Mapping the Current State of Canadian Medical School Oncology Interest Groups.

Cancer is the leading cause of mortality in Canada. Undergraduate medical education therefore must ensure adequate oncology education for all physicians and inspire some to make oncology their career specialty, in an effort to ensure public care needs are met in the future. Medical student-led oncology interest groups (OIGs) are a subset of specialty interest groups that supplement formal didactic and clinical learning to increase exposure to oncology and access to mentors. We conducted a survey of OIG leaders to ascertain their goals, activities, barriers, future directions, and perceptions about employment prospects. OIG leaders from 12/17 Canadian medical schools responded. Medical oncology was the most represented specialty in OIGs. Half of OIGs had faculty mentors. Self-reported goals were to increase exposure to oncology disciplines (n = 12), assist students with career selection (n = 11) and finding mentors (n = 7), and enhance oncology education (n = 10). OIGs held on average 5 events per year (range 1-12). Reported barriers were finding time to plan events, declining student interest over academic year, and limited funding. Many OIGs showed interest in more standardized resources about oncology disciplines (n = 9), access to presentations (n = 10), more funding (n = 7), and collaboration (n = 7). Employment in many oncology specialties was perceived poorly, and the most important career selection considerations were ease of employment, practice location, and partner/family preference. Our survey highlights common goals, barriers, and perceptions in OIG medical student leaders across Canada and provides guidance for future interventions.

DNA repair gene polymorphisms, tumor control, and treatment toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated with permanent implant prostate brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy and brachytherapy are common treatments for localized prostate cancer (PCa). However, very few studies evaluated the association of variations in DNA damage response genes and treatment outcomes and toxicity in brachytherapy-treated patients. PURPOSE: To evaluate the association of inherited germline variations in DNA repair-associated genes with tumor control and treatment toxicity in patients treated with low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDRB). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The cohort consists of 475 I-125 LDRB patients with a median follow-up of 51 months after seed implantation. Patients were genotyped for 215 haplotype tagging single nucleotide variations (htSNPs) in 29 candidate genes of DNA damage response and repair pathways. Their association with biochemical recurrence (BCR) was assessed using Cox regression models and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Linear regressions and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) between early and late International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) with htSNPs were used to evaluate the association with urinary toxicity. RESULTS: After adjustment for the established risk factors, six htSNPs in five genes were found to be significantly associated with an altered risk of BCR, with adjusted hazard ratios (HRadj. ) ranging between 3.6 and 11.1 (P < .05). Compared to carriers of the ERCC3 rs4150499C allele, patients homozygous for the T allele (n = 22) had a significant higher risk of BCR with a HR of 11.13 (IC95 = 3.9-32.0; P < .0001; q < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier survival curve revealed a mean BCR-free survival time reduced from 213 ± 7 to 99 ± 12 months (log-rank P < .0001) for homozygous T carriers compare to noncarriers. For late IPSS (>6 months after treatment), htSNP rs6544990 from MSH2 showed a statistically significant b-coefficient of 1.85 ± 0.52 (P < .001; q < 0.1). Homozygous carriers of the MSH2 rs6544990C allele (n = 62) had a mean late IPSS 3.6 points higher than patients homozygous for the A allele (n = 132). This difference was significant when tested by ANCOVA using pretreatment IPSS as a covariate (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests an association of the intronic variants of the DNA nucleotide excision repair ERCC3 and DNA mismatch repair MSH2 genes with elevated risk of BCR and late urinary toxicity respectively after LDRB. Further validation is required before translational clinical advances.

The prostate cancer risk stratification project: database construction and risk stratification outcome analysis.

This investigation reports on the biochemical and clinical outcomes of a newly created pan-Canadian Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification (ProCaRS) database developed by the Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada (GUROC). GUROC ProCaRS template-compliant data on 7974 patients who underwent radiotherapy were received from 7 unique databases. Descriptive analysis, Cox proportional hazards, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed using American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), prostate cancer-specific survival, and overall survival. Multivariable modeling for the primary ASTRO BFFS end point showed that age, prostate-specific antigen, T stage, and Gleason score and components such as hormonal therapy, and radiation treatment (brachytherapy with better outcome than external-beam) were predictive of outcome. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the existing GUROC and new NCCN classification system both showed good separation of all clinical outcome curves. The construction of a pan-Canadian database has informed important prostate cancer radiotherapy outcomes and risk stratification.

Differential outcomes of re-stratified high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiation therapy plus high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost.

Purpose: We report outcomes of high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients, initially classified according to a 3-tier NCCN classification system, treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (HDR-BT). Patients were analyzed based on a re-stratification of their risk grouping using CAPRA score and a newer 5-tier NCCN classification. Material and methods: 471 high-risk PCa patients treated with EBRT, HDR-BT, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) between 1999 and 2018 were included. Competing risk survival analyses to compare individuals with CAPRA scores < 6 vs. ≥ 6 for biochemical relapse (BCR) and metastasis incidence were conducted. Also, overall survival (OS) for both groups using Kaplan-Meier analysis was assessed. The same analyses were repeated using a 5-tier NCCN stratification comparing those classified as high-risk vs. very high-risk patients. Results: The median age was 71 years, and the median follow-up period was 72 months. The whole cohort received an EQD2 of 74 Gy or greater, with a median EQD2 of 106.89 Gy. Both a CAPRA score ≥ 6 and belonging to the NCCN very high-risk group were associated with BCR, with subdistribution hazard ratios (sHRs) of 3.04 (p = 0.015) and 2.53 (p = 0.013), respectively. For metastasis incidence, both the CAPRA and NCCN groups had similar sHRs of 2.60 (p = 0.094) and 2.71 (p = 0.037), respectively. For 10-year OS, patients with CAPRA score ≥ 6 and belonging to the NCCN very high-risk group presented similar HRs of 2.11 (p = 0.005) and 2.10 (p = 0.002). Conclusions: We showed that high-risk PCa patients classified according to the 3-tier NCCN system benefit from further stratification using the CAPRA score or the 5-tier NCCN stratification method. Patients with a CAPRA score ≥ 6 or classified as very high-risk demonstrate a higher hazard of BCR, metastasis, and death. These patients might benefit from further intensification of their investigations and treatment, based on ongoing research.

US-guided EM tracked system for HDR brachytherapy: A first in-men randomized study for whole prostate treatment.

PURPOSE: An electromagnetic tracking device (EMT) has been integrated in an HDR 3D ultrasound guidance system for prostate HDR. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of HDR workflows with and without EM tracking. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 58 patients with a 15 Gy HDR prostate boost were randomized in two arms and two operation room (OR) procedures using: (1) the EMT investigational device, and (2) the Oncentra prostate system (OCP). OR times were compared for both techniques. RESULTS: The overall procedure median time was about 20% shorter for EMT (63 min) compared to OCP (79 min). The US acquisition and contouring was longer for OCP compared to EMT (23 min vs. 16 min). The catheter reconstruction's median times were 23 min and 13 min for OCP and EMT respectively. For the automatic reconstruction with EMT, 62% of cases required no or few manual corrections. Using the EM technology in an OR environment was challenging. In some cases, interferences or the stiffness of the stylet introduced errors in the reconstruction of catheters. The last step was the dosimetry with median times of 11 min (OCP) and 15.5 min (EMT). Finally, it was observed that there was no learning curve associated with the introduction of this new technology. CONCLUSIONS: The EMT device offers an efficient solution for automatic catheter reconstruction for HDR prostate while reducing the possibility of mis-reconstructed catheters caused by issues of visualization in the US images. Because of that, the overall OR times was shorter when using the EMT system.

Testosterone recovery after androgen deprivation therapy in localised prostate cancer: Long-term data from two randomised trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To determine the rate and time of testosterone (T) recovery in patients (pts) with localised prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy plus 0-, 6-, 18- or 36-month of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 1230 pts with prostate cancer randomised into two phase III trials, serum T was measured at baseline, then regularly. T recovery rate was compared between normal vs. abnormal baseline T and with ADT duration with Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. A multivariable logistic regression model to predict the probability of recovering normal T was performed. RESULTS: Overall, 87.4 % (167/191), 75.9 % (293/386), 54.8 % (181/330) and 43.2 % (80/185) of pts, recovered normal T on the 0-, 6-, 18- or 36-month schedule, respectively (p < 0.001). In patients recovering normal T, the median time to T recovery increased with ADT duration ranging from 0.31, 1.64, 3.06 to 5.0 years for the 0-, 6-, 18- or 36-month schedules, respectively (p < 0.001) and was significantly faster for those with a normal T at baseline (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, older age and longer ADT duration are associated with a lower T recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Testosterone recovery rate after ADT depends on several factors including hormonal duration, normal baseline T, age and medical comorbidities. A longer ADT duration is the most important variable affecting T recovery. The data from this report might be a valuable tool to help physicians and patients in evaluating risks and benefits of ADT.

Noninferiority of Hypofractionated vs Conventional Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy for Genitourinary and Gastrointestinal Symptoms: The NRG-GU003 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: No prior trial has compared hypofractionated postprostatectomy radiotherapy (HYPORT) to conventionally fractionated postprostatectomy (COPORT) in patients primarily treated with prostatectomy. Objective: To determine if HYPORT is noninferior to COPORT for patient-reported genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms at 2 years. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, patients with a detectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA; ≥0.1 ng/mL) postprostatectomy with pT2/3pNX/0 disease or an undetectable PSA (<0.1 ng/mL) with either pT3 disease or pT2 disease with a positive surgical margin were recruited from 93 academic, community-based, and tertiary medical sites in the US and Canada. Between June 2017 and July 2018, a total of 296 patients were randomized. Data were analyzed in December 2020, with additional analyses occurring after as needed. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive 62.5 Gy in 25 fractions (HYPORT) or 66.6 Gy in 37 fractions (COPORT). Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary end points were the 2-year change in score from baseline for the bowel and urinary domains of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite Index questionnaire. Secondary objectives were to compare between arms freedom from biochemical failure, time to progression, local failure, regional failure, salvage therapy, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific survival, overall survival, and adverse events. Results: Of the 296 patients randomized (median [range] age, 65 [44-81] years; 100% male), 144 received HYPORT and 152 received COPORT. At the end of RT, the mean GU change scores among those in the HYPORT and COPORT arms were neither clinically significant nor different in statistical significance and remained so at 6 and 12 months. The mean (SD) GI change scores for HYPORT and COPORT were both clinically significant and different in statistical significance at the end of RT (-15.52 [18.43] and -7.06 [12.78], respectively; P < .001). However, the clinically and statistically significant differences in HYPORT and COPORT mean GI change scores were resolved at 6 and 12 months. The 24-month differences in mean GU and GI change scores for HYPORT were noninferior to COPORT using noninferiority margins of -5 and -6, respectively, rejecting the null hypothesis of inferiority (mean [SD] GU score: HYPORT, -5.01 [15.10] and COPORT, -4.07 [14.67]; P = .005; mean [SD] GI score: HYPORT, -4.17 [10.97] and COPORT, -1.41 [8.32]; P = .02). With a median follow-up for censored patients of 2.1 years, there was no difference between HYPORT vs COPORT for biochemical failure, defined as a PSA of 0.4 ng/mL or higher and rising (2-year rate, 12% vs 8%; P = .28). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, HYPORT was associated with greater patient-reported GI toxic effects compared with COPORT at the completion of RT, but both groups recovered to baseline levels within 6 months. At 2 years, HYPORT was noninferior to COPORT in terms of patient-reported GU or GI toxic effects. HYPORT is a new acceptable practice standard for patients receiving postprostatectomy radiotherapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03274687.

Treatment options for localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe treatment options for clinically localized prostate cancer: radical prostatectomy, prostate brachytherapy, external beam radiation, and active surveillance. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) outcomes presented are from non-randomized, cohort, and other comparisons trials (level II evidence). We describe PSA outcomes from Canadian centres when they are available. One small randomized controlled trial (level I evidence) in localized prostate cancer is available to compare radical prostatectomy with brachytherapy. MAIN MESSAGE: Treatment choice in prostate cancer is based on initial PSA level, clinical stage of disease, and Gleason score, together with baseline urinary function, comorbidities, and patient age. In this article, we describe patients' eligibility for and the common side effects of all treatment options. Prostate brachytherapy and active surveillance have evolved as new standard treatments of localized prostate cancer. We give a brief overview of the brachytherapy procedure, side effects, and PSA outcomes across Canada, as well as active surveillance guidelines. CONCLUSION: Prostate cancer treatment requires a multidisciplinary approach, with input from both urology and radiation oncology. Input from family physicians is often as important in helping guide patients through the treatment decision process.

A Monte Carlo dose recalculation pipeline for durable datasets: an I-125 LDR prostate brachytherapy use case.

Monte Carlo (MC) dose datasets are valuable for large-scale dosimetric studies. This work aims to build and validate a DICOM-compliant automated MC dose recalculation pipeline with an application to the production of I-125 low dose-rate prostate brachytherapy MC datasets. Built as a self-contained application, the recalculation pipeline ingested clinical DICOM-RT studies, reproduced the treatment into the Monte Carlo simulation, and outputted a traceable and durable dose distribution in the DICOM dose format. MC simulations with TG43-equivalent conditions using both TOPAS andegs_brachyMC codes were compared to TG43 calculations to validate the pipeline. The consistency of the pipeline when generating TG186 simulations was measured by comparing simulations made with both MC codes. Finally,egs_brachysimulations were run on a 240-patient cohort to simulate a large-scale application of the pipeline. Compared to line source TG43 calculations, simulations with both MC codes had more than 90% of voxels with a global difference under ±1%. Differences of 2.1% and less were seen in dosimetric indices when comparing TG186 simulations from both MC codes. The large-scale comparison ofegs_brachysimulations with treatment planning system dose calculation seen the same dose overestimation of TG43 calculations showed in previous studies. The MC dose recalculation pipeline built and validated against TG43 calculations in this work efficiently produced durable MC dose datasets. Since the dataset could reproduce previous dosimetric studies within 15 h at a rate of 20 cases per 25 min, the pipeline is a promising tool for future large-scale dosimetric studies.

GEC-ESTRO (ACROP)-ABS-CBG Consensus Brachytherapy Target Definition Guidelines for Recurrent Endometrial and Cervical Tumors in the Vagina.

PURPOSE: Representatives from the Gynecologic Groupe European de Curietherapie-European Society for Radiation Therapy and Oncology (GYN GEC-ESTRO), the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and the Canadian Brachytherapy Group (CBG) met to develop international consensus recommendations for target definitions for image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for vaginal recurrences of endometrial or cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventeen radiation oncologists and 2 medical physicists participated. Before an in-person meeting each participant anonymously contoured 3 recurrent endometrial/cervical cancer cases. Participants contoured the residual gross primary tumor volume (GTV-Tres), a high-risk clinical target volume (CTV-THR), and an intermediate-risk clinical target volume (CTV-TIR), on T2-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRIs). All contours were drawn using Falcon EduCase. Contours were reviewed at an in-person meeting during which a consensus document was created defining agreed-upon target definitions (Trial 1). After establishing these definitions, the group was sent one of the cases again (recurrent cervical cancer vaginal recurrence) and asked to contour the targets again (Trial 2). The Computerized Environment for Radiation Research (CERR) software (The Mathworks, Natwick, MA) was used to analyze the contours. Kappa statistics were generated to assess level of agreement between contours. A conformity index (CI), defined as the ratio between the intersection and union volume of a given pair of contours, was calculated. A simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) contour was created for the CTV-THR and CTV-TIR for the postmeeting case. RESULTS: Consensus definitions for GTV-Tres, CTV-THR, and CTV-TIR were established. Kappa statistics (Trial 1/Trial 2) for GTV-Tres, CTV-THR, and CTV-TIR were 0.536/0.583, 0.575/0.743 and 0.522/0.707. Kappa statistics for Trial 2 for the CTV-THR and CTV-TIR showed "substantial" agreement while the GTV-Tres remained at moderate agreement. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus provides recommendations to facilitate future collaborations for MRI-guided adaptive brachytherapy target definitions in endometrial/cervical vaginal recurrences.

Genomic Classifier Performance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 Randomized Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: Intermediate-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state with diverse treatment options. The 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (GC) retrospectively has shown to improve risk stratification in these patients. We assessed the performance of the GC in men with intermediate-risk disease enrolled in NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26 with updated follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After National Cancer Institute approval, biopsy slides were collected from NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26, a randomized phase 3 trial of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer randomized to 70.2 Gy versus 79.2 Gy of radiation therapy without androgen deprivation therapy. RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor foci to generate the locked 22-gene GC model. The primary endpoint for this ancillary project was disease progression (composite of biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and use of salvage therapy). Individual endpoints were also assessed. Fine-Gray or cause-specific Cox multivariable models were constructed adjusting for randomization arm and trial stratification factors. RESULTS: Two-hundred fifteen patient samples passed quality control for analysis. The median follow-up was 12.8 years (range, 2.4-17.7). On multivariable analysis, the 22-gene GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently prognostic for disease progression (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.26; P = .04), biochemical failure (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.37; P < .001), distant metastasis (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.55; P = .01), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (sHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.76; P < .001). Ten-year distant metastasis in GC low-risk patients was 4% compared with 16% for GC high-risk patients. In patients with lower GC scores, the 10-year difference in metastasis-free survival rate between arms was -7%, compared with 21% for higher GC patients (P-interaction = .04). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first validation of a biopsy-based gene expression classifier, assessing both its prognostic and predictive value, using data from a randomized phase 3 trial of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Decipher improves risk stratification and can aid in treatment decision-making in men with intermediate-risk disease.

Salvage prostate brachytherapy in radiorecurrent prostate cancer: An international Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Local recurrences after previous radiotherapy (RT) are increasingly being identified in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Salvage prostate brachytherapy (BT) is an effective and well tolerated treatment option. We sought to generate international consensus statements on the use and preferred technical considerations for salvage prostate BT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: International experts in salvage prostate BT were invited (n = 34) to participate. A three-round modified Delphi technique was utilized, with questions focused on patient- and cancer-specific criteria, type and technique of BT, and follow-up. An a priori threshold for consensus of ≥ 75% was set, with a majority opinion being ≥ 50%. RESULTS: Thirty international experts agreed to participate. Consensus was achieved for 56% (18/32) of statements. Consensus was achieved in several areas of patient selection: 1) A minimum of 2-3 years from initial RT to salvage BT; 2) MRI and PSMA PET should be obtained; and 3) Both targeted and systematic biopsies should be performed. Several areas did not reach consensus: 1) Maximum T stage/PSA at time of salvage; 2) Utilization/duration of ADT; 3) Appropriateness of combining local salvage with SABR for oligometastatic disease and 4) Repeating a second course of salvage BT. A majority opinion preferred High Dose-Rate salvage BT, and indicated that both focal and whole gland techniques could be appropriate. There was no single preferred dose/fractionation. CONCLUSION: Areas of consensus within our Delphi study may serve as practical advice for salvage prostate BT. Future research in salvage BT should address areas of controversy identified in our study.

Inter-observer evaluation of a GPU-based multicriteria optimization algorithm combined with plan navigation tools for HDR brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: Recently, a GPU-based multicriteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm was integrated in a graphical user interface (gMCO-GUI) that allowed real-time plan navigation through a set of Pareto-optimal plans for high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy. This work reports on the inter-observer evaluation of the gMCO algorithm into the clinical workflow. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty HDR brachytherapy prostate cancer patients were retrospectively replanned with the gMCO algorithm. The reference clinical plans were each generated by experienced physicists using inverse planning followed by graphical optimization and approved by a radiation oncologist (RO). Each case was replanned with the gMCO algorithm by generating 2000 Pareto-optimal plans with four different objective functions. Two physicists were asked to rank the objective functions according to their preferences by choosing one preferred plan for each plans pool and ranking them using gMCO-GUI. The optimized dwell positions and dwell times of the gMCO plans that were ranked first were exported to Oncentra Prostate where a blinded comparison of the gMCO plans with the clinical plans was conducted by three ROs. RESULTS: The median planning time of the two physicists was 9 min. Both physicists preferred the objective function with target sub-regions to cover specific target regions. Regarding the blinded comparison, the gMCO plans were preferred 19, 17, and 12 times by the three ROs, in which eight gMCO plans were unanimously preferred compared with the clinical plans. CONCLUSIONS: The plan quality and the planning time were similar between the two physicists and within what is observed in the clinic. Moreover, the gMCO plans evaluated favorably by ROs compared to the reference clinical plans.

Advantages of TRUS-based delineation for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy planning.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the variability of prostate contours delineated on computed tomography (CT) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A TRUS-based high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy procedure was introduced in 2016 in our center. The first thirty patients were additionally imaged with CT immediately after the treatment. In 2018, four different radiation oncologists (ROs: 1, 2, 3, 4) contoured the prostate on both modalities. A volume comparison was performed between CT and TRUS imaging. Using prostate gold fiducial makers, a rigid registration between CT and TRUS was done in 20 of the 30 patients studied. Jaccard index (JI) was computed to evaluate the inter-observer volume delineation agreement. RESULTS: The ratio of TRUS/CT volumes was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.79-0.87%). The mean JI was 87% for CT and 92% for TRUS, when comparing all four ROs; CT and TRUS JIs were significantly different (p < 0.001). The mean JI for the prostate on CT was significantly more consistent (p < 0.001) when comparing RO1, 2, and 3 together (RO1-2, RO1-3, and RO2-3; mean = 89%) than when comparing RO4 (newest to clinical practice) to others (RO1-4, RO2-4, and RO3-4; mean = 85%). For TRUS planning, the mean JI was not significantly different (p > 0.05) when comparing all ROs. CONCLUSIONS: The inter-observer and intra-observer variability were statistically significantly smaller on TRUS compared to CT-based planning, despite varying ROs clinical experiences. The superior soft tissue contrast offered by TRUS obviates the effect of the ROs experience on prostate contour volumes and enables more reproducible prostate delineation.

Salvage Low-Dose-Rate Prostate Brachytherapy: Clinical Outcomes of a Phase 2 Trial for Local Recurrence after External Beam Radiation Therapy (NRG Oncology/RTOG 0526).

PURPOSE: We report efficacy of a prospective phase 2 trial (NCT00450411) of salvage low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (BT) for local failure (LF) after prior external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with minimum 5-years' follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients had low/intermediate risk prostate cancer (PCa) before EBRT and biopsy-proven LF >30 months after EBRT, with prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/mL and no regional/distant disease. The primary endpoint, late gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0) grade ≥3 were 14%. With minimum 5-year follow-up after salvage BT, secondary clinical outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS; includes death from any cause), disease-specific survival, and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and modelled using Cox proportional hazards regression. Local tumor progression (ie, LF), distant failure (DF), and biochemical failure (BF) were estimated using cumulative incidence. Time to LF, DF, and BF were modeled by cause-specific Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: From May 2007 to January 2014, 20 centers registered 100 patients (92 analyzable). Median follow-up is 6.7 years (range, 0.3-11.2); median age 70 years (range, 55-82); median prior EBRT dose 74 Gy [interquartile range (IQR):70 - 76] at a median of 85 months prior (IQR 60-119 months). Androgen deprivation was combined with salvage BT in 16%. Ten-year OS is 70% [95% confidence interval (CI) 58% - 83%]. Nineteen patients died (5 PCa, 10 other, 4 unknown). Ten-year failure rates are local 5% (95% CI, 1-11), distant 19% (95% CI, 10-29), and biochemical 46% (95% CI, 34-57). DFS is 61% at 5 years and 33% at 10 years. No baseline characteristic was significantly associated with any clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective multicenter trial reporting outcomes of salvage LDR BT for LF after EBRT. Five-year freedom from BF is 68%, comparable to other salvage modalities. Although further LF is rare (5%), BF climbs to 46% by 10 years.

Quality of Life Implications of Dose-Escalated External Beam Radiation for Localized Prostate Cancer: Results of a Prospective Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trial, NRG/RTOG 0126.

PURPOSE: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) dose escalation has been tested in multiple prospective trials. However, the impact on patient reported outcomes (PROs) associated with higher doses of EBRT remain poorly understood. We sought to assess the differences in PROs between men treated with a dose of 70.2 Gy versus 79.2 Gy of EBRT for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The phase 3 clinical trial RTOG 0126 randomized 1532 patients with prostate cancer between March 2002 and August 2008 to 79.2 Gy over 44 fractions versus 70.2 Gy over 39 fractions. Eligible patients participated in the PRO data collection. PROs completed included the International Index of Erectile Function Questionnaire (IIEF), Functional Alterations due to Changes in Elimination (FACE), and the Spitzer Quality of Life Index (SQLI). The timepoints for the IIEF were collected pre-entry and at 6, 12, and 24 months. The FACE and SQLI were collected pre-entry and at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The impact of EBRT dose to normal structures (penile bulb, rectum, and bladder) on PROs was also examined. Mixed effects models were used to analyze trends across time. RESULTS: In total, 1144 patients completed baseline IIEF forms and of these, 56%, 64%, and 61% completed the IIEF at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively; 1123 patients completed the FACE score at baseline and 50%, 61%, 73%, 61%, and 65% completed all 15 items for the FACE metric at timepoints of 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. Erectile dysfunction at 12 months based on the single question was not significantly different between arms (38.1% for the standard dose radiation therapy arm vs 49.7% for the dose escalated radiation therapy arm; P = .051). Treatment arm (70.2 vs 79.2) had no significant impact on any PRO metrics measured across all collected domains. Comprehensive dosimetric analyses are presented and reveal multiple significant differences to regional organs at risk. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with PRO data collection was lower than anticipated in this phase 3 trial. Examining the available data, dose escalated EBRT did not appear to be associated with any detriment to PROs across numerous prospectively collected domains. These data, notwithstanding limitations, add to our understanding of the implications of EBRT dose escalation in prostate cancer. Furthermore, these results illustrate challenges associated with PRO data collection.

Commissioning of an intra-operative US guided prostate HDR system integrating an EM tracking technology.

PURPOSE: Ultrasound-based planning for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy is commonly used in the clinic, mainly because it offers fast real-time image-guided capability at a relatively low cost. The main difficulty with US planning is the catheter reconstruction due to artefacts (from multiple catheters) and echogenicity. Electromagnetic tracking (EMT) system offers a fast and accurate solution for automatic reconstruction of catheters using the EMT technology. In this study, the commissioning and performance evaluation of the new real-time prostate high-dose-rate brachytherapy investigational system from Philips Disease Management Solutions integrating EMT was performed before its clinical integration. METHOD AND MATERIALS: The Philips' clinical investigational system includes a treatment planning software (TPS) that was commissioned based on AAPM TG53 and TG56 recommendations for the use of TPS in brachytherapy. First, the CIRS - model 045A - QA phantom was used to evaluate the ultrasound (US) image quality and 3D image handling. Distances, volumes, and dimensions of the structures inside the phantom were measured and compared to the actual values. The calibration reproducibility and accuracy of the electromagnetic (EM) sensor used to track the US probe (rotation and translation) were performed using a specifically designed QA tool mounted on the probe and immersed in a salted water tank. This was performed for 3 different B&K 8848 US probes to evaluate the sensitivity of EM calibration to the probe geometric properties (manufacturing process). The new TPS performance was compared to that in OncentraBrachy (OcB) V4.5.5 (Elekta) using 30 clinical cases as part of a retrospective study. Following the system commissioning, clinical workflows were explored; tests were performed with the brachytherapy team on phantoms and finally implemented in the clinic. RESULTS: US image quality evaluation showed a mean difference with actual dimensions (lengths, widths and distances) of 0.4 mm (±0.3 mm) and mean difference in volume sizes of 0.2 cc (±0.2 cc). Then, the calibration of the US-to-EM coordinate system was performed for 3 different probes. For each probe, 3 measurements were acquired for every position of the calibration tool and measurements were repeated 3 times for a total of 27 measurements per probe per plane. The error was slightly higher in transverse mode compared to sagittal mode with mean values of 0.6 ± 0.2 mm and 0.3 ± 0.1 mm respectively. 30 clinical cases were used to compare the new TPS performance to OcB (IPSA). Optimized plans obtained with both systems were all clinically acceptable, but the plans from the Philips system have slightly higher V150% values, V200% values and dose to organs at risk. In the case of organs at risk, plans could have been manually modified to reduce the dose. Philips' system had a larger number of active dwell positions and longer treatment times. CONCLUSIONS: The first clinical version of Philips' system was proven to be stable, accurate and precise. The fully integrated EM tracking technology opens the way for automated catheter reconstruction and on-the-fly dynamical replanning.

PSA outcomes and late toxicity of single-fraction HDR brachytherapy and LDR brachytherapy as monotherapy in localized prostate cancer: A phase 2 randomized pilot study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the PSA outcomes and the late patient's reported health related quality of life (HRQOL) and toxicity after single-fraction High-Dose-Rate brachytherapy (HDRB) and Low-Dose-Rate brachytherapy (LDRB) for prostate cancer. METHODS: Men with low and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer across 3 centres were randomized between monotherapy brachytherapy with either Iodine-125 LDRB or 19 Gy single-fraction HDRB. Biochemical outcomes were evaluated using the Phoenix definition, PSA nadir and absolute PSA value <0.4 ng/mL. Toxicities and HRQOL were recorded at 24 and 36 months. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients were randomized, 15 in the LDRB arm and 16 patients in the HDRB arm. After a median follow-up of 45(36-53) months, 3 patients in the HDRB arm experienced biochemical failure (p = 0.092). Nineteen Gy single-fraction HDRB was associated with significantly higher PSA nadir compared to LDRB (1.02 ± 0.66vs 0.25 ± 0.39, p < 0.0001). Moreover, a significantly larger proportion of patients in the LDRB group had a PSA <0.4 ng/mL (13/15 vs 2/16, p < 0.0001). For late Genito-Urinary, Gastro-Intestinal, and sexual toxicities at 24 and 36 months, no significant differences were found between the 2 arms. As for HRQOL, the IPSS and EPIC-26 urinary irritative score were significantly better for patients treated with HDRB over the first 36 months post-treatment (p = 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively), reflecting superior HRQOL. CONCLUSION: HDRB resulted in superior HRQOL in the irritative urinary domain compared to LDRB. PSA nadir was significantly lower in the LDRB group and a higher proportion of patients in the LDRB group reached PSA <0.4 ng/mL.

Optimizing Treatment in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: To identify patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC) benefiting from de-escalation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or dose escalated radiation therapy (DERT), we performed a secondary analysis of a phase 3 trial by measuring biochemical failure (BF), distant metastases, prostate cancer-specific mortality, overall survival (OS), and distant metastases-free survival (DMFS) rates according to prognostic intermediate risk factors (IRF). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The initial trial randomized 600 patients with IRPC to a 3-arm trial with 200 patients per arm, consisting of 6 months of ADT plus 70 Gy radiation therapy (ADT + RT70) versus ADT plus a DERT of 76 Gy (ADT + DERT76) versus DERT of 76 Gy alone (DERT76). We performed an analysis based on IRF: clinical stage, prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, percentage of positive biopsy cores (PBC) ≥50%, and Gleason pattern. Patients were allocated to 2 groups: favorable intermediate risk (FIR), defined as patients with only 1 IRF without Gleason pattern 4 + 3 or PBC ≥50%; and unfavorable intermediate risk (UIR), defined as all other patients. BF, distant metastases, prostate cancer-specific mortality, OS, and DMFS were compared between FIR and UIR. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 11.3 years (interquartile range, 10.9-11.7). In the FIR cohort, BF and OS were not significantly different between arms. UIR patients had significantly worse DMFS (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.61 [1.20-2.15]; P = .026) and OS (1.51 [1.12-2.04]; P = .0495) and a nonsignificant higher cumulative incidence of BF rate (1.55 [0.98-2.47]; P = .08). In UIR patients, a significant improvement in BF was seen in the arms receiving ADT compared to DERT76 alone. On multivariable analysis, Gleason pattern 4 + 3 and prostate-specific antigen >10 ng/mL independently affected BF and OS, regardless of the treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: In IRPC, therapeutic optimization appears possible. To avoid ADT side effects, DERT76 alone appears sufficient in patients harboring only 1 risk factor without Gleason pattern 4 + 3 and PBC ≥50% (FIR). All other UIR patients seem to benefit from ADT + DERT76.

Androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: A randomised phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with radiotherapy (RT) in intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC) remains controversial, particularly in patients receiving dose-escalated RT (DERT). We compared outcomes between patients with IRPC treated with ADT and two different doses of RT vs. RT alone. METHODS: From December 2000 to September 2010, 600 patients with IRPC were randomised to a three-arm trial consisting of 6 months of ADT plus RT 70 Gy (ADT + RT70) vs. ADT plus a DERT of 76 Gy (ADT + DERT76) vs. DERT of 76 Gy alone (DERT76). Primary end-point was biochemical failure (BF), and secondary end-points were overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RT toxicity was assessed by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria. FINDINGS: With a median follow-up of 11.3 years (interquartile range: 10.9-11.7), patients receiving DERT76 alone, compared with patients receiving ADT + RT70 and ADT + DERT76, had higher rates of BF (32%, 18% and 14%, respectively, p < 0.001), higher rates of prostate cancer progression (12%, 4.5% and 3.3%, respectively, p = 0.001) and more deaths due to prostate cancer (6.5%, 3.0% and 1.5%, respectively, p = 0.03) with no significant difference seen between ADT + RT70 and ADT + DERT76. There was no significant difference in OS between the 3 arms. A higher dose of RT (76 Gy) increased late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity grade ≥ II compared with lower dose (70 Gy) (16% vs 5.3%, p < 0.001) with no statistical difference for late genitourinary toxicity. INTERPRETATION: In IRPC, the addition of 6 months of ADT to RT70 or DERT76 significantly improves BF and appears to decrease the risk of death from prostate cancer compared with DERT76 alone with no difference in OS. In the setting of IRPC, ADT plus RT 70 Gy yields effective disease control with a better GI toxicity profile. Clinicaltrials.gov#NCT00223145.