Treatment intensification strategies for men undergoing definitive radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Treatment intensification of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plays a crucial role in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: We performed a critical narrative review of the relevant literature and present new developments in evidence-based treatment intensification strategies. RESULTS: For men with high-risk prostate cancer, there is strong evidence to support prolonging androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to 18-36 months and escalating the dose to the prostate using a brachytherapy boost. A potentially less toxic alternative to a brachytherapy boost is delivering a focal boost to dominant intraprostatic lesions using EBRT. In patients who meet STAMPEDE high-risk criteria, there is evidence to support adding a second-generation anti-androgen agent, such as abiraterone acetate, to long-term ADT. Elective pelvic lymph node irradiation may be beneficial in select patients, though more prospective data is needed to elucidate the group of patients who may benefit the most. Tumor genomic classifier (GC) testing and advanced molecular imaging will likely play a role in improving patient selection for treatment intensification as well as contribute to the evolution of treatment intensification strategies for future patients. CONCLUSION: Treatment intensification using a combination of EBRT, advanced hormonal therapies, and brachytherapy may improve patient outcomes and survival in men with high-risk prostate cancer. Shared decision-making between patients and multidisciplinary teams of radiation oncologists, urologists, and medical oncologists is essential for personalizing care in this setting and deciding which strategies make sense for individual patients.

LUNAR: a randomized Phase 2 study of 177 Lutetium-PSMA Neoadjuvant to Ablative Radiotherapy for Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer (clinical trial protocol).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of 177 Lu-PNT2002, a novel radiolabelled small molecule that binds with high affinity to prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), in combination with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to all sites of metastasis, vs SBRT alone, in men with oligorecurrent metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 177 Lutetium-PSMA Neoadjuvant to Ablative Radiotherapy for Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer (LUNAR) trial is an open-label, randomized, stratified, two-arm, single-centre, Phase 2 trial to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant 177 Lu-PNT2002 plus SBRT vs SBRT alone in men with oligorecurrent mHSPC. Key eligibility criteria include one to five lesions identified on a PSMA positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scan centrally reviewed by a board-certified nuclear medicine physician. Key exclusion criteria include castrate-resistant disease, de novo oligometastatic disease and receipt of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) within 6 months of trial enrolment. The trial aims to enrol 100 patients who will be centrally randomized to one of the two treatment arms, in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the control arm receive SBRT to all sites of disease. Patients in the experimental arm receive two cycles of neoadjuvant 177 Lu-PNT2002 (6.8 GBq) 6-8 weeks apart, followed by an interval PSMA PET/CT in 4-6 weeks and dose-adapted SBRT to all sites of disease 1-2 weeks later. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints are radiographic and prostate-specific antigen-based progression, acute and late physician-scored toxicity, patient-reported quality of life, ADT-free survival, time to progression, overall survival, locoregional control, and duration of response. Enrolment in the study commenced in September 2022. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The addition of 177 Lu-PNT2002 to metastasis-directed therapy alone may potentially further forestall disease progression. The results of this Phase 2 trial will determine, for the first time in a randomized fashion, the added benefit of 177 Lu-PNT2002 to SBRT in patients with oligorecurrent mHSPC.

Multimodality Therapies for Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Multimodality therapy including radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy are frequently deployed in the management of localized prostate cancer. We sought to perform a critical appraisal of the most contemporary literature focusing on the multimodality management of localized prostate cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Men who are ideal candidates for multimodality therapy include those with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, high-risk disease, and very high-risk disease. Enhancements in both systemic agents (including second-generation antiandrogens) as well as localized therapies (such as stereotactic body radiotherapy and brachytherapy) are refining the optimal balance between the use of systemic and local therapies for localized prostate cancer. Genomic predictors are emerging as critical tools for more precisely allocating treatment intensification with multimodality therapies as well as treatment de-intensification. Close collaboration among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists will be critical for coordinating evidence-based multimodality therapies when clearly indicated and for supporting shared decision-making in areas where the evidence is mixed.

Selecting the optimal radiation modality in prostate cancer.

There are numerous radiation modalities for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer. Classic clinical trials have established the basic tenets of treatment approaches, and emerging data have generated new potential avenues of treatment that optimize the therapeutic ratio by increasing prostate cancer tumor control while minimizing treatment-related toxicity. In the definitive setting, the selection of the optimal radiation therapy approach depends largely on the appropriate up-front risk stratification of men with prostate cancer, with greater intensification of treatment and greater integration of multimodality therapies for men with higher-risk disease. Hormonal therapy should be selectively deployed based on prognostic information derived from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group and biologic tumor aggressiveness informed by genomic classifiers. Moreover, treatment intensification and target volume delineation are increasingly informed by molecular imaging and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Herein, we perform a critical appraisal of the literature focusing on the optimal selection of radiation therapy modality for localized prostate cancer. Collaboration among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists will be critical for coordinating evidence-based radiation therapies when clearly indicated and for supporting shared decision-making when the evidence is incomplete.

Androgen deprivation therapy use and duration with definitive radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Randomised trials have investigated various androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) intensification strategies in men receiving radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer. This individual patient data meta-analysis of relevant randomised trials aimed to quantify the benefit of these interventions in aggregate and in clinically relevant subgroups. METHODS: For this meta-analysis, we performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, trial registries, the Web of Science, Scopus, and conference proceedings to identify trials with results published in English between Jan 1, 1962, and Dec 30, 2020. Multicentre randomised trials were eligible if they evaluated the use or prolongation of ADT (or both) in men with localised prostate cancer receiving definitive radiotherapy, reported or collected distant metastasis and survival data, and used ADT for a protocol-defined finite duration. The Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium was accessed to obtain individual patient data from randomised trials. The primary outcome was metastasis-free survival. Hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained through stratified Cox models for ADT use (radiotherapy alone vs radiotherapy plus ADT), neoadjuvant ADT extension (ie, extension of total ADT duration in the neoadjuvant setting from 3-4 months to 6-9 months), and adjuvant ADT prolongation (ie, prolongation of total ADT duration in the adjuvant setting from 4-6 months to 18-36 months). Formal interaction tests between interventions and metastasis-free survival were done for prespecified subgroups defined by age, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group, and radiotherapy dose. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021236855. FINDINGS: Our search returned 12 eligible trials that provided individual patient data (10 853 patients) with a median follow-up of 11·4 years (IQR 9·0-15·0). The addition of ADT to radiotherapy significantly improved metastasis-free survival (HR 0·83 [95% CI 0·77-0·89], p<0·0001), as did adjuvant ADT prolongation (0·84 [0·78-0·91], p<0·0001), but neoadjuvant ADT extension did not (0·95 [0·83-1·09], p=0·50). Treatment effects were similar irrespective of radiotherapy dose, patient age, or NCCN risk group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings provide the strongest level of evidence so far to the magnitude of the benefit of ADT treatment intensification with radiotherapy for men with localised prostate cancer. Adding ADT and prolonging the portion of ADT that follows radiotherapy is associated with improved metastasis-free survival in men, regardless of risk group, age, and radiotherapy dose delivered; however, the magnitude of the benefit could vary and shared decision making with patients is recommended. FUNDING: University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Prostate Cancer Foundation, and the American Society for Radiation Oncology.

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer (mirage): a phase iii randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is becoming increasingly used in treating localized prostate cancer (PCa), with evidence showing similar toxicity and efficacy profiles when compared with longer courses of definitive radiation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided radiotherapy has multiple potential advantages over standard computed tomography (CT)-guided radiotherapy, including enhanced prostate visualization (abrogating the need for fiducials and MRI fusion), enhanced identification of the urethra, the ability to track the prostate in real-time, and the capacity to perform online adaptive planning. However, it is unknown whether these potential advantages translate into improved outcomes. This phase III randomized superiority trial is designed to prospectively evaluate whether toxicity is lower after MRI-guided versus CT-guided SBRT. METHODS: Three hundred men with localized PCa will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to SBRT using CT or MRI guidance. Randomization will be stratified by baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) (≤15 or > 15) and prostate gland volume (≤50 cc or > 50 cc). Five fractions of 8 Gy will be delivered to the prostate over the course of fourteen days, with or without hormonal therapy and elective nodal radiotherapy (to a dose of 5 Gy per fraction) as per the investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint is the incidence of physician-reported acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity (during the first 90 days after SBRT), as assessed by the CTCAE version 4.03 scale. Secondary clinical endpoints include incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, 5-year cumulative incidences of physician-reported late grade ≥ 2 GU and GI toxicity, temporal changes in patient-reported quality of life (QOL) outcomes, 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and the proportion of fractions of MRI-guided SBRT in which online adaptive radiotherapy is used. DISCUSSION: The MIRAGE trial is the first randomized trial comparing MRI-guided with standard CT-guided SBRT for localized PCa. The primary hypothesis is that MRI-guided SBRT will lead to an improvement in the cumulative incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity when compared to CT-guided SBRT. The pragmatic superiority design focused on an acute toxicity endpoint will allow an early comparison of the two technologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04384770. Date of registration: May 12, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04384770 PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 2.1, Aug 28, 2020.

Cost Effectiveness of External Beam Radiation Therapy versus Percutaneous Image-Guided Cryoablation for Palliation of Uncomplicated Bone Metastases.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of incorporating cryoablation in the treatment regimens for uncomplicated bone metastases using radiation therapy (RT) in single-fraction RT (SFRT) or multiple-fraction RT (MFRT) regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was constructed using 1-month cycles over a lifetime horizon to compare the cost effectiveness of multiple strategies, including RT followed by RT (RT-RT) for recurrent pain, RT followed by cryoablation (RT-ablation), and cryoablation followed by RT (ablation-RT). RT-RT consisted of 8 Gy in 1 fraction/8 Gy in 1 fraction (SFRT-SFRT) and 30 Gy in 10 fractions/20 Gy in 5 fractions (MFRT-MFRT). Probabilities and utilities were extracted from a search of the medical literature. Costs were calculated from a payer perspective using 2017 Medicare reimbursement in an outpatient setting. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated using strategies evaluated for willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). To account for model uncertainty, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, SFRT-ablation was cost effective relative to SFRT-SFRT at $96,387/QALY. MFRT-ablation was cost effective relative to MFRT-MFRT at $85,576/QALY. Ablation-SFRT and ablation-MFRT were not cost effective with ICERs >$100,000/QALY. In one-way sensitivity analyses, results were highly sensitive to variation in multiple model parameters, including median survival (base: 9 months), with SFRT-SFRT favored at median survival ≤8.7 months. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis examining SFRT-based regimens showed that SFRT-ablation was preferred in 36.9% of simulations at WTP of $100,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Cryoablation is a potentially cost-effective alternative to reirradiation with RT for recurrent of pain following RT; however, no strategy incorporating initial cryoablation was cost effective.

The patient's perspective on breast radiotherapy: Initial fears and expectations versus reality.

BACKGROUND: Although the efficacy and toxicity of breast radiotherapy (RT) has been studied extensively, to the authors' knowledge little is known regarding the patient's perspective on the modern breast RT experience. To better inform future patients and providers, the authors explored patient perceptions of their RT experience. METHODS: Consecutive patients who were free of disease recurrence and who had been treated between 2012 and 2016 were surveyed regarding their original fears, how short-term and long-term toxicities compared with initial expectations, and how pretreatment beliefs concerning RT compared with the actual experience. RESULTS: A total of 502 patients were surveyed, with a response rate of 65% (327 patients). The median patient age and posttreatment follow-up was 59 years and 31 months, respectively. Approximately 83% of patients (269 patients) underwent breast conservation therapy. Although approximately 68% of patients (221 patients) endorsed that they initially had little to no knowledge regarding RT, approximately 47% (152 patients) reported that they had heard frightening stories. Approximately 2% of patients (6 patients) agreed that the negative stories they previously heard about RT were actually true. Approximately 92% of patients treated with breast conservation (247 patients) and 81% of patients who underwent mastectomy (47 patients) agreed with the statement "If future patients knew the real truth about RT, they would be less scared about treatment." Approximately 83% (272 patients) and 84% (274 patients), respectively, of all patients reported the overall severity of short-term and long-term side effects to be better than or as expected. CONCLUSIONS: Breast RT is associated with misconceptions and fears. Patients' experiences with modern breast RT appear to be superior to expectations, and the majority of patients in the current study agreed that their initial negative impressions were unfounded. Cancer 2018;124:1673-81. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes after de-escalated chemoradiation for human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma: Findings from a phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The current study represents a subset analysis of quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes among patients treated on a phase 2 trial of de-escalated chemoradiation for human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal cancer. METHODS: Eligibility included newly diagnosed, (American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition) stage III or IV oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, p16 positivity, age ≥ 18 years, and a Zubrod performance status of 0 to 1. Treatment was induction paclitaxel at a dose of 175 mg/m2 and carboplatin at an area under the curve of 6 for 2 cycles followed by response-adapted, dose-reduced radiation of 54 Gy or 60 Gy with weekly concurrent paclitaxel at a dose of 30 mg/m2 . The University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QOL) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck questionnaires were used to assess patient-reported QOL as a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were registered, 40 of whom completed QOL surveys and were evaluable. Nadirs for overall UW-QOL and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck scores were reached at 4 weeks after treatment but returned to baseline at 3 months. Nearly all functional indices returned to baseline levels by 6 to 9 months. The mean overall UW-QOL score was 71.6 at baseline compared with 70.8, 73.0, 83.3, and 81.1, respectively, at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after therapy. The percentage of patients rating their overall QOL as "very good" or "outstanding" at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years using the UW-QOL was 50%, 77%, and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This de-escalation regimen achieved QOL outcomes that were favorable compared with historical controls. These results serve as powerful evidence that ongoing de-escalation efforts lead to tangible gains in function and QOL. Cancer 2018;124:521-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, or External Beam Radiotherapy With Brachytherapy Boost and Disease Progression and Mortality in Patients With Gleason Score 9-10 Prostate Cancer.

Importance: The optimal treatment for Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer is unknown. Objective: To compare clinical outcomes of patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer after definitive treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study in 12 tertiary centers (11 in the United States, 1 in Norway), with 1809 patients treated between 2000 and 2013. Exposures: Radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy, or EBRT plus brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT) with androgen deprivation therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was prostate cancer-specific mortality; distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival were secondary outcomes. Results: Of 1809 men, 639 underwent RP, 734 EBRT, and 436 EBRT+BT. Median ages were 61, 67.7, and 67.5 years; median follow-up was 4.2, 5.1, and 6.3 years, respectively. By 10 years, 91 RP, 186 EBRT, and 90 EBRT+BT patients had died. Adjusted 5-year prostate cancer-specific mortality rates were RP, 12% (95% CI, 8%-17%); EBRT, 13% (95% CI, 8%-19%); and EBRT+BT, 3% (95% CI, 1%-5%). EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower prostate cancer-specific mortality than either RP or EBRT (cause-specific HRs of 0.38 [95% CI, 0.21-0.68] and 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]). Adjusted 5-year incidence rates of distant metastasis were RP, 24% (95% CI, 19%-30%); EBRT, 24% (95% CI, 20%-28%); and EBRT+BT, 8% (95% CI, 5%-11%). EBRT+BT was associated with a significantly lower rate of distant metastasis (propensity-score-adjusted cause-specific HRs of 0.27 [95% CI, 0.17-0.43] for RP and 0.30 [95% CI, 0.19-0.47] for EBRT). Adjusted 7.5-year all-cause mortality rates were RP, 17% (95% CI, 11%-23%); EBRT, 18% (95% CI, 14%-24%); and EBRT+BT, 10% (95% CI, 7%-13%). Within the first 7.5 years of follow-up, EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (cause-specific HRs of 0.66 [95% CI, 0.46-0.96] for RP and 0.61 [95% CI, 0.45-0.84] for EBRT). After the first 7.5 years, the corresponding HRs were 1.16 (95% CI, 0.70-1.92) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.57-1.32). No significant differences in prostate cancer-specific mortality, distant metastasis, or all-cause mortality (≤7.5 and >7.5 years) were found between men treated with EBRT or RP (cause-specific HRs of 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.26], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.70-1.14], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.80-1.44], and 1.34 [95% CI, 0.85-2.11]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer, treatment with EBRT+BT with androgen deprivation therapy was associated with significantly better prostate cancer-specific mortality and longer time to distant metastasis compared with EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy or with RP.

Reduced-dose radiotherapy for human papillomavirus-associated squamous-cell carcinoma of the oropharynx: a single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancers positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) are exquisitely radiosensitive. We investigated whether chemoradiotherapy with reduced-dose radiation would maintain survival outcomes while improving tolerability for patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma. METHODS: We did a single-arm, phase 2 trial at two academic hospitals in the USA, enrolling patients with newly diagnosed, biopsy-proven stage III or IV squamous-cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, positive for HPV by p16 testing, and with Zubrod performance status scores of 0 or 1. Patients received two cycles of induction chemotherapy with 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel and carboplatin (target area under the curve of 6) given 21 days apart, followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy with daily image guidance plus 30 mg/m2 paclitaxel per week concomitantly. Complete or partial responders to induction chemotherapy received 54 Gy in 27 fractions, and those with less than partial or no responses received 60 Gy in 30 fractions. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 2 years, assessed in all eligible patients who completed protocol treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02048020 and NCT01716195. FINDINGS: Between Oct 4, 2012, and March 3, 2015, 45 patients were enrolled with a median age of 60 years (IQR 54-67). One patient did not receive treatment and 44 were included in the analysis. 24 (55%) patients with complete or partial responses to induction chemotherapy received 54 Gy radiation, and 20 (45%) with less than partial responses received 60 Gy. Median follow-up was 30 months (IQR 26-37). Three (7%) patients had locoregional recurrence and one (2%) had distant metastasis; 2-year progression-free survival was 92% (95% CI 77-97). 26 (39%) of 44 patients had grade 3 adverse events, but no grade 4 events were reported. The most common grade 3 events during induction chemotherapy were leucopenia (17 [39%]) and neutropenia (five [11%]), and during chemoradiotherapy were dysphagia (four [9%]) and mucositis (four [9%]). One (2%) of 44 patients was dependent on a gastrostomy tube at 3 months and none was dependent 6 months after treatment. INTERPRETATION: Chemoradiotherapy with radiation doses reduced by 15-20% was associated with high progression-free survival and an improved toxicity profile compared with historical regimens using standard doses. Radiotherapy de-escalation has the potential to improve the therapeutic ratio and long-term function for these patients. FUNDING: University of California.

Treatment trends for patients with brain metastases: Does practice reflect the data?

BACKGROUND: Published guidelines regarding the optimal treatment strategies for brain metastases focus on patients with ≤3 lesions. As delivery techniques for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) improve, radiation oncologists are increasingly using it for patients with >3 metastases. In the current study, the authors sought to characterize practice patterns among practitioners to identify areas of controversy. METHODS: A survey of practicing radiation oncologists was distributed via e-mail. Responses were collected from April 1 to May 5, 2016. Survey data were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 711 currently practicing radiation oncologists responded, for a response rate of 12.5%. Specialists in central nervous system tumors (CNS specialists) were more likely to treat higher numbers of patients with brain metastases with SRS. There was a significant difference in the optimal "cutoff number" used when deciding how many lesions to treat with SRS versus whole-brain radiotherapy. Cutoff numbers were significantly higher for high-volume CNS specialists (≥10 patients/month) than for either low-volume CNS specialists (5-9 patients/month) or high-volume, non-CNS specialists (8.1 vs 5.6 and 5.1, respectively; P<.001). A majority of respondents (56%) identified patients with 4 to 6 brain metastases as being the most challenging patients to treat. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, there appears to be no consensus regarding the optimal treatment strategy among patients with >3 brain metastases, and practice patterns are heterogeneous. Radiation oncologists, especially high-volume CNS specialists, are treating significantly more brain metastases with SRS than what currently is recommended by published consensus guidelines. Providers struggle with patients with a moderate intracranial disease burden. Further prospective studies are needed to support these practice patterns and guide decision making. Cancer 2017;123:2274-2282. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Predictors associated with MRI surveillance screening in women with a personal history of unilateral breast cancer but without a genetic predisposition for future contralateral breast cancer.

PURPOSE: For women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC), no validated mechanisms exist to calculate future contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk. The Manchester risk stratification guidelines were developed to evaluate CBC risk in women with a PHBC, primarily for surgical decision making. This tool may be informative for the use of MRI screening, as CBC risk is an assumed consideration for high-risk surveillance. METHODS: Three hundred twenty-two women with a PHBC were treated with unilateral surgery within our multidisciplinary breast clinic. We calculated lifetime CBC risk using the Manchester tool, which incorporates age at diagnosis, family history, genetic mutation status, estrogen receptor positivity, and endocrine therapy use. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses (UVA/MVA) were performed, evaluating whether CBC risk predicted MRI surveillance. RESULTS: For women with invasive disease undergoing MRI surveillance, 66% had low, 23% above-average, and 11% moderate/high risk for CBC. On MVA, previous mammography-occult breast cancer [odds ratio (OR) 18.95, p < 0.0001], endocrine therapy use (OR 3.89, p = 0.009), dense breast tissue (OR 3.69, p = 0.0007), mastectomy versus lumpectomy (OR 3.12, p = 0.0041), and CBC risk (OR 3.17 for every 10% increase, p = 0.0002) were associated with MRI surveillance. No pathologic factors increasing ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence were significant on MVA. CONCLUSIONS: Although CBC risk predicted MRI surveillance, 89% with invasive disease undergoing MRI had <20% calculated CBC risk. Concerns related to future breast cancer detectability (dense breasts and/or previous mammography-occult disease) predominate decision making. Pathologic factors important for determining ipsilateral recurrence risk, aside from age, were not associated with MRI surveillance.

Utilizing time-driven activity-based costing to understand the short- and long-term costs of treating localized, low-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given the costs of delivering care for men with prostate cancer remain poorly described, this article reports the results of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for competing treatments of low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Process maps were developed for each phase of care from the initial urologic visit through 12 years of follow-up for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), cryotherapy, high-dose rate (HDR) and low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and active surveillance (AS). The last modality incorporated both traditional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy and multiparametric-MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. The costs of materials, equipment, personnel, and space were calculated per unit of time and based on the relative proportion of capacity used. TDABC for each treatment was defined as the sum of its resources. RESULTS: Substantial cost variation was observed at 5 years, with costs ranging from $7,298 for AS to $23,565 for IMRT, and they remained consistent through 12 years of follow-up. LDR brachytherapy ($8,978) was notably cheaper than HDR brachytherapy ($11,448), and SBRT ($11,665) was notably cheaper than IMRT, with the cost savings attributable to shorter procedure times and fewer visits required for treatment. Both equipment costs and an inpatient stay ($2,306) contributed to the high cost of RALP ($16,946). Cryotherapy ($11,215) was more costly than LDR brachytherapy, largely because of increased single-use equipment costs ($6,292 vs $1,921). AS reached cost equivalence with LDR brachytherapy after 7 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TDABC is feasible for analyzing cancer services and provides insights into cost-reduction tactics in an era focused on emphasizing value. By detailing all steps from diagnosis and treatment through 12 years of follow-up for low-risk prostate cancer, this study has demonstrated significant cost variation between competing treatments.

Long term results from a prospective database on high dose rate (HDR) interstitial brachytherapy for primary cervical carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Present long-term outcomes in primary cervical cancer treated with external beam and high dose rate interstitial brachytherapy. METHODS: High dose rate (HDR) interstitial (IS) brachytherapy (BT) and external beam (EBRT) were administered from 1992 to 2009 to 315 patients who were unsuitable for intracavitary (IC) BT alone. Histology was 89% squamous cell, 8% adenocarcinoma, and 3% adenosquamous. FIGO stage was I-14%, II-47%, III-34%, and IVA-5%. Median tumor size was 6cm. Lymph node metastases were 26% pelvic and 9.5% para-aortic. Treatment planning was 49% 2D and 51% 3D-CT. The mean doses were central EBRT EQD210 37.3±4.3Gy (sidewall 49.2±3.6Gy) and HDR EQD210 42.3±5.3Gy (nominal 5.4Gy×6 fractions using a mean of 24 catheters and 1 tandem). Total EQD210 mean target dose was 79.5±5.4Gy. Standardized planned dose constraints were ICRU points or D0.1cc bladder 80%, rectum 75% and urethra 90% of the HDR dose per fraction. Morbidity assessment was CTCAEv3. Median and mean follow-up were 50 and 61months (3-234). RESULTS: The 10-year actuarial local control was 87%, regional control 84%, and loco-regional control 77%. Distant metastasis free survival was 66%, cause specific survival 56%, disease free survival 54%, and overall survival 40%. The rates of late grade GU and GI toxicities were 4.8% G3 and 5.4% G4. CONCLUSIONS: Template-guided interstitial can be safely performed to successfully deliver high radiation dose to locally advanced cervix cancer and avoid excessive dose and injury to adjacent vital pelvic organs. We achieved high tumor control with low morbidity in patients who were poor candidates for intracavitary brachytherapy.

Ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen after prostatectomy reliably identifies patients requiring postoperative radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Integrating ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen with surveillance in patients at high risk after radical prostatectomy potentially optimizes treatment by correctly identifying recurrence, promoting an early salvage strategy and minimizing overtreatment. We tested the power of postoperative ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen to identify eventual biochemical failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 247 patients at high risk with a median followup of 44 months who underwent radical prostatectomy from 1991 to 2013. Each patient had extraprostatic extension and/or a positive margin. Surgical technique, initial prostate specific antigen, pathology findings and postoperative prostate specific antigen were analyzed. The ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen assay threshold was 0.01 ng/ml. Conventional biochemical relapse was defined as prostate specific antigen 0.2 ng/ml or greater. Kaplan-Meier and Cox multivariate analyses were done to compare the rates of ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen recurrence and conventional biochemical relapse. RESULTS: Sensitivity analysis revealed that ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen 0.03 ng/ml or greater was the optimal threshold to identify recurrence. A first postoperative ultrasensitive value of 0.03 ng/ml or greater, Gleason grade, T stage, initial prostate specific antigen and margin status predicted conventional biochemical relapse. On multivariate analysis only a first postoperative ultrasensitive value of 0.03 ng/ml or greater, Gleason grade and T stage independently predicted conventional biochemical relapse. First postoperative ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen 0.03 ng/ml or greater conferred the highest risk (HR 8.5, p < 0.0001) and identified conventional biochemical relapse with greater sensitivity than undetectable first conventional prostate specific antigen (70% vs 46%). Any postoperative prostate specific antigen 0.03 ng/ml or greater captured all failures missed by the first postoperative value (100% sensitivity) with accuracy (96% specificity). Defining failure at an ultrasensitive value of 0.03 ng/ml or greater yielded a median lead time advantage of 18 months (mean 24) over the conventional definition of prostate specific antigen 0.2 ng/ml or greater. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasensitive prostate specific antigen 0.03 ng/ml or greater is an independent factor that identifies biochemical relapse more accurately than any traditional risk factors and confers a significant lead time advantage. This factor enables critical decisions on the timing of and indication for postoperative radiotherapy in patients at high risk after radical prostatectomy.

MRI-Guided Radiation Therapy-An Emerging and Disruptive Process of Care: Healthcare Economic and Policy Considerations.

MRI-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) is an emerging, innovative technology that provides opportunities to transform and improve the current clinical care process in radiation oncology. As with many new technologies in radiation oncology, careful evaluation from a healthcare economic and policy perspective is required for its successful implementation. In this review article, we describe the current evidence surrounding MRgRT, framing it within the context of value within the healthcare system. Additionally, we highlight areas in which MRgRT may disrupt the current process of care, and discuss the evidence thresholds and timeline required for the widespread adoption of this promising technology.

Performance Analysis of a Radiation Oncology Educational Podcast.

PURPOSE: Asynchronous podcast education is a popular supplementary tool, with up to 88% of medical residents reporting its use. Radiation oncology podcasts remain scarce. The authors analyzed the early performance, listenership, and engagement of the first education-specific radiation oncology medical podcast. METHODS: Episode data and listener demographics were gathered from Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Episodes were case based, categorized by disease subsite, and reviewed by a board-certified radiation oncologist. Listenership was defined by the number of plays per day (ppd) on unique devices, averaged up to 60 days from publication. Episode engagement was defined as a percentage of plays on unique devices playing >40% of an episode within a single session. Quantitative end points included episode engagement and listenership. Pearson's correlation coefficient calculations were used for analysis. RESULTS: From July 2022 to March 2023, 20 total episodes had 13,078 total plays over 227 days. The median episode length was 13.8 min (range, 9.2-20.1 min). Listener demographics were as follows: 54.4% men, 44.0% women, 1.3% not specified, and 0.3% nonbinary, with ages 18 to 22 (1%), 23 to 27 (13%), 28 to 34 (58%), 35 to 44 (22%), 45 to 59 (4%), and ≥60 (2%) years. Episodes were played in 53 countries, with the most plays in North America (71.5%), followed by Asia (10.2%), Europe (8.2%), Oceania (8.0%), Africa (1.5%), and South America (0.5%). There was a 585.2% increase in listenership since initiation, with median growth of 46.0% per month. Median listenership and engagement were 11.3 ppd (interquartile range, 10.3-13.8 ppd) and 81.4% (interquartile range, 72.0%-84.2%) for all episodes, respectively. A significant negative relationship between episode length and engagement was observed (r[20] = -0.51, P = .02). There was no statistically significant relationship between ppd and episode length (r[20] = -0.19, P = .42). CONCLUSIONS: The significant rise in listenership, high episode engagement, and large international audience support a previously unmet need in radiation oncology medical education that may be supplemented by podcasts.

Results of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Image Review System to Detect Patient Misalignment Errors in a Multi-institutional Database of Cone Beam Computed Tomography-Guided Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Present knowledge of patient setup and alignment errors in image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) relies on voluntary reporting, which is thought to underestimate error frequencies. A manual retrospective patient-setup misalignment error search is infeasible owing to the bulk of cases to be reviewed. We applied a deep learning-based misalignment error detection algorithm (EDA) to perform a fully automated retrospective error search of clinical IGRT databases and determine an absolute gross patient misalignment error rate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The EDA was developed to analyze the registration between planning scans and pretreatment cone beam computed tomography scans, outputting a misalignment score ranging from 0 (most unlikely) to 1 (most likely). The algorithm was trained using simulated translational errors on a data set obtained from 680 patients treated at 2 radiation therapy clinics between 2017 and 2022. A receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to obtain target thresholds. DICOM Query and Retrieval software was integrated with the EDA to interact with the clinical database and fully automate data retrieval and analysis during a retrospective error search from 2016 to 2017 and from 2021 to 2022 for the 2 institutions, respectively. Registrations were flagged for human review using both a hard-thresholding method and a prediction trending analysis over each individual patient's treatment course. Flagged registrations were manually reviewed and categorized as errors (>1 cm misalignment at the target) or nonerrors. RESULTS: A total of 17,612 registrations were analyzed by the EDA, resulting in 7.7% flagged events. Three previously reported errors were successfully flagged by the EDA, and 4 previously unreported vertebral body misalignment errors were discovered during case reviews. False positive cases often displayed substantial image artifacts, patient rotation, and soft tissue anatomy changes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results validated the clinical utility of the EDA for bulk image reviews and highlighted the reliability and safety of IGRT, with an absolute gross patient misalignment error rate of 0.04% ± 0.02% per delivered fraction.