Patients' Preferences for Cytoreductive Treatments in Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Prostate Cancer: The IP5-MATTER Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cytoreductive treatments for patients diagnosed with de novo synchronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) confer incremental survival benefits over systemic therapy, but these may lead to added toxicity and morbidity. Our objective was to determine patients' preferences for, and trade-offs between, additional cytoreductive prostate and metastasis-directed interventions. METHODS: A prospective multicentre discrete choice experiment trial was conducted at 30 hospitals in the UK between December 3, 2020 and January 25, 2023 (NCT04590976). The individuals were eligible for inclusion if they were diagnosed with de novo synchronous mHSPC within 4 mo of commencing androgen deprivation therapy and had performance status 0-2. A discrete choice experiment instrument was developed to elicit patients' preferences for cytoreductive prostate radiotherapy, prostatectomy, prostate ablation, and stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy to metastasis. Patients chose their preferred treatment based on seven attributes. An error-component conditional logit model was used to estimate the preferences for and trade-offs between treatment attributes. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 352 patients were enrolled, of whom 303 completed the study. The median age was 70 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 64-76) and prostate-specific antigen was 94 ng/ml (IQR 28-370). Metastatic stages were M1a 10.9% (33/303), M1b 79.9% (242/303), and M1c 7.6% (23/303). Patients preferred treatments with longer survival and progression-free periods. Patients were less likely to favour cytoreductive prostatectomy with systemic therapy (Coef. -0.448; [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.60 to -0.29]; p < 0.001), unless combined with metastasis-directed therapy. Cytoreductive prostate radiotherapy or ablation with systemic therapy, number of hospital visits, use of a "day-case" procedure, or addition of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy did not impact treatment choice. Patients were willing to accept an additional cytoreductive treatment with 10 percentage point increases in the risk of urinary incontinence and fatigue to gain 3.4 mo (95% CI 2.8-4.3) and 2.7 mo (95% CI 2.3-3.1) of overall survival, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patients are accepting of additional cytoreductive treatments for survival benefit in mHSPC, prioritising preservation of urinary function and avoidance of fatigue. PATIENT SUMMARY: We performed a large study to ascertain how patients diagnosed with advanced (metastatic) prostate cancer at their first diagnosis made decisions regarding additional available treatments for their prostate and cancer deposits (metastases). Treatments would not provide cure but may reduce cancer burden (cytoreduction), prolong life, and extend time without cancer progression. We reported that most patients were willing to accept additional treatments for survival benefits, in particular treatments that preserved urinary function and reduced fatigue.

Weekly ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy in localised prostate cancer.

Background: Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are standard of care for localised prostate cancer. However, some patients are unable or unwilling to travel daily to the radiotherapy department and do not have access to, or are not candidates for, SBRT. For many years, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has offered a weekly ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen to the prostate (36 Gy in 6 weekly fractions) to patients unable/unwilling to travel daily. Methods: The current study is a retrospective analysis of all patients with non-metastatic localised prostate cancer receiving this treatment schedule from 2010 to 2015. Results: A total of 140 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 86 % presented with high risk disease, with 31 % having Gleason Grade Group 4 or 5 disease and 48 % T3 disease or higher. All patients received hormone treatment, and there was often a long interval between start of hormone treatment and start of radiotherapy (median of 11 months), with 34 % of all patients having progressed to non-metastatic castrate-resistant disease prior to start of radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 52 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the whole group was 70 months and 72 months, respectively. PFS and OS in patients with hormone-sensitive disease at time of radiotherapy was not reached and 75 months, respectively; and in patients with castrate-resistant disease at time of radiotherapy it was 20 months and 61 months, respectively. Conclusion: Our data shows that a weekly ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen for prostate cancer could be an option in those patients for whom daily treatment or SBRT is not an option.

Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. METHODS: RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61-69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1-10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688-1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4-82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6-83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.

COmparing Urolift and Standard Transurethral resection of prostate Ahead of Radiotherapy in men with urinary symptoms secondary to prostate enlargement in Southwest London and North Cumbria (CO-STAR): a study protocol for a randomised feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing prostate radiotherapy with an enlarged prostate can have short-term and long-term urinary complications. Currently, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the mainstay surgical intervention for men with urinary symptoms due to an enlarged prostate prior to radiotherapy. UroLift (NeoTract, Pleasanton, CA, USA) is a recent minimally invasive alternative, widely used in benign disease but is untested in men with prostate cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, two-arm study designed in collaboration with a Patient Reference Group to assess the feasibility of randomising men with prostate cancer and coexisting urinary symptoms due to prostate enlargement to TURP or UroLift ahead of radiotherapy. 45 patients will be enrolled and randomised (1:1) using a computer-generated programme to TURP or UroLift. Recruitment and retention will be assessed over a 12 month period. Information on clinical outcomes, adverse events and costs will be collected. Clinical outcomes and patient reported outcome measures will be measured at baseline, 6 weeks postintervention and 3 months following radiotherapy. A further 12 in-depth interviews will be conducted with a subset of patients to assess acceptability using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Descriptive analysis on all outcomes will be performed using Stata (StataCorp V.2021). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW). The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at national meetings and disseminated to patients via social media, charity and hospital websites. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05840549.

ESTRO ACROP consensus recommendation on the target volume definition for radiation therapy of macroscopic prostate cancer recurrences after radical prostatectomy.

Background: The European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) panel on prostate bed delineation reflected on macroscopic local recurrences in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT), a challenging situation without standardized approach, and decided to propose a consensus recommendation on target volume selection and definition. Methods: An ESTRO ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 12 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in two separate clinically relevant scenarios: a local recurrence at the seminal vesicle bed and one apically at the level of the anastomosis. Both recurrences were prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-avid and had an anatomical correlate on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: Contouring of the two cases confirmed considerable variation among the panelists. Finally, however, a consensus recommendation could be agreed upon. Firstly, it was proposed to always delineate the entire prostate bed as clinical target volume and not the local recurrence alone. The panel judged the risk of further microscopic disease outside of the visible recurrence too high to safely exclude the rest of the prostate bed from the CTV. A focused, "stereotactic" approach should be reserved for re-irradiation after previous PORT. Secondly, the option of a focal boost on the recurrence was discussed. Conclusion: Radiation oncologists are increasingly confronted with macroscopic local recurrences visible on imaging in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy. It was recommended to always delineate and irradiate the entire prostate bed, and not the local recurrence alone, whatever the exact location of that recurrence. Secondly, specific dose-escalation on the macroscopic recurrence should only be considered if an anatomic correlate is visible. Such a focal boost is probably feasible, provided that OAR constraints are prioritized. Possible dose is also dependent on the location of the recurrence. Its potential benefit should urgently be investigated in prospective clinical trials.

Thromboxane biosynthesis in cancer patients and its inhibition by aspirin: a sub-study of the Add-Aspirin trial.

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical models demonstrate that platelet activation is involved in the spread of malignancy. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing whether aspirin, which inhibits platelet activation, can prevent or delay metastases. METHODS: Urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2 (U-TXM), a biomarker of in vivo platelet activation, was measured after radical cancer therapy and correlated with patient demographics, tumour type, recent treatment, and aspirin use (100 mg, 300 mg or placebo daily) using multivariable linear regression models with log-transformed values. RESULTS: In total, 716 patients (breast 260, colorectal 192, gastro-oesophageal 53, prostate 211) median age 61 years, 50% male were studied. Baseline median U-TXM were breast 782; colorectal 1060; gastro-oesophageal 1675 and prostate 826 pg/mg creatinine; higher than healthy individuals (~500 pg/mg creatinine). Higher levels were associated with raised body mass index, inflammatory markers, and in the colorectal and gastro-oesophageal participants compared to breast participants (P < 0.001) independent of other baseline characteristics. Aspirin 100 mg daily decreased U-TXM similarly across all tumour types (median reductions: 77-82%). Aspirin 300 mg daily provided no additional suppression of U-TXM compared with 100 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Persistently increased thromboxane biosynthesis was detected after radical cancer therapy, particularly in colorectal and gastro-oesophageal patients. Thromboxane biosynthesis should be explored further as a biomarker of active malignancy and may identify patients likely to benefit from aspirin.

Beyond the Knife in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review-To Ablate or Not to Ablate?

Intensified systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has led to improved patient outcomes. Patients commonly require local control of one or a few metastases. The aim was to evaluate metastasis-directed ablative therapies in extracranial mRCC. Two databases and one registry were searched, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, for all prospective and matched-pair case-control mRCC studies of radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryotherapy, microwave ablation (MWA), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Eighteen studies were identified. Fourteen investigated SBRT in 424 patients. Four thermal ablation studies were identified: two cryotherapy (56 patients) and two RFA studies (90 patients). The median participant number was 30 (range 12-69). The combined median follow-up was 17.3 months (range 8-52). Four SBRT studies reported local control (LC) at 12 months, median 84.4% (range 82.5-93). Seven studies (six SBRT and one cryotherapy) reported an LC rate of median 87% (79-100%). Median overall survival (OS) was reported in eight studies (five SBRT, two cryotherapy, and one RFA) with a median of 22.7 months (range 6.7-not reached). Median progression-free survival was reported in seven studies (five SBRT, one cryotherapy, and one RFA); the median was 9.3 months (range 3.0-22.7 months). Grade ≥ 3 toxicity ranged from 1.7% to 10%. SBRT has excellent local control outcomes and acceptable toxicity. Only four eligible thermal ablative studies were identified and could not be compared with SBRT. Translationally rich definitive studies are warranted.

Diagnosis, treatment, and survival from kidney cancer: real-world National Health Service England data between 2013 and 2019.

OBJECTIVES: To report the NHS Digital (NHSD) data for patients diagnosed with kidney cancer (KC) in England. We explore the incidence, route to diagnosis (RTD), treatment, and survival patterns from 2013 to 2019. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was extracted from the Cancer Data NHSD portal for International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition coded KC; this included Cancer Registry data, Hospital Episode Statistics, and cancer waiting times data. RESULTS: Registrations included 66 696 individuals with KC. Incidence of new KC diagnoses increased (8998 in 2013, to 10 232 in 2019), but the age-standardised rates were stable (18.7-19.4/100 000 population). Almost half of patients (30 340 [45.5%]) were aged 0-70 years and the cohort were most frequently diagnosed with Stage 1-2 KC (n = 26 297 [39.4%]). Most patients were diagnosed through non-urgent general practitioner referrals (n = 16 814 [30.4%]), followed by 2-week-wait (n = 15 472 [28.0%]) and emergency routes (n = 11 796 [21.3%]), with older patients (aged ≥70 years), Stage 4 KCs, and patients with non-specified renal cell carcinoma being significantly more likely to present through the emergency route (all P < 0.001). Invasive treatment (surgery or ablation), radiotherapy, or systemic anti-cancer therapy use varied with disease stage, patient factors, and treatment network (Cancer Alliance). Survival outcomes differed by Stage, histological subtype, and social deprivation class (P < 0.001). Age-standardised mortality rates did not change over the study duration, although immunotherapy usage is likely not captured in this study timeline. CONCLUSION: The NHSD resource provides useful insight about the incidence, diagnostic pathways, treatment, and survival of patients with KC in England and a useful benchmark for the upcoming commissioned National Kidney Cancer Audit. The RTD data may be limited by incidental diagnoses, which could confound the high proportion of 'emergency' diagnoses. Importantly, survival outcomes remained relatively unchanged.

A planning-based feasibility study of MR-Linac treatment for anal cancer radiation therapy.

The hybrid magnetic resonance image (MRI) scanner and radiation therapy linear accelerator (MR-Linac) has the potential to enhance clinical outcomes for anal cancer (AC) patients with improved soft tissue visualization and daily plan adaption but has planning and delivery limitations due to the incorporation of MRI. We aimed to identify if Elekta Unity MR-Linac-based radiation therapy is feasible for anal cancer. Ten prospectively enrolled AC patients treated with radical chemoradiotherapy were replanned for MR-Linac treatment using departmental planning criteria. For comparison, and to reduce interobserver variability, volumetric modulated arc radiation therapy (VMAT) plans were also created for each patient by the same single senior radiation therapist. Plans were compared using departmental dosimetric plan criteria, as well as conformity and homogeneity indices, monitor units (MUs) and measured plan delivery (beam-on) time. Results were deemed clinically acceptable. Target and organ at risk (OAR) doses were comparable between MR-Linac plans and VMAT plans, although PTV45Gy D98% coverage was compromised in 3 of 10 MR-Linac plans due to caudocranial length exceeding the limits of the MR-Linac. MR-Linac plans had lower MUs, median of 689.1 vs 849.65 (p = 0.002), but took over twice as long to deliver, 529.5s vs 224s (p = <0.0001) as VMAT plans. MR-Linac planning and treatment of AC is feasible for a subset of patients. The current physical limitations of the Elekta Unity system mean patients with large caudocranial elective PTV45Gy target volumes may not be covered dosimetrically to the required clinical standard. Longer image verification and treatment delivery times of the MR-Linac also mean patient selection and intrafractional IGRT are likely to be integral to ensuring high quality clinical outcomes in this rare cancer.

ESTRO ACROP guideline on prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Purpose/Objective: Radiotherapy to the prostate bed is a potentially curative salvage option after radical prostatectomy. Although prostate bed contouring guidelines are available in the literature, important variabilities exist. The objective of this work is to provide a contemporary consensus guideline for prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy. Methods: An ESTRO-ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 11 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in 3 separate clinically relevant scenarios: adjuvant radiation, salvage radiation with PSA progression, and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA. These cases focused on the presence of positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension, and seminal vesicles involvement. None of the cases had radiographic evidence of local recurrence on imaging. A single computed tomography (CT) dataset was shared via FALCON platform and contours were performed using EduCaseTM software. Contours were analyzed qualitatively using heatmaps which provided a visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively analyzed using Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficients. Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: The mean CTV for the adjuvant case was 76 cc (SD = 26.6), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 51.80 cc (SD = 22.7), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 57.63 cc (SD = 25.2). Compared to the median, the mean Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficient for the adjuvant case was 0.60 (SD 0.10), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 0.58 (SD = 0.12), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 0.60 (SD = 0.11). A heatmap for each clinical scenario was generated. The group agreed to proceed with a uniform recommendation for all cases, independent of the radiotherapy timing. Several controversial areas of the prostate bed CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences where the panel achieved consensus on the prostate bed CTV to be used as a novel guideline for postoperative prostate cancer radiotherapy. Conclusion: Variability was observed in a group formed by experienced genitourinary radiation oncologists and a radiologist. A single contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in prostate bed delineation, independent of the indication.There is important variability in existing contouring guidelines for postoperative prostate bed (PB) radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy. This work aimed at providing a contemporary consensus guideline for PB delineation. An ESTRO ACROP consensus panel including radiation oncologists and a radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, delineated the PB CTV in 3 scenarios: adjuvant RT, salvage RT with PSA progression, and salvage RT with persistently elevated PSA. None of the cases had evidence of local recurrence. Contours were analysed qualitatively using heatmaps for visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively using Sorensen-Dice coefficient. Case-specific questionnaires were also discussed via e-mails and videoconferences for consensus. Several controversial areas of the PB CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences. Finally, a contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in PB delineation, independent of the indication.

Interobserver variation in clinical target volume (CTV) delineation for stereotactic radiotherapy to non-spinal bone metastases in prostate cancer: CT, MRI and PET/CT fusion.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The use of SBRT for the treatment of oligometastatic prostate cancer is increasing rapidly. While consensus guidelines are available for non-spinal bone metastases practice continues to vary widely. The aim of this study is to look at inter-observer variability in the contouring of prostate cancer non-spinal bone metastases with different imaging modalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 15 metastases from 13 patients treated at our centre were selected. 4 observers independently contoured clinical target volumes (CTV) on planning CT alone, planning CT with MRI fusion, planning CT with PET-CT fusion and planning CT with both MRI and PET-CT fusion combined. The mean inter-observer agreement on each modality was compared by measuring the delineated volume, generalized conformity index (CIgen), and the distance of the centre of mass (dCOM), calculated per metastasis and imaging modality. RESULTS: Mean CTV volume delineated on planning CT with MRI and PET-CT fusion combined was significantly larger compared to other imaging modalities (p = 0.0001). CIgen showed marked variation between modalities with the highest agreement between planning CT + PET-CT (mean CIgen 0.55, range 0.32-0.73) and planning CT + MRI + PET-CT (mean CIgen 0.59, range 0.34-0.73). dCOM showed small variations between imaging modalities but a significantly shorter distance found on planning CT + PET-CT when compared with planning CT + PET-CT + MRI combined (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Highest consistency in CTV delineation between observers was seen with planning CT + PET-CT and planning CT + PET-CT + MRI combined.

Diffusion-weighted MRI to determine response and long-term clinical outcomes in muscle-invasive bladder cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Objective: This study aims to determine local treatment response and long-term survival outcomes in patients with localised muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) using diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) analysis. Methods: Patients with T2-T4aN0-3M0 bladder cancer suitable for NAC were recruited prospectively. DWI was performed prior to NAC and was repeated following NAC completion. Conventional response assessment was performed with cystoscopy and tumour site biopsy. Response was dichotomised into response (15.5% was associated with significant improvement in OS (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19-0.86; p=0.0179), bCSS (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.82; p=0.0214), PFS (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05-0.48; p=0.0012), and time to cystectomy (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07-0.47; p=0.0004). Conclusions: Quantitative ADC analysis can successfully identify NAC response and improved long-term clinical outcomes. Multi-centre validation to assess reproducibility and repeatability is required before testing within clinical trials to inform MIBC treatment decision making. Advances in knowledge: We successfully demonstrated that measured change in DWI can successfully identify NAC response and improved long-term survival outcomes.

A pilot study investigating the role of 18 F-FDG-PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Anal cancer (AC) is 18 F-FDG-PET avid and has been used to evaluate treatment response several months after chemoradiotherapy. This pilot study aimed to assess the utility of semi-automated contouring methods and quantitative measures of treatment response using 18 F-FDG-PET imaging at the early time point of 1-month post-chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: Eleven patients with AC referred for chemoradiotherapy were prospectively enrolled into this study, with 10 meeting eligibility requirements. 18 F-FDG-PET imaging was obtained pre-chemoradiotherapy (TP1), and then 1-month (TP2), 3-6 months (TP3) and 9-12 months (TP4) post-chemoradiotherapy. Manual and semi-automated (Threshold) contouring methods were used to define the primary tumour on all 18 F-FDG-PET images. Resultant contours from each method were interrogated using quantitative measures, including volume, response index (RI), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), SUVmax , SUVmedian and SUVmean . Response was assessed quantitatively as reductions in these measures and also qualitatively against established criteria. RESULTS: Nine patients were qualitatively classified as complete metabolic responders at TP2 and all 10 at TP3. All quantitative measures demonstrated significant (P < 0.05) reductions at TP2 for both Manual and Threshold methods. All reduced further at TP3 and again at TP4 for Threshold methods. TLG showed the highest reduction at all post-chemoradiotherapy time points and classified the most responders for each method at each time point. All patients are recurrence-free at minimum 4-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Based on our small sample size, semi-automated methods of disease definition using 18 F-FDG-PET imaging are feasible and appear to facilitate quantitative response classification of AC as early as 1-month post-chemoradiotherapy. Early identification of treatment response may potentially improve disease management.

Overall Survival Update for Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Capivasertib and Docetaxel in the Phase 2 ProCAID Clinical Trial.

The PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway is frequently deregulated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). ProCAID was a phase 2 trial assessing addition of the AKT1/2/3 inhibitor capivasertib to docetaxel for patients with mCRPC. We previously reported that capivasertib did not extend a composite progression-free survival primary endpoint but did significantly improve the secondary endpoint of overall survival (OS). Here we present OS data after 66% of events had occurred in the intent-to-treat population (n = 150). Median OS was 25.3 mo for capivasertib plus docetaxel versus 20.3 mo for placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-1.05; nominal p = 0.09). Receipt of subsequent life-extending treatments was balanced between the treatment arms. The OS benefit associated with capivasertib was maintained in a subset of patients previously treated with abiraterone and/or enzalutamide (median OS 25.0 vs 17.6 mo; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.91; nominal p = 0.02) but not in abiraterone/enzalutamide-naïve patients (median OS 31.1 mo vs not reached; HR 1.43, 95% CI 0.63-3.23). We conclude that OS may be extended by addition of capivasertib to docetaxel. Exploratory analysis revealed that the OS benefit was maintained in a subset of patients previously exposed to androgen receptor-targeted agents, which should be evaluated in prospective trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The ProCAID study examined whether adding the AKT inhibitor drug capivasertib to docetaxel chemotherapy improves outcomes for patients with advanced prostate cancer. Initial analysis of the ProCAID results suggested that capivasertib improved overall survival benefit. This follow-up analysis suggests that capivasertib addition may be particularly beneficial for patients whose cancer was previously treated with drugs that target the androgen receptor.

Oligoprogression in Metastatic, Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer-Prevalence and Current Clinical Practice.

Aims: Oligoprogression is poorly defined in current literature. Little is known about the natural history and significance of oligoprogression in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer on abiraterone or enzalutamide treatment [termed androgen receptor-targeted therapy (ARTT)]. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of oligoprogression, describe the characteristics of oligoprogression in a cohort of patients from a single center, and identify the number of patients potentially treatable with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Methods: Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients who radiologically progressed while on ARTT were included. Patients with oligoprogressive disease (OPD) (≤3 lesions) on any imaging were identified in a retrospective analysis of electronic patient records. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to calculate progression-free and overall survival. Results: A total of 102 patients with metastatic CRPC on ARTT were included. Thirty (29%) patients presented with oligoprogression (46 lesions in total); 21 (21% of total) patients had lesions suitable for SBRT. The majority of lesions were in the bone (21, 46%) or lymph nodes (15, 33%). Patients with oligoprogression while on ARTT had a significantly better prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response on commencing ARTT as compared to patients who later developed polyprogression. However, PSA doubling time immediately prior to progression did not predict OPD. Median progression-free survival to oligoprogression versus polyprogression was 16.8 vs. 11.7 months. Time to further progression after oligoprogression was 13.6 months in those treated with radiotherapy (RT) for oligoprogression vs. 5.7 months in those treated with the continuation of ARTT alone. Conclusions: In this study, nearly a third of patients on ARTT for CRPC were found to have OPD. OPD patients had a better PSA response on ART and a longer duration on ARTT before developing OPD as compared to those developing polyprogressive disease (Poly-PD). The majority of patients (70%) with OPD had lesions suitable for SBRT treatment. Prospective randomized control trials are needed to establish if there is a survival benefit of SBRT in oligoprogressive prostate cancer and to determine predictive indicators.

The dosimetric advantages of perirectal hydrogel spacer in men with localized prostate cancer undergoing stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR).

To evaluate the dosimetric differences for patients receiving a perirectal hydrogel spacer (PR-HS) using SpaceOAR undergoing stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for localized prostate cancer with the CyberKnife VSI system. Gold fiducial markers and a PR-HS was inserted in 22 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed localized prostate cancer. For planning comparison, dosimetry from the clinical plans was compared against replans based on a simulated rectum volume designed to recreate a clinically appropriate spacer-less anatomy for each patient. Both sets were planned to 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions using the treatment planning system associated with the CyberKnife VSI system. The aim was to ensure equivalent target coverage for both plans and to evaluate doses to the organs-at-risk (OARs): rectum, bladder and penile bulb. The median PR-HS implant volume was 11.2 cc (range 8.8 to 14.9 cc). The maximal median perirectal separation was 15.5 mm (10.5 to 20.7 mm). Statistically significant reductions were noted for the 3 OARs, with no statistically significant difference in planning target volumes or clinical target volume coverage. All rectal dose constraints were significantly improved in the PR-HS plans with a percentage dose difference of at least 24% (rectum V18.1Gy (%)) to 60.5% (rectum V36Gy (cc)). The bladder and penile bulb dose constraints parameters were also significantly improved: the bladder V37Gy was reduced by 17.1%, V18.1Gy was reduced by 4.2%; the penile bulb D50% was reduced by 7.7%. The use of PR-HS was able to significantly reduce planned dose to the rectum, bladder and penile bulb with SABR techniques associated with the CyberKnife VSI system.

Efficacy and Safety of Autologous Dendritic Cell-Based Immunotherapy, Docetaxel, and Prednisone vs Placebo in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: The VIABLE Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: DCVAC/PCa is an active cellular immunotherapy designed to initiate an immune response against prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of DCVAC/PCa plus chemotherapy followed by DCVAC/PCa maintenance treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The VIABLE double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolled patients with mCRPC among 177 hospital clinics in the US and Europe between June 2014 and November 2017. Data analyses were performed from December 2019 to July 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were randomized (2:1) to receive DCVAC/PCa (add-on and maintenance) or placebo, both in combination with chemotherapy (docetaxel plus prednisone). The stratification was applied according to geographical region (US or non-US), prior therapy (abiraterone, enzalutamide, or neither), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0-1 or 2). DCVAC/PCa or placebo was administered subcutaneously every 3 to 4 weeks (up to 15 doses). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), defined as the time from randomization until death due to any cause, in all randomized patients. Survival was compared using 2-sided log-rank test stratified by geographical region, prior therapy with abiraterone and/or enzalutamide, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. RESULTS: A total of 1182 men with mCRPC (median [range] age, 68 [46-89] years) were randomized to receive DCVAC/PCa (n = 787) or placebo (n = 395). Of these, 610 (81.8%) started DCVAC/PCa, and 376 (98.4%) started placebo. There was no difference in OS between the DCVAC/PCa and placebo groups in all randomized patients (median OS, 23.9 months [95% CI, 21.6-25.3] vs 24.3 months [95% CI, 22.6-26.0]; hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90-1.21; P = .60). No differences in the secondary efficacy end points (radiological progression-free survival, time to prostate-specific antigen progression, or skeletal-related events) were observed. Treatment-emergent adverse events related to DCVAC/PCa or placebo occurred in 69 of 749 (9.2%) and 48 of 379 (12.7%) patients, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (DCVAC/PCa [n = 749] vs placebo [n = 379]) were fatigue (271 [36.2%] vs 152 [40.1%]), alopecia (222 [29.6%] vs 130 [34.3%]), and diarrhea (206 [27.5%] vs 117 [30.9%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, DCVAC/PCa combined with docetaxel plus prednisone and continued as maintenance treatment did not extend OS in patients with mCRPC and was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02111577.

Nonrandomized Comparison of Efficacy and Side Effects of Bicalutamide Compared With Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone (LHRH) Analogs in Combination With Radiation Therapy in the CHHiP Trial.

PURPOSE: CHHiP is a randomized trial evaluating moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Of all participants, 97% of them had concurrent short-course hormone therapy (HT), either luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog (LHRHa) or 150 mg of bicalutamide daily. This exploratory analysis compares efficacy and side effects in a nonrandomized comparison. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In our study, 2700 patients received LHRHa and 403 received bicalutamide. The primary endpoint was biochemical/clinical failure. Groups were compared with Cox regression adjusted for various prognostic factors and stratified by radiation therapy dose. A key secondary endpoint was erectile dysfunction (ED) assessed by clinicians (using scores from Late Effects on Normal Tissues: Subjective/Objective/Management [LENT-SOM] subjective erectile function for vaginal penetration) and patients (single items within the University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index [UCLA PCI] and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC]-50 questionnaires) at 2 years and compared between HT regimens by χ2 trend test. RESULTS: Bicalutamide patients were significantly younger (median 67 vs 69 years LHRHa). Median follow-up was 9.3 years. There was no difference in biochemical or clinical failure with an adjusted hazard ratio or 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.23; P = .8). At 2 years, grade ≥2 LENT-SOM ED was reported in significantly more LHRHa patients (313 out of 590; 53%) versus bicalutamide (17 out of 68; 25%) (P < .0001). There were no differences in ED seen with UCLA-PCI and EPIC-50 questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: In this nonrandomized comparison, there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy according to type of HT received. Bicalutamide preserved clinician assessed (LENT-SOM) erectile function at 2 years but patient-reported outcomes were similar between groups.

A Systematic Review of Patients' Values, Preferences, and Expectations for the Treatment of Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

CONTEXT: Advances in systemic agents have increased overall survival for men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. Additional cytoreductive prostate treatments and metastasis-directed therapies are under evaluation. These confer toxicity but may offer incremental survival benefits. Thus, an understanding of patients' values and treatment preferences is important for counselling, decision-making, and guideline development. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of patients' values, preferences, and expectations regarding treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for qualitative and preference elucidation studies reporting on patients' preferences for treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) or GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual). The protocol was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42020201420. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 1491 participants from 15 studies met the prespecified eligibility for inclusion. The study designs included were discrete choice experiments (n = 5), mixed methods (n = 3), and qualitative methods (n = 7). Disease states reported per study were: metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in nine studies (60.0%), metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in two studies (13.3%), and a mixed cohort in four studies (26.6%). In quantitative preference elicitation studies, patients consistently valued treatment effectiveness and delay in time to symptoms as the two top-ranked treatment attributes (low or very low certainty). Patients were willing to trade off treatment-related toxicity for potential oncological benefits (low certainty). In qualitative studies, thematic analysis revealed cancer progression and/or survival, pain, and fatigue as key components in treatment decisions (low or very low certainty). Patients continue to value oncological benefits in making decisions on treatments under qualitative assessment. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited understanding of how patients make treatment and trade-off decisions following a diagnosis of metastatic prostate cancer. For appropriate investment in emerging cytoreductive local tumour and metastasis-directed therapies, we should seek to better understand how this cohort weighs the oncological benefits against the risks. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at how men with advanced (metastatic) prostate cancer make treatment decisions. We found that little is known about patients' preferences for current and proposed new treatments. Further studies are required to understand how patients make decisions to help guide the integration of new treatments into the standard of care.

A clinical study comparing polymer and gold fiducials for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Introduction: Image guidance with gold fiducials improves outcomes of prostate radiotherapy. However, gold produces artefact on CT imaging, interfering with contouring and verification. The purpose of this study was to compare polymer to standard gold fiducials using radiotherapy imaging modalities to assess the visibility and artefact. Methods: Twenty eight patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were enrolled, half had three polymer fiducials implanted into the prostate and half underwent insertion of gold fiducials. Patients were imaged with CT, T2 weighted MRI, cone-beam CT (CBCT) and planar KV images. Fiducials were scored for visibility and assessed for CT artefact in surrounding prostate tissue. The artefact was quantified from Hounsfield number histograms and separated into percentile ranges and proportion of voxels in HU normal tissue range of a 2cm sphere surrounding the fiducial. Results: Gold and polymer fiducials were sufficiently visible for CT and CBCT verification. The gold fiducials could be visualized well on KV planar imaging; however, the polymer markers were obscured by pelvic bones. Neither polymer nor gold fiducials could be visualized on MRI. The polymer fiducial produced less artefact than gold on CT, having less voxel spread for the HU percentile ranges and a greater proportion of voxels in the normal tissue range. Conclusions: Polymer fiducials are a more suitable fiducial than gold for CT/CBCT in prostate cancer radiotherapy, demonstrating minimal artefact and good visibility on CT. However, they were not well seen on MRI or KV imaging and thus not suitable for co-registration or planar KV verification.