RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Ultra-hypofractionated regimens for definitive prostate cancer (PCa) radiotherapy are increasingly utilized due in part to promising safety and efficacy data complemented by greater patient convenience from a treatment course requiring fewer sessions. As such, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is rapidly emerging as a standard definitive treatment option for patients with localized PCa. The commercially available magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-LINAC) integrates MR imaging with radiation delivery, providing several theoretical advantages compared to computed tomography (CT)-guided radiotherapy. MR-LINAC technology facilitates improved visualization of the prostate, real-time intrafraction tracking of prostate and organs-at-risk (OAR), and online adaptive planning to account for target movement and anatomical changes. These features enable reduced treatment volume margins and improved sparing of surrounding OAR. The theoretical advantages of MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) have recently been shown to significantly reduce rates of acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicities as reported in the prospective randomized phase III MIRAGE trial, which compared MR-LINAC vs CT-based 5 fraction SBRT in patients with localized PCa (Kishan et al. JAMA Oncol 9:365-373, 2023). Thus, MR-LINAC SBRT-utilizing potentially fewer treatments-is warranted and clinically relevant for men with low or intermediate risk PCa electing for radiotherapy as definitive treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 136 men with treatment naïve low or intermediate risk PCa will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to 5 or 2 fractions of MR-guided SBRT using permuted block randomization. Randomization is stratified by baseline Expanded PCa Index Composite (EPIC) bowel and urinary domain scores. Patients undergoing 5 fractions will receive 37.5 Gy to the prostate over 10-14 days and patients undergoing 2 fractions will receive 25 Gy to the prostate over 7-10 days. The co-primary endpoints are GI and GU toxicities as measured by change scores in the bowel and urinary EPIC domains, respectively. The change scores will be calculated as pre-treatment (baseline) score subtracted from the 2-year score. DISCUSSION: FORT is an international, multi-institutional prospective randomized phase II trial evaluating whether MR-guided SBRT delivered in 2 fractions versus 5 fractions is non-inferior from a gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity standpoint at 2 years post-treatment in men with low or intermediate risk PCa. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04984343 . Date of registration: July 30, 2021. PROTOCOL VERSION: 4.0, Nov 8, 2022.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Radiocirugia , Masculino , Humanos , Radiocirugia/efectos adversos , Radiocirugia/métodos , Próstata/patología , Estudios Prospectivos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Antígeno Prostático EspecíficoRESUMEN
Importance: Technical advances in treatment of prostate cancer and a better understanding of prostate cancer biology have allowed for hypofractionated treatment courses using a higher dose per fraction. Use of ultrahypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has also been characterized. Objective: To characterize US national trends of different RT fractionation schemes across risk groups of prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data collected by the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to characterize the fractionation regimens used for 302â¯035 patients diagnosed as having prostate cancer from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2020, who underwent definitive RT. The analysis was performed between February 1 and April 30, 2023. Exposure: Stereotactic body RT or ultrahypofractionation, defined as 5 or fewer fractions of external beam RT (EBRT), moderate hypofractionation, defined as 20 to 28 fractions of EBRT, or conventional fractionation, defined as all remaining EBRT fractionation schemes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Temporal trends and clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with SBRT, moderate hypofractionation, and conventional fractionation use. Results: A total of 302â¯035 men receiving EBRT for localized prostate cancer between 2004 and 2020 were identified (40.1% aged 60-69 years). Black patients comprised 17.6% of this cohort; White patients, 77.9%; and other races and ethnicities, 4.5%. Patients with low-risk disease comprised 17.5% of the cohort; favorable intermediate-risk disease, 23.5%; unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, 23.9%; and high-risk disease, 35.1%. Treatment consisted of conventional fractionation for 81.2%, moderate hypofractionation for 12.9%, and SBRT for 6.0%. The rate of increase over time in patients receiving SBRT compared with conventional fractionation was higher (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for 2005 vs 2004, 3.18 [95% CI, 2.04-4.94; P < .001]; AOR for 2020 vs 2004, 264.69 [95% CI, 179.33-390.68; P < .001]) than the rate of increase in patients receiving moderate hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation (AOR for 2005 vs 2004, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.98-1.12; P = .19]; AOR for 2020 vs 2004, 4.41 [95% CI, 4.15-4.69; P < .001]). Compared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to receive SBRT compared with conventional fractionation or moderate hypofractionation (AOR for conventional fractionation, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.80-0.89; P < .001]; AOR for moderate hypofractionation, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.72-0.81; P < .001]). Compared with 2019, patients treated with all fractionation regimens declined in 2020 by 24.4%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this hospital-based cohort study of patients with prostate cancer treated with definitive EBRT, use of moderate hypofractionation and SBRT regimens for definitive prostate cancer treatment has increased from 2004 to 2020. Despite this increasing trend, findings suggest potential health care disparities for Black patients receiving EBRT for localized prostate cancer. The number of patients treated with EBRT in the year 2020 decreased, coinciding with official onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Estudios de Cohortes , Pandemias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lymphodepletion enhances adoptive T cell transfer (ACT) therapy by activating the innate immune system via microbes released from the radiation-injured gut. Microbial components, such as LPS, are key mediators of total body irradiation (TBI) enhancement, but our ability to strategically use these toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists to bolster the potency of T cell-based therapies for cancer remains elusive. Herein, we used TLR4 agonist LPS as a tool to address how and when to use TLR agonists to effectively improve cancer immunotherapy. METHODS: To determine the mechanisms of how innate immune activation via lymphodepletion potentiated antitumor T cell immunity, we utilized the pmel-1 melanoma mouse model. B16F10-bearing mice were preconditioned with 5Gy TBI and given a tripartite ACT therapy (consisting of transferred pmel-1 CD8(+) T cells, vaccination with fowlpox encoding gp100, and IL-2) along with TLR4 agonist LPS. The timing of LPS administration and the requirement of individual components of the tripartite therapy were evaluated based on tumor growth and the phenotype of recovered splenocytes by flow cytometry. We also evaluated the role of non-toxic and clinically used TLR4 and TLR9 agonists-monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) and CpG Oligodeoxynucleotide (CpG ODN), respectively- for ACT therapy. RESULTS: Here we report that while exogenous administration of LPS was able to enhance adoptively transferred CD8(+) T cells' tumor destruction, LPS treatment alone did not replace individual components of the tripartite ACT regimen, or obviate TBI. Moreover, we found that sequentially administering LPS during or one day prior to ACT therapy compromised tumor regression. In contrast, administering LPS after ACT potentiated the antitumor effectiveness of the regimen, thereby supporting the expansion of transferred tumor-specific CD8(+) T cells over host CD4(+) T cells. We also found that non-toxic TLR agonists MPL and CpG potentiated the antitumor activity of infused CD8(+) T cells. Finally, TBI was no longer needed to regress tumors in mice who were depleted of host CD4(+) T cells, given a tripartite ACT regimen and then treated with low dose LPS. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, our results identify how and when to administer TLR agonists to augment T cell-based immunotherapy in the absence or presence of host preconditioning for treatment of advanced malignancies. Our findings have clinical implications for the design of next generation immune-based therapies for patients with cancer.
RESUMEN
The microbiota plays a key role in regulating the innate and adaptive immune system. Herein, we review the immunological aspects of the microbiota in tumor immunity in mice and man, with a focus on toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists, vaccines, checkpoint modulators, chemotherapy, and adoptive T cell transfer (ACT) therapies. We propose innovative treatments that may safely harness the microbiota to enhance T cell-based therapies in cancer patients. Finally, we highlight recent developments in tumor immunotherapy, particularly novel ways to modulate the microbiome and memory T cell responses to human malignancies.