Short-term androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy as salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 16): a 112-month follow-up of a phase 3, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is the standard salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy. To date, the role of androgen deprivation therapy has not been formally shown. In this follow-up study, we aimed to update the results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial, which assessed the efficacy of radiotherapy plus androgen suppression versus radiotherapy alone. METHODS: GETUG-AFU 16 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial that enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen suppression or pelvic radiotherapy), stage pT2, T3, or T4a (bladder neck involvement only) and pN0 or pNx according to the tumour, node, metastasis (TNM) staging system, whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration increased from 0·1 ng/mL to between 0·2 ng/mL and 2·0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were assigned through central randomisation (1:1) to short-term androgen suppression (subcutaneous injection of 10·8 mg goserelin on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later) plus radiotherapy (3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy of 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy alone. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method (block sizes of two and four) according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This post-hoc one-shot data collection done 4 years after last data cutoff included patients who were alive at the time of the primary analysis and updated long-term patient status by including dates for first local progression, metastatic disease diagnosis, or death (if any of these had occurred) or the date of the last tumour evaluation or last PSA measurement. Survival at 120 months was reported. Late serious adverse effects were assessed. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00423475. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. At the time of data cutoff (March 12, 2019), the median follow-up was 112 months (IQR 102-123). The 120-month progression-free survival was 64% (95% CI 58-69) for patients treated with radiotherapy plus goserelin and 49% (43-54) for patients treated with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0·54, 0·43-0·68; stratified log-rank test p<0·0001). Two cases of secondary cancer occurred since the primary analysis, but were not considered to be treatment related. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: The 120-month progression-free survival confirmed the results from the primary analysis. Salvage radiotherapy combined with short-term androgen suppression significantly reduced risk of biochemical or clinical progression and death compared with salvage radiotherapy alone. The results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial confirm the efficacy of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy as salvage treatment in patients with increasing PSA concentration after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. FUNDING: The French Health ministry, AstraZeneca, la Ligue Contre le Cancer, and La Ligue de Haute-Savoie.

Salvage radiotherapy with or without short-term hormone therapy for rising prostate-specific antigen concentration after radical prostatectomy (GETUG-AFU 16): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: How best to treat rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration after radical prostatectomy is an urgent clinical question. Salvage radiotherapy delays the need for more aggressive treatment such as long-term androgen suppression, but fewer than half of patients benefit from it. We aimed to establish the effect of adding short-term androgen suppression at the time of salvage radiotherapy on biochemical outcome and overall survival in men with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, was done in 43 French study centres. We enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) who had received previous treatment for a histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen deprivation therapy or pelvic radiotherapy), and who had stage pT2, pT3, or pT4a (bladder neck involvement only) in patients who had rising PSA of 0·2 to less than 2·0 µg/L following radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally via an interactive web response system to standard salvage radiotherapy (three-dimensional [3D] conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy, of 66 Gy in 33 fractions 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy plus short-term androgen suppression using 10·8 mg goserelin by subcutaneous injection on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423475. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. Patients assigned to radiotherapy plus goserelin were significantly more likely than patients in the radiotherapy alone group to be free of biochemical progression or clinical progression at 5 years (80% [95% CI 75-84] vs 62% [57-67]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). No additional late adverse events occurred in patients receiving short-term androgen suppression compared with those who received radiotherapy alone. The most frequently occuring acute adverse events related to goserelin were hot flushes, sweating, or both (30 [8%] of 366 patients had a grade 2 or worse event; 30 patients [8%] had hot flushes and five patients [1%] had sweating in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group vs none of 372 patients in the radiotherapy alone group). Three (8%) of 366 patients had grade 3 or worse hot flushes and one patient had grade 3 or worse sweating in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group versus none of 372 patients in the radiotherapy alone group. The most common late adverse events of grade 3 or worse were genitourinary events (29 [8%] in the radiotherapy alone group vs 26 [7%] in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group) and sexual disorders (20 [5%] vs 30 [8%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Adding short-term androgen suppression to salvage radiotherapy benefits men who have had radical prostatectomy and whose PSA rises after a postsurgical period when it is undetectable. Radiotherapy combined with short-term androgen suppression could be considered as a reasonable option in this population. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health, AstraZeneca, and La Ligue Contre le Cancer.

Geriatric assessment findings independently associated with clinical depression in 1092 older patients with cancer: the ELCAPA Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess the prevalence and associated factors of clinical depression in older patients with cancer. METHODS: We studied a prospective cohort of cancer patients aged ≥ 70 years and referred to geriatric oncology clinics between 2007 and 2012. A multidimensional geriatric assessment was performed before choosing the cancer-treatment strategy. Clinical depression was diagnosed by senior geriatricians by a semi-structured interview. It encompassed criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (fourth edition) and of the International Classification of Diseases (10th edition). Multivariate logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: Of 1121 consecutive patients, 1092 had available data (mean age, 80.4 years; women, 48.8%; metastases, 51.3%; cancer location: colorectal 21.1%, breast 16.8%, kidney, bladder or urinary tract 14.0%, and prostate 11.4%). The overall prevalence of clinical depression was 28.4% (95% confidence interval, 25.7-31.2). Factors independently associated with clinical depression by multivariate analysis adjusting for all following factors plus gender, and metastasis were impaired mobility (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.35; 1.59-3.46), impaired functional status defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status ≥ 2 (aOR, 2.39; 1.66-3.43) or as activities of daily living < 6 (aOR, 2.43; 1.73-3.41), inpatient status (aOR, 1.68; 1.20-2.37), inadequate social support (aOR, 1.66; 1.16-2.37), cognitive impairment (aOR, 1.76; 1.24-2.49), polypharmacy defined as five or more non-antidepressant drugs (aOR, 1.65; 1.14-2.38), multimorbidity (aOR additional CIRS-G point , 1.08; 1.04-1.12), and cancer-related pain (aOR, 1.76; 1.26-2.46). CONCLUSION: In older patients with as-yet untreated cancer at various sites and stages, clinical depression was highly prevalent. Clinical depression was independently associated with several geriatric assessment findings (impaired mobility and function, inadequate social support, cognitive impairment, polypharmacy, and multimorbidity) independently from gender, tumor site, and metastatic status.

Androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel and estramustine versus androgen deprivation therapy alone for high-risk localised prostate cancer (GETUG 12): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Early risk-stratified chemotherapy is a standard treatment for breast, colorectal, and lung cancers, but not for high-risk localised prostate cancer. Combined docetaxel and estramustine improves survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. We assessed the effects of combined docetaxel and estramustine on relapse in patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer. METHODS: We did this randomised phase 3 trial at 26 hospitals in France. We enrolled patients with treatment-naive prostate cancer and at least one risk factor (ie, stage T3-T4 disease, Gleason score of ≥8, prostate-specific antigen concentration >20 ng/mL, or pathological node-positive). All patients underwent a staging pelvic lymph node dissection. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; goserelin 10·8 mg every 3 months for 3 years) plus four cycles of docetaxel on day 2 at a dose of 70 mg/m(2) and estramustine 10 mg/kg per day on days 1-5, every 3 weeks, or ADT only. The randomisation was done centrally by computer, stratified by risk factor. Local treatment was administered at 3 months. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Follow-up for other endpoints is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00055731. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 207 patients to the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group and 206 to the ADT only group. Median follow-up was 8·8 years (IQR 8·1-9·7). 88 (43%) of 207 patients in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group had an event (relapse or death) versus 111 (54%) of 206 in the ADT only group. 8-year relapse-free survival was 62% (95% CI 55-69) in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group versus 50% (44-57) in the ADT only group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·54-0·94, p=0·017). Of patients who were treated with radiotherapy and had data available, 31 (21%) of 151 in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group versus 26 (18%) of 143 in the ADT only group reported a grade 2 or higher long-term side-effect (p=0·61). We recorded no excess second cancers (26 [13%] of 207 vs 22 [11%] of 206; p=0·57), and there were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Docetaxel-based chemotherapy improves relapse-free survival in patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to assess whether this benefit translates into improved metastasis-free survival and overall survival. FUNDING: Ligue Contre le Cancer, Sanofi-Aventis, AstraZeneca, Institut National du Cancer.

Assessment of solid cancer treatment feasibility in older patients: a prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess solid cancer treatment feasibility in older patients. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2010, 385 consecutive elderly patients (mean age: 78.9 ± 5.4 years; 47.8% males) with solid malignancies referred to two geriatric oncology clinics were included prospectively. We recorded feasibility of first-line chemotherapy (planned number of cycles in patients without metastases and three to six cycles depending on tumor site in patients with metastases), surgery (patient alive 30 days after successfully performed planned surgical procedure), radiotherapy (planned dose delivered), and hormonal therapy (planned drug dose given), and we recorded overall 1-year survival. RESULTS: Main tumor sites were colorectal (28.6%), breast (23.1%), and prostate (10.9%), and 47% of patients had metastases. Planned cancer treatment was feasible in 65.7% of patients with metastases; this proportion was 59.0% for chemotherapy, 82.6% for surgery, 100% for radiotherapy, and 85.2% for hormonal therapy. In the group without metastases, feasibility proportions were 86.8% overall, 72.4% for chemotherapy, 95.7% for surgery, 96.4% for radiotherapy, and 97.9% for hormonal therapy. Factors independently associated with chemotherapy feasibility were good functional status defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status <2 (p < .0001) or activities of daily living >5 (p = .01), normal mobility defined as no difficulty walking (p = .01) or no fall risk (p = .007), and higher creatinine clearance (p = .04). CONCLUSION: Feasibility rates were considerably lower for chemotherapy than for surgery, radiotherapy, and hormonal therapy. Therefore, utilization of limited geriatric oncology resources may be optimized by preferential referral of elderly cancer patients initially considered for chemotherapy to geriatric oncology clinics.

Nomograms to predict late urinary toxicity after prostate cancer radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze late urinary toxicity after prostate cancer radiotherapy (RT): symptom description and identification of patient characteristics or treatment parameters allowing for the generation of nomograms. METHODS: Nine hundred and sixty-five patients underwent RT in seventeen French centers for localized prostate cancer. Median total dose was 70 Gy (range, 65-80 Gy), using different fractionations (2 or 2.5 Gy/day) and techniques. Late urinary toxicity and the corresponding symptoms (urinary frequency, incontinence, dysuria/decreased stream, and hematuria) were prospectively assessed in half of the patients using the LENT-SOMA classification. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models addressed patient or treatment-related predictors of late urinary toxicity (≥grade 2). Nomograms were built up, and their performance was assessed. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 61 months. The 5-year (≥grade 2) global urinary toxicity, urinary frequency, hematuria, dysuria, and urinary incontinence rates were 15, 10, 5, 3 and 1 %, respectively. The 5-year (≥grade 3) urinary toxicity rate was 3 %. The following parameters significantly increased the 5-year risk of global urinary toxicity (≥grade 2): anticoagulant treatment (RR = 2.35), total dose (RR = 1.09), and age (RR = 1.06). Urinary frequency was increased by the total dose (RR = 1.07) and diabetes (RR = 4). Hematuria was increased by anticoagulant treatment (RR = 2.9). Dysuria was increased by the total dose (RR = 1.1). Corresponding nomograms and their calibration plots were generated. Nomogram performance should be validated with external data. CONCLUSIONS: The first nomograms to predict late urinary toxicity but also specific urinary symptoms after prostate RT were generated, contributing to prostate cancer treatment decision.

International radiation oncology trainee decision making in the management of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: This study explored international radiation oncology trainee decision making in the management of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV). METHODS: Radiation oncology trainees who were members of the national radiation oncology associations of the USA, Canada, Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, France, Spain and Singapore completed a Web-based survey. Respondents estimated the risks of nausea and vomiting associated with six standardised radiotherapy-only clinical case vignettes modelled after international anti-emetic guidelines and then committed to prophylactic, rescue or no therapy as an initial management approach for each case. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-six trainees from 11 countries responded. Only 28 % were aware of any anti-emetic guideline. In general, risk estimates and management approaches for the high-risk and minimal risk cases varied less and were more in line with guideline standards than were estimates and approaches for the moderate- and low-risk cases. Prophylactic therapy was the most common approach for the high-risk and a moderate-risk case (83 and 71 % of respondents respectively), while rescue therapy was the most common approach for a second moderate-risk case (69 %), two low-risk cases (69 and 76 %) and a minimal risk case (68 %). A serotonin receptor antagonist was the most commonly recommended prophylactic agent. On multivariate analysis, a higher estimated risk of nausea predicted for recommending prophylactic therapy, and a lower estimated risk of nausea predicted for recommending rescue therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncology trainee risk estimates and recommended management approaches for RINV clinical case vignettes varied and matched guideline standards more often for high-risk and minimal risk cases than for moderate- and low-risk cases. Risk estimates of nausea specifically were strong predictors of management decisions.

Very Long-Term Complete Remission Can Be Achieved in Men With High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer and a Very High PSA Value: An Analysis of the GETUG 12 Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) is a well-known prognostic parameter in men with prostate cancer. The treatment of men with very high PSA values and apparently no detectable metastases is not fully established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ancillary analysis from the GETUG 12 phase 3 trial. Patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer by bone and computerized tomography (CT) scan were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel plus estramustine or ADT alone. Relapse-free survival (RFS), clinical RFS, metastases-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method for different levels of PSA (50 ng/mL, 75 ng/mL, and 100 ng/mL). The relationship between PSA and outcomes was studied using residual-based approaches and spline functions. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 12 years (range: 0-15.3). Baseline PSA (<50 ng/mL, n = 328; ≥50ng/mL, n = 85) was associated with improved RFS (P = .0005), cRFS (P = .0024), and MFS (P = .0068). The 12-year RFS rate was 46.33% (CI 40.59-51.86), 33.59% (CI 22.55-44.97), and 11.76% (1.96-31.20) in men with PSA values <50 ng/mL (n = 328), 50-100 ng/mL (n = 68), and ≥100 ng/mL (n = 17), respectively. Exploratory analyses revealed no deviation from the linear relationship assumption between PSA and the log hazard of events. CONCLUSIONS: Men with apparently localized prostate cancer and a high baseline PSA value have a reasonable chance of being long-term disease-free when treated with curative intent combining systemic and local therapy.

Waiting times before initiation of radiotherapy might not affect outcomes for patients with glioblastoma: a French retrospective analysis of patients treated in the era of concomitant temozolomide and radiotherapy.

Purpose of this study was to determine the effect of waiting time for radiotherapy on overall survival of patients with glioblastoma treated in the EORTC-NCIC trial at 18 centers in France. A total of 400 adult patients with glioblastoma who were treated between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2006 were included. There were 282 patients with "minimum criteria" according to the EORTC-NCIC trial: (i) concurrent chemotherapy with temozolomide; and (ii) age between 18 and 70 years old. Among these patients, 229 were treated with adjuvant temozolomide and were classified as "maximal criteria". One-hundred and eighteen patients were in the "without minimal criteria" group. Waiting time from the first symptom (FS-RT), pathology diagnosis (P-RT), multidisciplinary meeting (MM-RT), surgery (S-RT), and CT scan for delineation (CT-RT) until the start of radiotherapy were recorded. Median follow-up for all patients was 327 days. Overall, median FS-RT, P-RT, MM-RT, CT-RT, and S-RT times were 77, 36, 32, 12, and 41 days, respectively. Median, and 12 and 24-month overall survival were 409 days, and 56.3 ± 2.1 % and 27.6 ± 2.6 %, respectively. Univariate analysis failed to reveal a difference in survival, irrespective of the delay. In multivariate analysis, independent favorable prognostic factors for overall survival were age (p ≤ 0.0001) and type of surgery (p = 0.0006). In this large series treated during the EORTC-NCIC protocol period, waiting time until radiotherapy did not seem to affect patient outcome.

Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: MRI pathological correlation following bilateral total mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is more often multifocal and bilateral than invasive ductal carcinoma. MRI is usually recommended for detection of all ILC sites. The performance of known diagnostic breast MRI criteria for ILC characterization has not been evaluated to date using bilateral mastectomy specimens as gold standard. PURPOSE: To determine the value of BI-RADS 2006 MRI criteria for ILC detection and characterization, using pathological examination of bilateral mastectomy specimens as the reference standard. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 2004 and 2007, we retrospectively included all patients with pathologically documented ILC referred to our institution for bilateral mastectomy and preoperative bilateral breast MRI. The location, diameter, and characteristics (BI-RADS) of all lesions were compared with pathological findings. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of bilateral breast MRI for the diagnosis of ILC were calculated. Association of MRI BI-RADS categorical variables and characterization of ILC were assessed (Fisher exact test). RESULTS: Among 360 patients treated for ILC in 2004-2007, 15 patients qualified for this study. Thirty-one ILC foci were found on pathological examination (30 ipsilateral and 1 contralateral tumor; mean diameter 23 mm; range 2-60 mm) and all were identified on MRI, with 90% of masses and 10% non-mass-like enhancements; MRI features significantly associated with ILC included absence of smooth margins (P = 0.02) and rim-shaped enhancement (P = 0.039). Enhancement kinetics of the 31 foci were evenly distributed among wash-out, plateau, and persistent profiles. Eleven additional lesions were seen on MRI, mainly corresponding to fibrocystic disease; 91% presented as masses and 9% had a wash-out profile. CONCLUSION: Based on the 2006 BI-RADS criteria, breast MRI shows a high sensitivity for ILC detection, at the expense of a 26% false-positive rate, suggesting that a pathological proof by US- or MR-guided biopsy is required in case of suspicious MRI images in this context.

The Prognostic Value of Eight Comorbidity Indices in Older Patients with Cancer: The ELCAPA Cohort Study.

Background: A prognostic assessment is crucial for making cancer treatment decisions in older patients. We assessed the prognostic performance (relative to one-year mortality) of eight comorbidity indices in a cohort of older patients with cancer. Methods: We studied patients with cancer aged ≥70 included in the Elderly Cancer Patient (ELCAPA) cohort between 2007 and 2010. We assessed seven nonspecific indices (Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), three modified versions of the CCI, the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, the Gagne index, and the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G)) and the National Cancer Institute Comorbidity Index. Results: Overall, 510 patients were included. Among patients with nonmetastatic cancer, all the comorbidity indices were independently associated with 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of 1.44 to 2.51 for one standard deviation increment; p < 0.05 for all) and had very good discriminant ability (Harrell's C > 0.8 for the eight indices), but were poorly calibrated. Among patients with metastatic cancer, only the CIRS-G was independently associated with 1-year mortality (aHR (95% confidence interval): 1.26 [1.06−1.50]). Discriminant ability was moderate (0.61 to 0.70) for the subsets of patients with metastatic cancer and colorectal cancer. Conclusion: Comorbidity indices had strong prognostic value and discriminative ability for one-year mortality in older patients with nonmetastatic cancer, although calibration was poor. In older patients with metastatic cancer, only the CIRS-G was predictive of one-year mortality.

Predicting Frailty and Geriatric Interventions in Older Cancer Patients: Performance of Two Screening Tools for Seven Frailty Definitions-ELCAPA Cohort.

Screening tools have been developed to identify patients warranting a complete geriatric assessment (GA). However, GA lacks standardization and does not capture important aspects of geriatric oncology practice. We measured and compared the diagnostic performance of screening tools G8 and modified G8 according to multiple clinically relevant reference standards. We included 1136 cancer patients ≥ 70 years old referred for GA (ELCAPA cohort; median age, 80 years; males, 52%; main locations: digestive (36.3%), breast (16%), and urinary tract (14.8%); metastases, 43.5%). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) estimates were compared between both tools against: (1) the detection of ≥1 or (2) ≥2 GA impairments, (3) the prescription of ≥1 geriatric intervention and the identification of an unfit profile according to (4) a latent class typology, expert-based classifications from (5) Balducci, (6) the International Society of Geriatric Oncology task force (SIOG), or using (7) a GA frailty index according to the Rockwood accumulation of deficits principle. AUROC values were ≥0.80 for both tools under all tested definitions. They were statistically significantly higher for the modified G8 for six reference standards: ≥1 GA impairment (0.93 vs. 0.89), ≥2 GA impairments (0.90 vs. 0.87), ≥1 geriatric intervention (0.85 vs. 0.81), unfit according to Balducci (0.86 vs. 0.80) and SIOG classifications (0.88 vs. 0.83), and according to the GA frailty index (0.86 vs. 0.84). Our findings demonstrate the robustness of both screening tools against different reference standards, with evidence of better diagnostic performance of the modified G8.

European French-speaking study from the GEMO group on bone metastases management: a special focus on external beam radiotherapy practice survey.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study seeks to perform a survey of patterns of practice among the different physicians involved in the bone metastases management, with special focus on external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A questionnaire about bone metastases based on clinical cases and supplemented with general questions, including medical therapies, EBRT and metabolic radiotherapy strategies, surgery, and supportive care approaches, was sent to 4,706 French-speaking physicians in Belgium, France, Luxemburg, and Switzerland. RESULTS: Overall, 644 questionnaires were analyzed. Twenty-eight percent concerned the radiotherapy approach and were judged adequate to respond to the part dedicated to EBRT. Sixty-nine percent of physicians used a total dose irradiation of 30 Gy delivered in ten fractions. A large majority (75%) used two opposed fields prescribed at mid-depth (30%), or with non-equally weighted fields (45%). Seventy percent irradiated also above and below the concerned vertebra. A dosimetry planning treatment was done in 85% and high-energy megavoltage photons were used in 42%. Moreover, 54% physicians used short course radiotherapy in routine. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment of bone metastases, but there is substantial heterogeneity in clinical practice. Guidelines and treatment protocols are required to improve the treatment quality.

OLIGOPELVIS GETUG P07, a Multicenter Phase II Trial of Combined High-dose Salvage Radiotherapy and Hormone Therapy in Oligorecurrent Pelvic Node Relapses in Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oligorecurrent pelvic nodal relapse in prostatic cancer is a challenge for regional salvage treatments. Androgen depriving therapies (ADTs) are a mainstay in metastatic prostate cancer, and salvage pelvic radiotherapy may offer long ADT-free intervals for patients harboring regional nodal relapses. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of the combination of ADT and salvage radiotherapy in men with oligorecurrent pelvic node relapses of prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed an open-label, phase II trial of combined high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy and ADT (6 mo) in oligorecurrent (five or fewer) pelvic node relapses in prostate cancer, detected by fluorocholine positron-emission tomography computed tomography imaging. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was 2-yr progression-free survival defined as two consecutive prostate-specific antigen levels above the level at inclusion and/or clinical evidence of progression as per RECIST 1.1 and/or death from any cause. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between August 2014 and July 2016, 67 patients were recruited in 15 centers. Half of the patients had received prior prostatic irradiation. The median age was 67.7 yr. After a median follow-up of 49.4 mo, 2- and 3-yr progression-free survival rates were 81% and 58%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 45.3 mo. The median biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) was 25.9 mo. At 2 and 3 yr, the BRFS rates were 58% and 46%, respectively. Grade 2 + 2-yr genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 10% and 2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Combined high-dose salvage pelvic radiotherapy and ADT appeared to prolong tumor control in oligorecurrent pelvic node relapses in prostate cancer with limited toxicity. After 3 yr, nearly half of patients were in complete remission. Our study showed initial evidence of benefit, but a randomized trial is required to confirm this result. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes of combined high-dose salvage pelvic radiotherapy and 6-mo-long hormone therapy in oligorecurrent pelvic nodal relapse in prostatic cancer. We found that 46% of patients presenting with oligorecurrent pelvic node relapses in prostate cancer were in complete remission after 3 yr following combined treatment at the cost of limited toxicity.

Early Toxicity of a Phase 2 Trial of Combined Salvage Radiation Therapy and Hormone Therapy in Oligometastatic Pelvic Node Relapses of Prostate Cancer (OLIGOPELVIS GETUG P07).

PURPOSE: Limited pelvic nodal relapse of prostatic cancer is a paramount challenge for locoregional salvage treatments. Salvage whole pelvis radiation therapy as considered in the BLINDED trial is an attractive option, but there are concerns about its toxicity. This article describes early toxicity with the technique. METHODS AND MATERIALS: BLINDED was a prospective multicenter phase 2 trial investigating high-dose salvage pelvic irradiation with an additional dose to the fluorocholine-based positron emission tomography-positive pelvic lymph nodes, combined with 6-month androgen blockade. The prescribed dose was 54 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions with up to 66 Gy in 2.2 Gy fractions to the pathologic pelvic lymph nodes. Early toxicity was defined as toxicity until 1 year after radiation therapy. Patients quality of life was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaires (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25). RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were recruited in 15 French radiation oncology departments between August 2014 and July 2016. Seven were excluded before treatment because of violation of the inclusion criteria. The intention-to-treat analysis therefore included 67 patients. Half had received prior prostatic irradiation. Median age was 67.7 ± 6.5 years. Grade 2 acute urinary toxicity was observed in 9 of 67 patients (13.4%), and grade 2 1-year toxicity occurred in 4 of 67 patients (6%). Three patients (4.4%) had grade 3 urinary toxicity. Grade 2 acute digestive toxicity was observed in 10 of 67 patients (14.9%), and grade 2 1-year toxicity occurred in 4 of 67 patients (6%). Patients with prior prostate bed irradiation did not exhibit increased urinary or digestive toxicity. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaire scores at 1 year did not worsen significantly. CONCLUSIONS: The acute and 1-year toxicity of the BLINDED protocol was satisfactory, even in patients with a history of prostatic irradiation.

Effect of Adding Docetaxel to Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer With Rising Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels After Primary Local Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel is the standard of care in hormone-naive metastatic prostate cancer but is of uncertain benefit in a nonmetastatic, high-risk prostate cancer setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefit of ADT plus docetaxel in patients presenting with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after primary local therapy and high-risk factors but no evidence of metastatic disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, phase 3, randomized superiority trial comparing ADT plus docetaxel vs ADT alone enrolled patients from 28 centers in France between June 4, 2003, and September 25, 2007; final follow-up was conducted April 12, 2017, and analysis was performed May 2 to July 31, 2017. Patients had undergone primary local therapy for prostate cancer, were experiencing rising PSA levels, and were considered to be at high risk of metastatic disease. Stratification was by prior local therapy and PSA-level doubling time (≤6 vs >6 months), and intention-to-treat analysis was used. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ADT (1 year) plus docetaxel, 70 mg/m2 (every 3 weeks [6 cycles]), or ADT alone (1 year). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS). Secondary end points were PSA response, radiologic PFS, overall survival, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Overall, 254 patients were randomized (1:1) to the trial; median age, 64 years in the ADT plus docetaxel arm, 66 years in the ADT alone arm. At a median follow-up of 30.0 months, the median PSA-PFS was 20.3 (95% CI, 19.0-21.6) months in the ADT plus docetaxel arm vs 19.3 (95% CI, 18.2-20.8) months in the ADT alone arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.16; P = .31). At a median follow-up of 10.5 years, there was no significant between-arm difference in radiologic PFS (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.43; P = .88). Overall survival data were not mature. The most common grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxic effects in the ADT plus docetaxel arm were neutropenia (60 of 125 patients [48.0%]), febrile neutropenia (10 [8.0%]), and thrombocytopenia (4 [3.0%]). There was no significant between-arm difference in overall quality of life. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Compared with ADT alone, combined ADT plus docetaxel therapy with curative intent did not significantly improve PSA-PFS in patients with high-risk prostate cancer and rising PSA levels and no evidence of metastatic disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: French Health Products Safety Agency identifier: 030591; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00764166.

Daily Versus Weekly Prostate Cancer Image Guided Radiation Therapy: Phase 3 Multicenter Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal frequency of prostate cancer image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) has not yet been clearly identified. This study sought to compare the safety and efficacy of daily versus weekly IGRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3 randomized trial recruited patients with N0 localized prostate cancer. The total IGRT doses in the prostate ranged from 70 Gy to 80 Gy, sparing the lymph nodes. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to 2 prostate IGRT frequency groups: daily and weekly (ie, on days 1, 2, and 3 and then weekly). The primary outcome was 5-year recurrence-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival and toxicity. Post hoc analyses included biochemical progression-free interval, clinical progression-free interval, and other cancer-free interval. RESULTS: Between June 2007 and November 2012, 470 men from 21 centers were randomized into the 2 groups. Median follow-up was 4.1 years. There was no statistically significant difference in recurrence-free survival between the groups (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; P = .330). Overall survival was worse in the daily group than in the weekly group (HR = 2.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-4.37]; P = .042). Acute rectal bleeding (grade ≥1) was significantly lower in the daily group (6%) (n = 14) than in the weekly group (11%) (n = 26) (P = .014). Late rectal toxicity (grade ≥1) was significantly lower in the daily group (HR = 0.71 [95% CI, 0.53-0.96]; P = .027). Biochemical progression-free interval (HR = 0.45 [95% CI, 0.25 - 0.80]; P = .007) and clinical progression-free interval (HR = 0.50 [95% CI, 0.24-1.02]; P = .057) were better in the daily group, whereas other cancer-free interval was worse in the daily group (HR = 2.21 [95% CI, 1.10-4.44]; P = .026). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with weekly control, daily IGRT control in prostate cancer significantly improves biochemical progression-free and clinical progression-free interval, and rectal toxicity.

Stereotactic radiation therapy in the strategy of treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A study of the Getug group.

BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is usually considered radioresistant, but stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) may increase local disease control. This study aimed to assess the benefit of SRT in the management of metastatic RCC patients. METHODS: Data of all RCC patients who received SRT between 2008 and 2015 with curative intent were retrospectively collected in six French referral centres. Local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), time to systemic therapy (TTS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-eight patients treated with SRT for 252 RCC metastases (brain [n = 120]; spine [n = 75]; and others [n = 57]) were recensed. SRT was performed for oligoprogressive disease (101 patients), oligometastatic disease (80 patients) or residual tumour after a partial response to systemic treatment (7 patients). The median biologically effective dose was 78 Gy. For the whole population, local control rates at 6, 12 and 24 months were 87.5%, 82.9% and 77.6%, respectively; median PFS, LRFS, TTS and OS were 8.5, 23.2, 13.2 and 29.2 months, respectively. Among patients treated for oligoprogressive/oligometastatic disease, the median PFS, TTS, and OS were 8.6/7.6, 10.5/14.2 and 23.2/33.9 months, respectively. Among the 7 patients treated with SRT after partial response to systemic treatment, no relapse occurred for 3 of them after a median follow-up of 22 months. Acute and late severe toxicities were noted in 5 (2.6%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: SRT is effective and safe for oligometastatic and oligoprogressive RCC patients and may delay introduction or change of systemic therapy.

Impact of adjuvant hormonotherapy on radiation-induced breast fibrosis according to the individual radiosensitivity: results of a multicenter prospective French trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate risk of severe breast fibrosis occurrence in patients treated by breast-conserving surgery, adjuvant radiotherapy and hormonotherapy (HT) according to individual radiosensitivity (RILA assay). RESULTS: HT- and RILAhigh were the two independent factors associated with improved breast-fibrosis free survival (BFFS). BFFS rate at 36 months was lower in patients with RILAlow and HT+ than in patients with RILAhigh and HT- (75.8% and 100%, respectively; p = 0.004, hazard ratio 5.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-19.1]). Conversely, BFFS at 36 months was comparable in patients with RILAhigh and HT+ and in patients with RILAlow and HT- (89.8% and 93.5%, respectively; p = 0.39, hazard ratio 1.7 [95% CI 0.51-5.65]), showing that these two parameters influenced independently the occurrence of severe breast fibrosis. BFFS rate was not affected by the HT type (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor) and timing (concomitant or sequential with radiotherapy). CONCLUSIONS: HT and RILA score independently influenced BFFS rate at 36 months. Patients with RILAhigh and HT- presented an excellent BFFS at 36 months (100%). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Breast Fibrosis-Free Survival (BFFS) rate was assessed relative to RILA categories and to adjuvant HT use (HT+ and HT-, respectively) in a prospective multicentre study (NCT00893035) which enrolled 502 breast cancer patients (456 evaluable patients). Breast fibrosis was recorded according to CTCAE v3.0 grading scale; RILA score was defined according to two categories (<12%: RILAlow; ≥12%: RILAhigh).

Long-term results of breast cancer irradiation treatment with low-dose-rate external irradiation.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess beam therapy with low-dose-rate (LDR) external irradiation in a group of patients with breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This trial compared, from 1986 to 1989, patients with advanced breast cancer treated either by conventional fractionation or low-dose-rate (LDR) external radiotherapy (dose-rate 15 mGy/min, 5 sessions of 9 Gy delivered on 5 consecutive days). RESULTS: A total of 21 patients were included in the fractionated therapy arm. At follow-up 15 years after treatment, 7 local recurrences had occurred, 3 patients had died of cancer, 18 patients were alive, 10 were without evidence of disease, and 6 had evidence of disease. A total of 22 patients had been included in the LDR arm of the study. Of these, 11 had received a dose of 45 Gy; thereafter, in view of severe local reactions, the dose was reduced to 35 Gy. There was no local recurrence in patients who had received 45 Gy, although there were 2 local recurrences among the 11 patients after 35 Gy. The sequelae were severe in patients who received 45 Gy but were comparable to those observed in patients treated by fractionated radiotherapy who received 35 Gy. The higher efficacy of tumor control in patients treated by LDR irradiation as well as the lower tolerance of normal tissue are probably related to the lack of repopulation. CONCLUSION: Although the patient numbers in this study are limited, based on our study results we conclude that the data for LDR irradiation are encouraging and that further investigation is warranted.