Impact of prostate position-based image-guidance in intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The long-term clinical impact of prostate position-based image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for localized prostate cancer remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared clinical outcomes following intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with cone-beam computed tomography-based prostate position-based IGRT (P-IGRT) or without P-IGRT (non-P-IGRT). From June 2011, we applied P-IGRT in IMRT for intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) (D'Amico risk classification) (76 Gy in 38 fractions, with smaller margins). Clinical outcomes of patients who received P-IGRT between June 2011 and June 2019 were retrospectively compared with those of patients with IR PCa who received IMRT without P-IGRT between October 2002 and May 2011 in our institution (74 Gy in 37 fractions). RESULTS: A total of 222 consecutive patients were analyzed: 114 in the P-IGRT cohort and 108 in the non-P-IGRT cohort. The median follow-up period after IMRT was 7.1 years for the P-IGRT cohort and 10.8 years for the non-P-IGRT cohort. The biochemical failure-free rate was significantly better in the P-IGRT cohort (94.9% for the P-IGRT cohort vs 82.7% for the non-P-IGRT cohort at 10 years, p = 0.041). The rate of rectal bleeding which needs intervention including the use of suppositories was significantly lower in the P-IGRT cohort (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of P-IGRT with higher doses and smaller margins was correlated with significantly better biochemical control, and a lower incidence of rectal bleeding in IMRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The enhanced accuracy using P-IGRT has the potential to independently improve disease control and reduce late rectal bleeding.

Clinical factors predicting the outcome of salvage radiotherapy for patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear which patients with biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy are most suitable for salvage radiotherapy. We evaluated the parameters related to outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent salvage therapy for biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy between 2005 and 2019. This study aimed to evaluate biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) after salvage radiotherapy and elucidate the parameters associated with bRFS. The bRFS rate was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the parameters associated with bRFS were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: This study included 67 patients treated with salvage radiotherapy with a median age of 67 years at salvage radiotherapy. The median follow-up period after salvage radiotherapy was 7.3 years. The 5-year bRFS rate following salvage radiotherapy was 47.1%. Univariate analysis showed that PSA doubling time < 6 months, positive surgical margin, and pathological Gleason score ≥ 8 were significantly associated with shorter bRFS (p < 0.001, p = 0.036, p = 0.047, respectively). Multivariable analysis showed that a PSA doubling time < 6 months and positive surgical margins were significantly associated with shorter bRFS (p = 0.001 and p = 0.018, respectively). No serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In our hospital, approximately half of the patients are under long-term control with salvage radiotherapy. A PSA doubling time of < 6 months and positive surgical margins were suggested to be associated with poor outcomes of salvage radiotherapy.

Significance of androgen-deprivation therapy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with high-dose radiotherapy: A literature review.

The real-world benefits of adding androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and its optimal duration when combined with current standard high-dose radiation therapy (RT) remain unknown. We aimed to assess the efficacy of and toxicities associated with ADT in the setting of combination with high-dose RT for intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa). This article is a modified and detailed version of the commentary on Clinical Question 8 described in the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer (ver. 2023). A qualitative systematic review was performed according to the Minds Guide. All relevant published studies between September 2010 and August 2020, which assessed the outcomes of IR or HR PCa treated with high-dose RT, were screened using two databases (PubMed and ICHUSHI). A total of 41 studies were included in this systematic review, mostly consisting of retrospective studies (N = 34). The evidence basically supports the benefit of adding ADT to high-dose RT to improve tumor control. Regarding IR populations, many studies suggested the existence of a subgroup for which adding ADT had no impact on either overall survival or the BF-free duration. On the other hand, regarding HR populations, several studies suggested the positive impact of adding ADT for ≥1 year on overall survival. Adding ADT increases not only the risk of sexual dysfunction but also that of cardiovascular toxicities or bone fracture. Although the benefit of adding ADT was basically suggested for both IR and HR populations, further investigations are warranted to identify subgroups of patients for whom ADT has no benefit, as well as the appropriate duration of ADT for those who do derive benefit.

Current trends in the promising immune checkpoint inhibition and radiotherapy combination for locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) remains a challenging malignancy, though several novel therapeutic drugs have been developed in recent years. Over the past decade, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have shifted the paradigm of therapeutic strategies for UC; however, only a limited number of patients respond to ICI. Since radiotherapy (RT) is widely known to induce systemic immune activation, it may boost the efficacy of ICI. Conversely, RT also causes exhaustion of cytotoxic T cells, and the activation and recruitment of immunosuppressive cells; ICI may help overcome these immunosuppressive effects. Therefore, the combination of ICI and RT has attracted attention in recent years. The therapeutic benefits of this combination therapy and its optimal regimen have not yet been determined through prospective studies. Therefore, this review article aimed to provide an overview of the current preclinical and clinical studies that illustrate the underlying mechanisms and explore the optimization of the RT regimen along with the ICI and RT combination sequence. We also analyzed ongoing prospective studies on ICI and RT combination therapies for metastatic UC. We noted that the tumor response to ICI and RT combination seemingly differs among cancer types. Thus, our findings highlight the need for well-designed prospective trials to determine the optimal combination of ICI and RT for locally advanced and metastatic UC.

Clinical significance of IDC-P as predictive factor after intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

The clinical significance of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) treated with high-dose external-beam radiation therapy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of IDC-P in men who received intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nonmetastatic PCa. All patients with high-risk (H-R) and very high-risk (VH-R) PCa who received IMRT between September 2000 and December 2013 at our institution were analyzed retrospectively. We re-reviewed biopsy cores for the presence of IDC-P. Treatment consisted of IMRT (median: 78 Gy at 2 Gy per fraction) plus 6-month neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (HT). In total, 154 consecutive patients with H-R and VH-R PCa were analyzed. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate was present in 27.9% (n = 43). The median follow-up period was 8.4 years. The 10-year PCa-specific survival, biochemical failure (BF), clinical failure, and castration-resistant PCa rates were 90.0%, 47.8%, 27.5%, and 24.5% in patients with IDC-P, and 96.6%, 32.6%, 10.8%, and 7.0% in those without IDC-P, respectively (p = 0.12, 0.04, 0.0031, and 0.012, respectively). In multivariable analysis, IDC-P was not identified as an independent predictive factor for BF (p = 0.26). The presence of IDC-P was correlated with a significantly higher incidence of disease progression in men with H-R and VH-R PCa who received IMRT, although it was not identified as an independent predictive factor for BF. Further investigations are needed to determine the significance of IDC-P as an independent predictive factor for survival outcomes.

Narrative review of local prostate and metastasis-directed radiotherapy in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.

The role of local treatment in patients with de novo metastatic prostate cancer is controversial. In population-based retrospective studies, metastatic prostate cancer patients who received local treatment with prostate radiotherapy showed a better prognosis than those who did not. In addition, several prospective randomized studies demonstrated that prostate radiotherapy achieves a survival benefit for patients with oligo-metastasis. Moreover, the efficacy of metastasis-directed radiotherapy was evaluated, revealing a potential benefit for patients with oligo-metastasis. Importantly, these radiotherapies may reduce the occurrence of symptomatic local events. In this review, the rationale, efficacy and future perspectives for local prostate and metastasis-directed radiotherapy in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer were described and summarized.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer after rectal surgery: a single hospital long-term safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is a treatment option for prostate cancer patients after rectal surgery; however, the toxicity profile of radiotherapy for such patients has not been elucidated. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term toxicities and efficacy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with prostate cancer who had undergone rectal surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with prostate cancer after rectal surgery, who were definitively treated with IMRT between January 2000 and December 2019 at our institution. The planned total dose was 70-78 Gy in 2-Gy fraction, and the dose to the rectal anastomosis was limited to 70 Gy. The acute and late toxicities and survival outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 71 years, with a median follow-up of 86 months. The median time from surgery to IMRT was 93.5 months. The median prostate-specific antigen value was 13.17 ng/ml. The median total dose was 74 Gy, and the median maximum dose to rectal anastomosis was 66.97 Gy. The 8-year biochemical recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 70.2% and 90.0%, respectively. The incidence rates of grade 2 acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 14.3% and 0%, respectively. No grade ≥ 3 acute or late toxicities were observed when the rectal anastomosis dose was limited to 70 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis suggested that IMRT for patients with prostate cancer after rectal surgery may be safe and effective with rectal dose constraint of Dmax < 70 Gy if more than 5 years have passed after surgery.

Evaluation of internal margins for prostate for step and shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy using different margin formulas.

PURPOSE: This feasibility study evaluated the intra-fractional prostate motion using an ultrasound image-guided system during step and shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SS-IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Moreover, the internal margins (IMs) using different margin formulas were calculated. METHODS: Fourteen consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent SS-IMRT (n = 5) or VMAT (n = 9) between March 2019 and April 2020 were considered. The intra-fractional prostate motion was observed in the superior-inferior (SI), anterior-posterior (AP), and left-right (LR) directions. The displacement of the prostate was defined as the displacement from the initial position at the scanning start time, which was evaluated using the mean ± standard deviation (SD). IMs were calculated using the van Herk and restricted maximum likelihood (REML) formulas for SS-IMRT and VMAT. RESULTS: For SS-IMRT, the maximum displacements of the prostate motion were 0.17 ± 0.18, 0.56 ± 0.86, and 0.18 ± 0.59 mm in the SI, AP, and LR directions, respectively. For VMAT, the maximum displacements of the prostate motion were 0.19 ± 0.64, 0.22 ± 0.35, and 0.14 ± 0.37 mm in the SI, AP, and LR directions, respectively. The IMs obtained for SS-IMRT and VMAT were within 2.3 mm and 1.2 mm using the van Herk formula and within 1.2 mm and 0.8 mm using the REML formula. CONCLUSIONS: This feasibility study confirmed that intra-fractional prostate motion was observed with SS-IMRT and VMAT using different margin formulas. The IMs should be determined according to each irradiation technique using the REML margin.

Long-term safety of high-dose whole pelvic IMRT for high-risk localized prostate cancer through 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of whole pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a simultaneous-integrated boost (WP-SIB-IMRT) for locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPCa). METHODS: All patients with cT3-4N0M0 prostate cancer treated with WP-SIB-IMRT between February 2006 and September 2009 at our institution were analyzed retrospectively. The prescribed dose was 78 Gy to the prostate and 58.5 Gy to the prophylactic pelvic lymph nodal area in 39 fractions delivered using the simultaneous-integrated boost technique. All patients received short-term neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy alone (median 8.3 months). Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to evaluate the additional benefit of prophylactic whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT), using the cohort of 203 LAPCa patients treated with prostate-only IMRT (PO-IMRT). RESULTS: In total, 47 consecutive patients were analyzed. The median estimated risk of pelvic lymph node involvement was 57.5%. The median follow-up period was 10.5 years. The 10 year prostate cancer-specific survival and biochemical failure (BF) rates were 92.2 and 54.8%, respectively. The 10 year cumulative incidence rates of ≥ grade 2 late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 21.6 and 17.2%, respectively. From a total of 250 patients, PSM analysis identified 76 patients with similar characteristics, and no significant difference in BF rates was observed between WP-SIB-IMRT and PO-IMRT cohorts (p = 0.261). CONCLUSIONS: WP-SIB-IMRT for LAPCa was safe over long-term observation, although no clear benefit of WPRT was observed among our small and highly selected cohort. Regarding the additional efficacy of WPRT, further investigations are needed.

Long-term clinical outcomes of external beam radiation therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer: A combination of prostate-targeted treatment and metastasis-directed therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of combination of prostate-targeted treatment and metastasis-directed therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of synchronously diagnosed oligometastatic prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiation therapy for the prostate and all metastatic lesions (≤3 lesions) at Kyoto University Hospital between January 2004 and April 2019. The prescribed dose was basically ≥70 Gy for the prostate with or without whole pelvic irradiation, and ≥45 Gy for the metastatic lesions. Clinical outcomes were compared with a contemporary cohort of 55 synchronous oligometastatic prostate cancer patients treated with the standard of care. RESULTS: In total, 16 consecutive patients with synchronous oligometastatic prostate cancer were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 7.4 years. The 8-year overall survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, biochemical failure-free, clinical failure-free and castration-resistant prostate cancer-free rates were 64.8%, 71.3%, 38.5%, 47.3% and 67.3%, respectively. No grade 3 or higher radiation-induced late toxicities occurred. Patients with prostate-targeted treatment plus metastasis-directed therapy had a significantly higher castration-resistant prostate cancer-free rate than those without prostate-targeted treatment plus metastasis-directed therapy (P = 0.00741). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate-targeted treatment plus metastasis-directed therapy through external beam radiation therapy can result in favorable long-term disease-free and survival outcomes with acceptable morbidities among synchronous oligometastatic prostate cancer patients. Therefore, this approach may represent a promising treatment strategy for this population. Further investigation is required.

Low incidence of late recurrence in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated by intensity-modulated radiation therapy plus short-term androgen deprivation therapy.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the long-term outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with IR PCa treated with IMRT at our institution between September 2000 and November 2010 were analyzed retrospectively. The treatment consisted of IMRT (70-78 Gy in 35-39 fractions) combined with 6 months of neoadjuvant ADT. Salvage ADT was initiated when the prostate-specific antigen level was > 4.0 ng/mL RESULTS: In total, 106 consecutive patients with IR PCa (median age: 70 years old) were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 8.0 years. The overall survival, PCa-specific survival, biochemical failure, and clinical failure rates were 99.0%, 100.0%, 6.8%, and 1.9% at 5 years and 89.1%, 100.0%, 11.3%, and 2.9% at 10 years, respectively. Late recurrence (> 5 years) was observed in three cases (2.8%). The cumulative incidence rates of genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities (grade 2/3) were 10.5% and 5.8% at 5 years, and 14.7% and 5.8% at 10 years, respectively. No patient developed grade 4/5 GU toxicities or grade 3-5 GI toxicities. CONCLUSION: IMRT at a dose up to 78 Gy combined with short-term neoadjuvant ADT resulted in excellent long-term disease-free outcomes with acceptable morbidities among patients with IR PCa. In addition, the incidence of late recurrence was very low. Further investigation is warranted to confirm our findings.

Ten-year outcomes of high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer with unfavorable risk: early initiation of salvage therapy may replace long-term adjuvant androgen deprivation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of salvage androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) following definitive radiation therapy for prostate cancer (PCa) is unknown. This study evaluated the efficacy of early initiation of salvage-ADT (S-ADT) based on predetermined timing among patients with unfavorable PCa treated with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: High-risk (HR) and very-high-risk (VHR) PCa patients treated with IMRT at our institution between September 2000 and December 2010 were analyzed retrospectively. Treatment consisted of high-dose IMRT (78 Gy/39 fractions) combined with 6 months of neoadjuvant-ADT (NA-ADT). S-ADT was initiated when prostate-specific antigen levels exceeded 4.0 ng/mL. RESULTS: In total, 268 (184 HR and 84 VHR) patients were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 114.4 months. The 10-year overall survival (OS), PCa-specific survival (PCSS), biochemical failure (BF), and clinical failure (CF) rates were 82.8%, 97.1%, 27.3%, and 12.8% among the HR PCa patients and 79.4%, 87.9%, 56.2%, and 26.7% among the VHR PCa patients (p = 0.839, = 0.0377, < 0.001, and < 0.001), respectively. The 10-year cumulative incidence rates of urinary and rectal (grades 2-3) toxicities were 22.6% and 5.8%, respectively. No grade 4 or higher toxicities were observed. CONCLUSION: High-dose IMRT combined with short-term NA-ADT resulted in long-term disease-free status, with acceptable morbidity among approximately three-fourths of the HR PCa patients and nearly half of the VHR PCa patients. Moreover, excellent survival outcomes were achieved by the early S-ADT initiation. This approach may be a promising alternative to uniform provision of long-term ADT.

Long-term outcomes of definitive external-beam radiotherapy for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although definitive external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is one of the treatment options for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (NM-CRPC), there are limited data on the long-term outcomes of this treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 31 NM-CRPC patients consecutively treated with definitive EBRT. The median age was 74 years upon EBRT initiation. The initial T stage distribution was as follows: T1c in 3, T2 in 11, T3 in 14, and T4 in 3 cases, respectively. The median prostate dose was 70.4 Gy. A castration-resistant status was defined as continuously increasing serum prostate-specific antigen levels despite ongoing hormonal therapy (HT). RESULTS: The median follow-up duration after EBRT was 66.6 months. The median period of primary HT was 18.0 months. The 5- and 8-year overall survival rates were 74.6 and 49.8%, respectively. The 5- and 8-year prostate cancer-specific survival rates were 77.4 and 51.7%, respectively. Fourteen patients died, and prostate cancer was the cause of death in 12 of these patients. The 5- and 8-year relapse-free survival rates were 32.3 and 25.8%, respectively. Among 23 patients who experienced biochemical or clinical failure, the median duration to recurrence after EBRT was 19.3 months. The 5- and 8-year clinical failure-free survival rates were 56.0 and 51.4%, respectively. Among the 14 patients who experienced clinical failure, the median duration after EBRT was 16.0 months. The local relapse-free rates at 5 and 8 years were 91.0 and 91.0%, respectively. Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in four patients. CONCLUSION: Definitive EBRT achieved a long-term disease-free and clinical failure-free status in approximately one-third of and half of the treated NM-CRPC patients, respectively. This approach was also associated with favorable local relapse-free rates and overall survival outcomes. Definitive EBRT is a promising approach for NM-CRPC patients.

Severe esophagitis associated with cytomegalovirus during concurrent chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

Although radiation esophagitis is one of the most common adverse events that occurs during chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with esophageal cancer, CRT-associated cytomegalovirus (CMV) esophagitis is rare. CMV esophagitis typically occurs in patients with an immunosuppressed status. Here we report a case of CMV esophagitis during CRT initially treated as radiation esophagitis. A 64-year-old man with mid-thoracic esophageal cancer was admitted to our hospital with clinical stage cT4bN1M1 (supraclavicular lymph node metastasis) Stage IV according to the UICC ver. 7 guidelines, and he was administered definitive concurrent CRT. From the 39th day of CRT onwards, he presented with a sustained fever and severe odynophagia that was resistant to antibiotic therapy. An esophagoscopy revealed severe esophagitis with a circumferential ulcer throughout the entire esophagus, and CMV esophagitis was clinically suspected because of positive result of CMV antigenemia. Subsequently, antiviral therapy for CMV provided dramatic relief of his symptoms. Later, CMV DNA was confirmed with a polymerase chain reaction in the biopsy specimen.The symptoms of CMV esophagitis resemble those of radiation esophagitis and can make the diagnosis difficult. Thus, CMV esophagitis associated CRT may be overlooked or masked by radiation esophagitis and can cause a delay in healing. Therefore, CMV esophagitis may be considered when severe intractable esophagitis is observed during CRT.

Spatial Pattern of Intraprostatic Recurrence after Definitive External-Beam Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Implications for Focal Boost to Intraprostatic Dominant Lesion.

Purpose: We retrospectively investigated spatial pattern associations between primary and recurrent tumor sites after definitive external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer, using positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) with a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted probe, 18F-FSU-880. Methods and Materials: We used data from our prior phase 2 trial involving patients who received PET/CT with 18F-FSU-880, which was designed to evaluate the tumor detection efficacy of PSMA-PET/CT for recurrent prostate cancer. Data from patients with local intraprostatic recurrence detected by PSMA-PET/CT after definitive EBRT were retrospectively analyzed. The prostate and seminal vesicles were divided into 14 sections. Two diagnostic radiologists separately re-evaluated the intraprostatic location of the primary tumor on magnetic-resonance imaging and that of the recurrent tumor on PSMA-PET/CT, respectively, and the rate of overlap between primary and recurrent tumors was calculated. The overlap rate was defined as "the number of sections that overlapped between the primary tumor and recurrent tumor" divided by "the total number of sections of recurrent tumor". A recurrent tumor was considered to be at the same location as the primary tumor when the overlap rate was equal to or greater than 75%, and a partial overlap was defined as an overlap rate between 25 and 74%. Results: Twelve patients had local recurrence detected by PSMA-PET/CT. The median time to diagnosis of local recurrence was 9.1 (range, 2.2-12.3) years after definitive EBRT. The recurrent tumor was detected at the same location in 25.0%, and a partial overlap was noted in 41.7%. Conclusions: Local intraprostatic recurrence after definitive EBRT often occurs at the same site or at a partially overlapping site adjacent to the primary intraprostatic dominant lesion. Our results support the merit of focal dose-escalation for intraprostatic dominant lesions in definitive EBRT.

Impact of Long-term Adjuvant Hormonal Therapy in High-dose IMRT for Unfavorable Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of adding long-term adjuvant hormonal therapy to high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer patients with multiple unfavorable risks. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All cT3-4N0M0 prostate cancer patients with Gleason score 8-10 and prostate-specific antigen ≥30 ng/ml who received intensity-modulated radiation therapy to the prostate and seminal vesicle alone (78 Gy in 39 fractions) between September 2000 and June 2017 at our institution were analyzed retrospectively. All patients received short-term neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Before May 2011, salvage hormonal therapy was initiated when prostate-specific antigen levels exceeded 4.0 ng/ml (early salvage hormonal therapy cohort). In June 2011, 2-year adjuvant hormonal therapy was added (adjuvant hormonal therapy cohort). Clinical outcomes were retrospectively compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: In total, 88 patients (44 in both cohorts) were analyzed. Median follow-up periods were 10.9 and 6.1 years in early salvage hormonal therapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy cohorts, respectively. No significant difference in overall survival rates was observed (p=0.58). Disease controls were significantly better in the adjuvant hormonal therapy cohort: 95.5 versus 73.6% for castration-resistant prostate cancer-free rate (p=0.04), and 73.6 versus 34.1% for biochemical failure-free rate (p<0.001), both at 8 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among locally advanced prostate cancer patients with multiple unfavorable risks, adding long-term adjuvant hormonal therapy to high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy resulted in significantly better disease control than short-term hormonal therapy, even when salvaged early after biochemical failure.

Long-Term Outcomes of a Prospective Study on Highly Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer for 3 Weeks.

PURPOSE: Reports of radiation therapy for prostate cancer using dose fractions between moderate hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation are limited. This pilot study involved the application of highly hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in 15 fractions for 3 weeks and the number of fractions was intermediate between the 2 previously mentioned dose fractions. The long-term outcomes are reported. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From April 2014 to September 2015, patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer received 54 Gy in 15 fractions (3.6 Gy per fraction) for 3 weeks using IMRT without intraprostatic fiducial markers or a rectal hydrogel spacer. Neoadjuvant hormone therapy (HT) was administered for 4 to 8 months. Adjuvant HT was not administered to any patients. Rates of biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, overall survival, and the cumulative incidence of late grade ≥2 toxicities were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled in this prospective study; 24 of them were treated with highly hypofractionated IMRT (17% had low-risk and 83% had intermediate-risk disease). The median neoadjuvant HT duration was 5.3 months. The median follow-up period was 77 months (range, 57-87 months). Biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, and overall survival rates were 91.7%, 95.8%, and 95.8% at 5 years, and 87.5%, 86.3%, and 95.8% at 7 years, respectively. Neither grade ≥2 late gastrointestinal toxicity nor grade ≥3 late genitourinary toxicity was observed. The cumulative incidence rates of grade 2 genitourinary toxicity were 8.5% and 18.3% at 5 and 7 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Highly hypofractionated IMRT delivering 54 Gy in 15 fractions for 3 weeks for prostate cancer without intraprostatic fiducial markers facilitated favorable oncological outcomes without severe complications. This treatment approach may be a possible alternative to moderate hypofractionation, but further validation is needed.

Ten-year outcomes of whole-pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer with regional lymph node metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Management of pelvic node-positive prostate cancer has been challenging and controversial. We conducted a study to evaluate the outcomes of whole-pelvic (WP) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS: A total of 67 consecutive patients with cT1c-4N1M0 prostate cancer were definitively treated by WP SIB-IMRT. Neoadjuvant ADT (median: 8.3 months) was administered in all cases. WP SIB-IMRT was designed to simultaneously deliver 78, 66.3, and 58.5 Gy in 39 fractions to the prostate plus seminal vesicles, metastatic lymph nodes (LNs), and the pelvic LN region, respectively. Adjuvant ADT (median: 24.7 months) was administered in 66 patients. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 81.6 months (range: 30.5-160.7). Biochemical relapse-free, overall, and prostate cancer-specific survival rates at 10 years were 59.8%, 79.6%, and 86.3%, respectively. Loco-regional recurrence was not observed. Being in International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 5 and having a posttreatment detectable nadir prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (≥0.010 ng/ml) were significantly associated with worse prostate cancer-specific survival and progression of castration resistance. The 10-year cumulative incidence rates of grade 2 and 3 late toxicities were, respectively, 1.5% and 0% for genitourinary, 0% and 1.5% for gastrointestinal events. No grade 4 acute or late toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: WP SIB-IMRT can be safely administered to patients with pelvic node-positive prostate cancer. Since grade group 5 and detectable nadir PSA levels are risks for castration resistance, we may need to increase the intensity of treatment for such cases.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Second-line Pembrolizumab With Radiation Therapy in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Considering the limited data available on immune checkpoint inhibitors and radiation combination therapy in advanced urothelial carcinoma, this study evaluated the survival benefit and associated toxicity of adding radiation therapy to second-line pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined 24 consecutive patients with advanced bladder or upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma and for whom second-line pembrolizumab was initiated between August 2018 and October 2021 in combination with radiation therapy (with curative intent in 12 patients, and palliative intent in 12 patients). Their survival outcomes and toxicities were compared with those of propensity-score-matched cohorts from a Japanese multicenter study with similar characteristics who received pembrolizumab monotherapy. RESULTS: The median follow-up periods after pembrolizumab initiation were 15 months for the curative cohort and 4 months for the palliative cohort. The median overall survival was 27.7 months for the curative cohort and 4.8 months for the palliative cohort. Compared with the matched pembrolizumab monotherapy cohort, overall survival was better among the curative cohort although not statistically significant (p=0.13), but similar between the palliative and matched pembrolizumab monotherapy cohorts (p=0.44). There was no difference in the incidence of grade ≥2 adverse events between the combination and monotherapy cohorts, irrespective of the intent of radiation therapy. CONCLUSION: The combination of radiation therapy and pembrolizumab can be performed with a clinically acceptable safety profile, and the addition of radiation therapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors may improve survival outcome after pembrolizumab treatment in cases where the intent of radiation therapy is curative.

[Clinical characteristics after surgery of non-small cell lung cancer which measures 20 mm or less in diameter].

Today's advances in diagnostic image-technologies often enable us to find small lung cancers. However, we have few definite strategies including how to diagnosis and treat them. In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of 122 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for non-small cell lung cancer 20 mm or less in diameter to clarify the clinical features of small lung cancer. Of 122 patients, there were 114 patients of pN0, and 8 patients with lymph node metastasis. Seventy three patients underwent lobectomy, 45 underwent segmentectomy, and 4 underwent wedge resection based on the findings of preoperative CT and anatomical and oncological view during operation. Overall survival rate( OS) and progression free survival( PFS) at 3-year was, 94% and 84%, respectively. There were no differences in OS or PFS between lobectomy group and limited resection group, which might suggest that we adapted appropriate surgical procedures. Multivariate analysis revealed that pathological pleural invasion, lymphatic vessel invasion, and vascular vessel invasion were likely to be unfavorable prognostic-factors. We believe that further investigations should be required to clarify the characteristics of small lung cancer.