI and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) were associated with worse CSS. For analysis 2, five-year OS was 56% and 58% for the RC and chemoRT groups, respectively (p=0.90), and five-year CSS was 56% for RC and 71% for chemoRT (p=0.71). Four of 42 (9.5%) chemoRT patients had RC at relapse. CONCLUSIONS: SCBC is a rare entity with a poor prognosis. RC and chemoRT offer similar CSS and OS for localized SCBC, even when focusing the analysis on patients treated according to the modern consensus guidelines. NAC should be considered for eligible patients. Both chemoRT and RC treatment options should be discussed with patients with SCBC.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors versus Standard of Care.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trial results reported that stereotactic radiotherapy (SABR) may improve survival for patients with oligometastatic (OM) cancer. Given that these results come from a phase II trial, there remains considerable uncertainty about this finding, and about the cost-effectiveness of SABR for patients with OM cancer. In this analysis, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of SABR for oligometastatic cancer patients. METHODS: A probabilistic time-dependent Markov model was constructed to simulate treatment of oligometastatic cancer patients over five- and ten-year time horizons. The primary data source was the phase II, Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for the Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastases (SABR-COMET )trial and supplemented with data from the literature. We estimated the effect of SABR and the standard of care (SoC) using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were measured from a provincial payer perspective (2018 Canadian dollars). RESULTS: In the reference case analysis (five-year time horizon), SABR was associated with additional incremental costs of CAD 38,487 and an incremental QALY gain of 0.84. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD 45,726 per QALY gained. Over a ten-year time horizon, the increased uncertainty in the long-term effectiveness of SABR resulted in an ICER of CAD 291,544 per QALY gained. Estimates from the probabilistic analysis indicated that at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CAD 50,000 and CAD 100,000 per QALY gained, there is 54% and 78% probability (respectively) that SABR would be cost-effective using the five-year time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of SABR therapy requires a considerable upfront capital investment. Our results suggest that the cost-effectiveness of SABR is contingent on the uncertainty in the evidence base. Further clinical trials to confirm the effectiveness of SABR and research into the real-world costs associated with this treatment could reduce the uncertainty around implementation of the technology.

Long term toxicity of intracranial germ cell tumor treatment in adolescents and young adults.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to describe the long-term toxicities of intracranial germ cell tumor (IGCT) in the adolescent and young adult (AYA) population. METHODS: We report late toxicities of a multi-center cohort of AYA patients treated for IGCT between 1975 and 2015. Charts were retrospectively reviewed for hormone deficiency, ototoxicity, seizure disorder, visual deterioration, cerebrovascular events, second neoplasm, psychiatric illness, and neurocognitive impairment. Statistical analysis was performed for late toxicities to evaluate the influence of select factors. RESULTS: Our patient cohort included 112 patients with IGCTs; 84% of patients had a germinoma as opposed to a non-germinomatous germ cell tumor (NGGCT), median age at radiotherapy (RT) was 19 years, and median follow-up was 8.3 years. Of the 94 patients with germinoma, 32 (34%) received both chemotherapy and RT as part of their upfront treatment, while 62 (66%) received RT alone. All 18 patients with NGGCT received chemotherapy and RT. The most common late toxicity following IGCT treatments was physician-reported neurocognitive impairment, with a 10-year cumulative incidence (CI) of 38.5%. Ten-year CI of treatment-induced ototoxicity was 39.2% for patients who received cisplatin, compared to 3.6% for those who received carboplatin but no cisplatin (p < 0.005). Suprasellar/hypothalamic tumor location was associated with 10-year CI of treatment-induced hormone deficiency (36.1 vs 6.2%, p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of AYAs treated for IGCTs experience late effects from treatment, including neurocognitive impairment, ototoxicity, and hormone deficiency. Suprasellar/hypothalamic tumor location and cisplatin were associated with a higher risk of treatment-induced hormone deficiency and ototoxicity, respectively.

Hypofractionated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Is Effective for Patients With Lymph Node-Positive Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated long-term, population-based, breast cancer-specific outcomes in patients treated with radiation therapy (RT) to the breast/chest wall plus regional nodes using hypofractionated (HF) (40-42.5 Gy/16 fractions) versus conventionally fractionated (CF) regimens (50-50.4 Gy/25-28 fractions). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective provincial database was used to identify patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer treated with curative-intent breast/chest wall + regional nodal RT from 1998 to 2010. The effect of RT fractionation on locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was assessed for the entire cohort and for high-risk subgroups: grade 3, ER-/HER2-, HER2+, and ≥4 positive nodes. Multivariable analysis and 2:1 case-match comparison of HF versus CF were also performed. RESULTS: A total of 5487 patients met the inclusion criteria (4006 HF and 1481 CF). Median age was 55 years, and median follow-up was 12.7 years. On multivariable analysis, no statistically significant differences were identified in 10-year LRRFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-1.27; P = .46), DRFS (HR 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.06; P = .19), or BCSS (HR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.76-1.10; P = .36) between the HF and CF cohorts. There was no statistical difference in breast cancer-specific outcomes in the high-risk subgroups. On analysis of 2962 HF cases matched to 1481 CF controls, no statistical difference was observed in LRRFS (HR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.71-1.33; P = .87), DRFS (HR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85-1.11; P = .68), or BCSS (HR 1.00; 95% CI, 0.87-1.16; P = .92). CONCLUSIONS: This large, population-based analysis with long-term follow-up after locoregional RT demonstrated that modest HF provides similar breast cancer-specific outcomes compared with CF. HF is an effective option for patients with stage I to III breast cancer receiving nodal RT.