Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Impacts the Prognostic Effect of Surgical Margin Status in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Many studies show significantly improved survival after R0 resection compared with R1 resection in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC); however, the effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT) on this association is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of positive surgical margins (SMs) after NACRT compared with upfront surgery + adjuvant therapy in PAC. METHODS: All cases of surgically resected PAC at a single institution were reviewed from 1996 to 2014; patients treated with palliative intent, metastatic disease, and biliary/ampullary tumors were excluded. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 300 patients were included; 134 patients received NACRT with concurrent 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine followed by surgery, and 166 patients received upfront surgery (+ adjuvant chemotherapy in 72% of patients and RT in 65%); 31% of both groups had a positive SM (+SM). The median OS for patients with a +SM or negative SM (-SM) was 26.6 and 31.6 months, respectively for NACRT, and 12.0 and 24.5 months, respectively, for upfront surgery. OS was significantly improved with -SM compared with +SM in both groups (p = 0.006). When resection yielded +SM, NACRT patients had improved OS compared with upfront surgery patients (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, +SM in the upfront surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.04-4.24; p < 0.001) and older age (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.03, per year; p = 0.007) predicted worse OS. +SM in the NACRT group was not associated with worse OS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.72-1.65; p = 0.70). CONCLUSION: Patients with a positive margin after NACRT and surgery had longer survival compared with patients with a positive margin after upfront surgery. NACRT should be strongly considered for patients at high risk of R1 resections.

Effect of time from diagnosis to start of radiotherapy on children with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma.

BACKGROUND: Children with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) continue to have poor outcomes, and radiotherapy (RT) is the only temporarily effective treatment. In this retrospective analysis, we studied the effect of time from diagnosis to start of RT on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in children with DIPG. METHODS: Records of children (n = 95) with DIPG treated with RT at a single institution between April 1999 and September 2009 were analyzed. RT was delivered at doses of 54.0-55.8 Gy at 1.8 Gy per fraction, and children were followed prospectively. The effect of gender, race, interruption during treatment course, age at diagnosis, duration of symptoms prior to diagnosis, use of protocol-based chemotherapy, and time from diagnosis to initiation of RT on EFS and OS was assessed by the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Time as a continuous variable from diagnosis to start of RT did not affect outcome. Time dichotomized to ≤14 days significantly affected OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.70, P = 0.014) and race other than white or black affected EFS (HR = 2.32, P = 0.017). The 95 patients had a 6-month EFS and OS of 60 ± 5% and 94.7 ± 2.3%, respectively, and a 12-month EFS and OS of 11.6 ± 3.1% and 49.5 ± 5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Time as a continuous variable did not affect OS or EFS in our cohort; however, children treated within 2 weeks of diagnosis had poor outcomes. Although rapid initiation of RT is desirable, our findings do not support intensive efforts aimed at shortening delays from diagnosis to start of RT.

Factors Associated with Reconstruction Failure and Major Complications After Postmastectomy Radiation to a Reconstructed Breast.

PURPOSE: Postmastectomy radiation therapy is known to increase risk of complications in the reconstruction setting. We aim to identify the variables associated with reconstruction failure and other major complications. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospectively collected institutional database was queried for patients with up to stage IIIC breast cancer treated from 2000 to 2017, undergoing mastectomy, immediate implant or autologous tissue reconstruction, and radiation to the reconstructed breast within 1 year of surgery. Reconstruction failure was defined as complication requiring surgical revision or implant removal. Additional major complications were defined as any infection, contracture, necrosis, or fibrosis. Covariates of interest included age, body mass index, smoking status, stage, hormone receptor and HER2 status, systemic therapy timing, radiation technique, nodal irradiation, and interval between surgery and start of postmastectomy radiation therapy. Differences in complication rates were assessed with χ² or Fisher exact tests. Competing risk regression was used to estimate hazard ratios; covariates were included one at a time to avoid over adjustment. RESULTS: A total of 206 reconstructed breasts in 202 patients resulted from our initial query, with 139 treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and 67 treated with conventional radiation therapy (CRT). Median follow-up was 45 months (range, 4-210 months); patient cohorts were generally similar. Eight patients were excluded from toxicity analysis for insufficient follow-up (<2 years). Overall, reconstruction failure and major complication rates were significantly lower in the IMRT group. Reconstruction failure rates were 3.0% for IMRT versus 16.4% for CRT (P = .002), and major complication rates were 6.8% for IMRT versus 24.6% for CRT (P < .001). On univariate analysis, CRT was significantly predictive of implant failure (hazard ratio, 5.54; P = .003) and increased complication rates (hazard ratio, 3.83; P = .001). Significance persisted on multivariable analysis. Survival outcomes were similar, with no difference in 2 year overall survival (P = .12) and local recurrence (P = .41). CONCLUSIONS: Using IMRT may improve reconstruction outcomes over CRT, with significantly lower reconstruction failure and complication rates without compromising local control or survival.

A dosimetric analysis of rectal hydrogel spacer use in patients with recurrent prostate cancer undergoing salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: We hypothesize rectal hydrogel spacer (RHS) improves rectal dosimetry in patients undergoing salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) for intact, recurrent prostate cancer (PC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospectively collected institutional database was queried for recurrent PC patients treated with salvage HDR-BT from September 2015 to November 2021. Patients were offered RHS beginning June 2019. Dosimetric variables were compared between RHS and no-RHS groups for the average of two fractions using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Primary outcomes were rectal volume receiving 75% of prescription dose (V75%) and prostate volume receiving 100% of prescription dose (V100%). Generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was used to evaluate the association between other planning variables and rectal V75%. RESULTS: Forty-one PC patients received salvage HDR-BT, of whom 20 had RHS. All patients received 2400cGy in 2 fractions. Median RHS volume was 6.2cm3 (Standard deviation [SD]: ± 3.5cm3). Median follow-up was 4 months and 17 months in the RHS and no-RHS groups, respectively. Median rectal V75% with and without RHS were 0.0cm3 (IQR: 0.0-0.0cm3) and 0.06cm3 (IQR: 0.0-0.14cm3), respectively (p<0.001). Median prostate V100% with and without RHS were 98.55% (IQR: 97.86-99.22%) and 97.78% (IQR: 97.50-98.18%), respectively (p = 0.007). RHS, rectum, and prostate volumes did not significantly affect rectal V75% per GEE modeling. There was 10% G1-2 and 5% G3 rectal toxicity in RHS group. There was 9.5% G1-2 and no G3+ rectal toxicities in the no-RHS group. CONCLUSIONS: Absolute improvement in rectal V75% and prostate V100% was significant with RHS in PC patients undergoing salvage HDR-BT, but clinical benefit is marginal.

Long-Term Results of a Phase 3 Randomized Prospective Trial of Erectile Tissue-Sparing Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Men With Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether limiting the doses delivered to the penile bulb (PB) and corporal bodies with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) preserves erectile function compared with standard IMRT in men with prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 117 patients with low- to intermediate-risk, clinical T1a-T2c prostate adenocarcinoma were enrolled in a single-institution, prospective, single-blind, phase 3 randomized trial. All received definitive IMRT to 74 to 80 Gy in 37 to 40 fractions and standard IMRT (s-IMRT) or erectile tissue-sparing IMRT (ETS-IMRT), which placed additional planning constraints that limited the D90 to the penile bulb and corporal bodies to ≤15 Gy and ≤7 Gy, respectively. Erectile potency was assessed with components of the International Index of Erectile Function and phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5) medication records. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients received ETS-IMRT, and 54 received s-IMRT; 1 patient did not receive radiation therapy. Before treatment, all patients reported erectile potency. No patients received androgen deprivation therapy. In the intention-to-treat analysis, treatment arms did not differ in potency preservation at 24 months (37.1% ETS-IMRT vs 31.5% s-IMRT, P = .53). Of 85 evaluable patients with International Index of Erectile Function and PDE5 medication follow-up, erectile potency was seen in 47.9% of patients in the ETS-IMRT arm and 46.0% of patients in the s-IMRT arm (P = .86). PDE5 inhibitors were initiated in 41.7% of ETS-IMRT patients and 35.1% of s-IMRT patients (P = .54). Among all patients enrolled, there was no difference in freedom from biochemical failure between those treated with ETS-IMRT and s-IMRT (5-year 91.8% vs 90.7%, respectively, P = .77), with a median follow-up of 7.4 years. There were no differences in acute or late gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicity. An unplanned per-protocol analysis demonstrated no differences in potency preservation or secondary endpoints between patients who exceeded erectile tissue-sparing constraints and those who met constraints, although power was limited by attrition and unplanned dosimetric crossover. CONCLUSIONS: ETS-IMRT that strictly limits dose to the penile bulb and corporal bodies is safe and feasible. Use of this planning technique did not show an effect on potency preservation outcomes at 2 years, though power to detect a difference was limited.

Early Prostate-Specific Antigen Kinetics for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated With Definitive Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: This study used a patient-specific model to characterize and compare ideal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer after definitive radiation treatment with conventionally fractionated, hypofractionated, stereotactic body radiation therapy, or brachytherapy, both high-dose and low-dose rate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective analysis includes low- and intermediate-risk patients with prostate cancer treated between 1998 and 2018 at an National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. Demographics and treatment characteristics were prospectively collected. Patients had at least 2 PSA measurements within 24 months of treatment and were free from biochemical recurrence. The incidence of, time to, and risk factors for PSA nadir (nPSA) and bounce (bPSA) were analyzed at 24 months after radiation therapy. Ideal PSA kinetics were characterized for each modality and compared. RESULTS: Of 1042 patients, 45% had low-risk cancer, 37% favorable intermediate risk, and 19% unfavorable intermediate risk. nPSAs were higher for ablative modalities, both as absolute nPSA and relative to initial PSA. Median time to nPSA ranged from 14.8 to 17.1 months. Over 50% treated with nonablative therapy (conventionally fractionated, hypofractionated, and low-dose rate) reached an nPSA threshold of ≤0.5 ng/mL compared with 23% of stereotactic body radiation therapy and 33% of high-dose rate cohorts. The incidence of bPSA was 13.3% and not affected by treatment modality, Gleason score, or prostate volume. PSA decay rate was faster for ablative therapies in the 6- to 24-month period. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of PSA within 24 months after radiation therapy revealed ablative therapies are associated with a latent PSA response and higher nPSA. Multivariable logistics modeling revealed younger age, initial PSA above the median, presence of bPSA, and ablative therapy as predictors for not achieving nPSA ≤0.5 ng/mL. PSA decay rate appears to be faster in ablative therapies after a latent period. Understanding the different PSA kinetic profiles is necessary to assess treatment response and survey for disease recurrence.

A Pooled Toxicity Analysis of Moderately Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Early-Stage Prostate Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Data comparing moderately hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) are lacking. We aim to compare late toxicity profiles of patients with early-stage prostate cancer treated with moderately hypofractionated PBT and IMRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This multi-institutional analysis included patients with low- or intermediate-risk biopsy-proven prostate adenocarcinoma from 7 tertiary referral centers treated from 1998 to 2018. All patients were treated with moderately hypofractionated radiation, defined as 250 to 300 cGy per daily fraction given for 4 to 6 weeks, and stratified by use of IMRT or PBT. Primary outcomes were late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Adjusted toxicity rates were calculated using inverse probability of treatment weighting, accounting for race, National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, age, pretreatment International Prostate Symptom Score (GU only), and anticoagulant use (GI only). RESULTS: A total of 1850 patients were included: 1282 IMRT (median follow-up 80.0 months) and 568 PBT (median follow-up 43.9 months). Overall toxicity rates were low, with the majority of patients experiencing no late GU (56.6%, n = 1048) or late GI (74.4%, n = 1377) toxicity. No difference was seen in the rates of late toxicity between the groups, with late grade 3+ GU toxicity of 2.0% versus 3.9% (odds ratio [OR] 0.47; 95% confidence interval 0.17-1.28) and late grade 2+ GI toxicity of 14.6% versus 4.7% (OR 2.69; confidence interval 0.80-9.05) for the PBT and IMRT cohorts, respectively. On multivariable analysis, no factors were significantly predictive of GU toxicity, and only anticoagulant use was significantly predictive of GI toxicity (OR 1.90; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, multi-institutional analysis of 1850 patients with early-stage prostate cancer, treatment with moderately hypofractionated IMRT and PBT resulted in low rates of toxicity. No difference was seen in late GI and GU toxicity between the modalities during long-term follow-up. Both treatments are safe and well tolerated.

Prostate-specific antigen kinetics and biochemical control following stereotactic body radiation therapy, high dose rate brachytherapy, and low dose rate brachytherapy: A multi-institutional analysis of 3502 patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) and high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) are ablative-intent radiotherapy options for prostate cancer (PCa). These vary considerably in dose delivery, which may impact post-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) patterns and biochemical control. We compared PSA kinetics between SBRT, HDR-BT, and LDR-BT, and assessed their relationships to biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective PSA data were analyzed for 3502 men with low-risk (n = 2223; 63.5%), favorable intermediate-risk (n = 869; 24.8%), and unfavorable intermediate-risk (n = 410; 11.7%) PCa treated with SBRT (n = 1716; 49.0%), HDR-BT (n = 512; 14.6%), or LDR-BT (n = 1274; 36.4%) without upfront androgen deprivation therapy at 10 institutions from 1990 to 2017. We compared nadir PSA (nPSA), time to nPSA, achievement of nPSA <0.2 ng/mL and <0.5 ng/mL, rates of nPSA <0.4 ng/mL at 4 years, and BCRFS. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 72 months. Median nPSA and nPSA <0.2 ng/mL were stratified by risk group (interaction p ≤ 0.001). Median nPSA and time to nPSA were 0.2 ng/mL at 44 months after SBRT, 0.1-0.2 ng/mL at 37 months after HDR-BT, and 0.01-0.2 ng/mL at 51 months after LDR-BT (mean log nPSA p ≤ 0.009 for LDR-BT vs. SBRT or HDR-BT for low/favorable intermediate-risk). There were no differences in nPSA <0.4 ng/mL at 4 years (p ≥ 0.51). BCRFS was similar for all three modalities (p ≥ 0.27). Continued PSA decay beyond 4 years was predictive of durable biochemical control. CONCLUSION: LDR-BT led to lower nPSAs with longer continued decay compared to SBRT and HDR-BT, but no differences in BCRFS.