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.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Abiraterone Acetate for Patients Affected by Oligometastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Trial (ARTO).

PURPOSE: ARTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03449719) is a multicenter, phase II randomized clinical trial testing the benefit of adding stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) in patients with oligometastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients were affected by oligometastatic CRPC as defined as three or less nonvisceral metastatic lesions. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either AAP alone (control arm) or AAP with concomitant SBRT to all the sites of disease (experimental arm). Primary end point was the rate of biochemical response (BR), defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decrease ≥50% from baseline measured at 6 months from treatment start. Complete BR (CBR), defined as PSA < 0.2 ng/mL at 6 months from treatment, and progression-free survival (PFS) were secondary end points. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-seven patients were enrolled between January 2019 and September 2022. BR was detected in 79.6% of patients (92% v 68.3% in the experimental v control arm, respectively), with an odds ratio (OR) of 5.34 (95% CI, 2.05 to 13.88; P = .001) in favor of the experimental arm. CBR was detected in 38.8% of patients (56% v 23.2% in the experimental v control arm, respectively), with an OR of 4.22 (95% CI, 2.12 to 8.38; P < .001). SBRT yielded a significant PFS improvement, with a hazard ratio for progression of 0.35 (95% CI, 0.21 to 0.57; P < .001) in the experimental versus control arm. CONCLUSION: The trial reached its primary end point of biochemical control and PFS, suggesting a clinical advantage for SBRT in addition to first-line AAP treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PSMA guided approach for bIoCHEmical relapse after prostatectomy- (PSICHE) trial (NCT05022914). Detection rate and treatment decision after 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT within a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasensitive imaging has been demonstrated to influence biochemical relapse treatment. PSICHE is a multicentric prospective study, aimed at exploring detection rate with 68Ga-PSMA-11 positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and outcomes with a predefined treatment algorithm tailored to the imaging. METHODS: Patients affected by biochemical recurrence after surgery (prostate specific antigen [PSA] > 0.2 < 1 ng/mL) underwent staging with 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT. Management followed this treatment algorithm accordingly with PSMA results: prostate bed salvage radiotherapy (SRT) if negative or positive within prostate bed, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) if pelvic nodal recurrences or oligometastatic disease, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) if nonoligometastatic disease. Chi-square test was used to evaluate the relationship between baseline features and rate of positive PSMA PET/CT. RESULTS: One hundred patients were enrolled. PSMA results were negative/positive in the prostate bed in 72 patients, pelvic nodal or extrapelvic metastatic disease were detected in 23 and 5 patients. Twenty-one patients underwent observation because of prior postoperative radiotherapy (RT)/treatment refusal. Fifty patients were treated with prostate bed SRT, 23 patients underwent SBRT to pelvic nodal disease, five patients were treated with SBRT to oligometastatic disease. One patient underwent ADT. NCCN high-risk features, stage > pT3 and ISUP score >3 reported a significantly higher rate of positive PSMA PET/CT after restaging (p = 0.01, p = 0.02, and p = 0.002). By quartiles of PSA, rate of positive PSMA PET/CT was 26.9% (>0.2; <0.29 ng/mL), 24% (>0.3; <0.37 ng/mL), 26.9% (>0.38; <0.51 ng/mL), and 34.7% (>0. 52; <0.98 ng/mL). CONCLUSIONS: PSICHE trial constitute a useful platform to collect data within a clinical framework where modern imaging and metastasis-directed therapy are integrated.

Early biochemical outcomes following PSMA guided approach for bIoCHEmical relapse after prostatectomy-PSICHE trial (NCT05022914): preliminary results.

PSICHE (NCT05022914) is a prospective trial to test a [68Ga]Ga- PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging tailored strategy. All evaluable patients had biochemical relapse after surgery and underwent centralized [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging. The treatment was performed according pre-defined criteria. Observation and re-staging at further PSA progression were proposed to patients with negative PSMA and previous postoperative RT. Prostate bed SRT was proposed to all patients with a negative staging or positive imaging within prostate bed. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to all sites of disease was used for all patients with pelvic nodal recurrence (nodal disease < 2 cm under aortic bifurcation) or oligometastatic disease. At 3 months after treatment, 54.7% of patients had a complete biochemical response Only 2 patients experienced G2 Genitourinary toxicity. No G2 Gastrointestinal toxicity was recorded. A PSMA targeted treatment strategy led to encouraging results and was well tolerated.

Body composition and mortality in men receiving prostate radiotherapy: A pooled analysis of NRG/RTOG 9406 and NRG/RTOG 0126.

PURPOSE: To validate the association between body composition and mortality in men treated with radiation for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Secondarily, to integrate body composition as a factor to classify patients by risk of all-cause mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants of NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9406 and NRG/RTOG 0126 with archived computed tomography were included. Muscle mass and muscle density were estimated by measuring the area and attenuation of the psoas muscles on a single slice at L4-L5. Bone density was estimated by measuring the attenuation of the vertebral body at mid-L5. Survival analyses, including Cox proportional hazards models, assessed the relationship between body composition and mortality. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to create a classification tree to classify participants by risk of death. RESULTS: Data from 2066 men were included in this study. In the final multivariable model, psoas area, comorbidity score, baseline prostate serum antigen, and age were significantly associated with survival. The RPA yielded a classification tree with four prognostic groups determined by age, comorbidity, and psoas area. Notably, the classification among older (≥70 years) men into prognostic groups was determined by psoas area. CONCLUSIONS: This study strongly supports that body composition is related to mortality in men with localized PCa. The inclusion of psoas area in the RPA classification tree suggests that body composition provides additive information to age and comorbidity status for mortality prediction, particularly among older men. More research is needed to determine the clinical impact of body composition on prognostic models in men with PCa.

Use of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Initial Results From the Pembrolizumab Arm of a Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is often used to downstage locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and decrease locoregional relapse; however, more than one-third of patients develop recurrent metastatic disease. As such, novel combinations are needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the addition of pembrolizumab during and after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can lead to an improvement in the neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score compared with treatment with FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) and chemoradiotherapy alone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this open-label, phase 2, randomized clinical trial (NRG-GI002), patients in academic and private practice settings were enrolled. Patients with stage II/III LARC with distal location (cT3-4 ≤ 5 cm from anal verge, any N), with bulky disease (any cT4 or tumor within 3 mm of mesorectal fascia), at high risk for metastatic disease (cN2), and/or who were not candidates for sphincter-sparing surgery (SSS) were stratified based on clinical tumor and nodal stages. Trial accrual opened on August 1, 2018, and ended on May 31, 2019. This intent-to-treat analysis is based on data as of August 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to neoadjuvant FOLFOX for 4 months and then underwent chemoradiotherapy (capecitabine with 50.4 Gy) with or without intravenous pembrolizumab administered at a dosage of 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 6 doses before surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was the NAR score. Secondary end points included pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, SSS, disease-free survival, and overall survival. This report focuses on end points available after definitive surgery (NAR score, pCR, SSS, clinical complete response rate, margin involvement, and safety). RESULTS: A total of 185 patients (126 [68.1%] male; mean [SD] age, 55.7 [11.1] years) were randomized to the control arm (CA) (n = 95) or the pembrolizumab arm (PA) (n = 90). Of these patients, 137 were evaluable for NAR score (68 CA patients and 69 PA patients). The mean (SD) NAR score was 11.53 (12.43) for the PA patients (95% CI, 8.54-14.51) vs 14.08 (13.82) for the CA patients (95% CI, 10.74-17.43) (P = .26). The pCR rate was 31.9% in the PA vs 29.4% in the CA (P = .75). The clinical complete response rate was 13.9% in the PA vs 13.6% in the CA (P = .95). The percentage of patients who underwent SSS was 59.4% in the PA vs 71.0% in the CA (P = .15). Grade 3 to 4 adverse events were slightly increased in the PA (48.2%) vs the CA (37.3%) during chemoradiotherapy. Two deaths occurred during FOLFOX: sepsis (CA) and pneumonia (PA). No differences in radiotherapy fractions, FOLFOX, or capecitabine doses were found. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Pembrolizumab added to chemoradiotherapy as part of total neoadjuvant therapy was suggested to be safe; however, the NAR score difference does not support further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02921256.

Radiotherapy Plus GnRH Analogue Versus High Dose Bicalutamide: A Case Control Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Radiotherapy (RT) with adjuvant hormone therapy (HT) improves prognosis in prostate cancer (PC) patients. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) analogues is the standard HT. High-dose antiandrogen therapy also improves survival in patients with locally advanced PC. The aim of this study was to compare the results of patients treated with RT plus GnRHa and patients treated with RT plus bicalutamide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our institutional PC database was used to identify patients treated with definitive or postoperative RT +/- HT which were included in this study. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighteen patients were retrospectively reviewed (median follow-up=56 months). Five-year biochemical relapse-free survival was 85.5% and 88.3% in patients treated with GnRHa and bicalutamide, respectively (p=0.712). CONCLUSION: Bicalutamide may be offered as an adjuvant treatment to RT in patients who refuse GnRHa because of related side effects. Furthermore, our study justifies randomized trials comparing RT plus GnRHa and RT plus bicalutamide.

Adjuvant and Salvage Radiotherapy after Prostatectomy: ASTRO/AUA Guideline Amendment 2018-2019.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate newly-published literature into the original ASTRO/AUA Adjuvant and Salvage Radiotherapy after Prostatectomy Guideline and to provide an updated clinical framework for clinicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The original systematic review yielded 294 studies published between January 1990 and December 2012. In April 2018, the guideline underwent an amendment and incorporated 155 references that were published from January 1990 through December 2017. Two new key questions were added. One on the use of genomic classifiers and the other on the treatment of oligo-metastases with radiation post-radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: A new statement on the use of hormone therapy with salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy was added and long-term data was used to update an existing statement on adjuvant radiotherapy. The balance of the guideline statements were re-affirmed and references were added to the existing literature base. A discussion on the use of genomic classifiers as a risk stratification tool was added to the future research discussion. No relevant data on oligo-metastases was found. CONCLUSIONS: Hormone therapy should be offered to patients who have had radical prostatectomy and who are candidates for salvage radiotherapy. The clinician should discuss possible short- and long-term side effects with the patient as well as the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to use hormone therapy should be made by the patient and a multi-disciplinary team of providers with full consideration of the patient's history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status.

Adjuvant and Salvage Radiation Therapy After Prostatectomy: ASTRO/AUA Guideline Amendment, Executive Summary 2018.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate newly published literature into the original American Society for Radiation Oncology/American Urological Association Adjuvant and Salvage Radiotherapy After Prostatectomy Guideline and provide an updated clinical framework for clinicians. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The original systematic review yielded 294 studies published between January 1990 and December 2012. In April 2018, the guideline underwent an amendment and incorporated 155 references that were published between January 1990 and December 2017. Two new key questions were added: one on the use of genomic classifiers and the other on the treatment of oligo-metastases with radiation after radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: A new statement on the use of hormone therapy with salvage radiation therapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy was added, and long-term data were used to update an existing statement on adjuvant RT. The balance of the guideline statements were reaffirmed, and references added to the existing literature base. A discussion on the use of genomic classifiers as a risk stratification tool was added to the future research discussion. No relevant data on oligo-metastases were found. CONCLUSIONS: Hormone therapy should be offered to patients who have had radical prostatectomy and who are candidates for salvage RT. Clinicians should discuss possible short- and long-term side effects with patients in addition to the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to use hormone therapy should be made by the patient and a multidisciplinary team of providers with full consideration of the patient's history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status.

Factors associated with deformation accuracy and modes of failure for MRI-optimized cervical brachytherapy using deformable image registration.

PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with MRI-to-CT image deformation accuracy and modes of failure for MRI-optimized intracavitary high-dose-rate treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-six patients with locally advanced cervical cancer had preimplantation MRI registered and deformed to postimplantation CT images using anatomically constrained and biomechanical model-based deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms. Cervix (primary) and cervix plus 10-mm margin (secondary) were used as controlling regions of interest for deformation. High-risk clinical target volume defined on pre-MRI was propagated to CT and evaluated for clinical utility in optimizing target volumes using scores 0 (low performing) to 4 (high performing). Quantitative evaluation of deformation performance included Dice index, distance to agreement, center of mass (COM) differences, cervical/uterus volume, and geometric change in organ position for MR-projected structures. Statistical analysis was performed to identify predictors of clinical utility and modes of failure. RESULTS: Anatomically constrained and biomechanical model-based deformable image registration algorithms achieved clinical utility >3 in 65% and 81% of patients, respectively. This improved to 81% and 85%, respectively, if cervix plus margin was used to drive deformations. Total COM displacement (cervix plus uterus) had the highest sensitivity in predicting low from high clinical utility in optimizing target volumes. Deformation failure (low clinical utility) resulted from high COM displacement, high cervical volume change, and retroverted uterine anatomy. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-to-CT deformable image registration using a cervix-controlling region of interest can aid clinical target delineation in cervical brachytherapy and potentially improve brachytherapy implant quality and clinical workflow. Deformation failures warrant further study and prospective deformation validation.

Converting Treatment Plans From Helical Tomotherapy to L-Shape Linac: Clinical Workflow and Dosimetric Evaluation.

This work evaluated a commercial fallback planning workflow designed to provide cross-platform treatment planning and delivery. A total of 27 helical tomotherapy intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans covering 4 anatomical sites were selected, including 7 brain, 5 unilateral head and neck, 5 bilateral head and neck, 5 pelvis, and 5 prostate cases. All helical tomotherapy plans were converted to 7-field/9-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated radiotherapy plans through fallback dose-mimicking algorithm using a 6-MV beam model. The planning target volume (PTV) coverage ( D1, D99, and homogeneity index) and organs at risk dose constraints were evaluated and compared. Overall, all 3 techniques resulted in relatively inferior target dose coverage compared to helical tomotherapy plans, with higher homogeneity index and maximum dose. The organs at risk dose ratio of fallback to helical tomotherapy plans covered a wide spectrum, from 0.87 to 1.11 on average for all sites, with fallback plans being superior for brain, pelvis, and prostate sites. The quality of fallback plans depends on the delivery technique, field numbers, and angles, as well as user selection of structures for organs at risk. In actual clinical scenario, fallback plans would typically be needed for 1 to 5 fractions of a treatment course in the event of machine breakdown. Our results suggested that <1% dose variance can be introduced in target coverage and/or organs at risk from fallback plans. The presented clinical workflow showed that the fallback plan generation typically takes 10 to 20 minutes per case. Fallback planning provides an expeditious and effective strategy for transferring patients cross platforms, and minimizing the untold risk of a patient missing treatment(s).

Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy Induces Systemic Differences in Peripheral Blood Immunophenotype Dependent on Irradiated Site.

PURPOSE: Despite the strong interest in combining stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SAR) with immunotherapy, limited data characterizing the systemic immune response after SAR are available. We hypothesized that the systemic immune response to SAR would differ by irradiated site owing to inherent differences in the microenvironment of various organs. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients receiving SAR to any organ underwent prospective blood banking before and 1 to 2 weeks after SAR. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and serum were isolated. PBMCs were stained with fluorophore-conjugated antibodies against T and natural killer (NK) cell markers. Cells were interrogated by flow cytometry, and the results were analyzed using FlowJo software. Serum cytokine and chemokine levels were measured using Luminex. We analyzed the changes from before to after therapy using paired t tests or 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni's post-test. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients had evaluable PBMCs for flow cytometry and 37 had evaluable serum samples for Luminex analysis. The total number of NK cells and cytotoxic (CD56dimCD16+) NK cells decreased (P = .02) and T-cell immunoglobulin- and mucin domain-containing molecule-3-positive (TIM3+) NK cells increased (P = .04) after SAR to parenchymal sites (lung and liver) but not to bone or brain. The total memory CD4+ T cells, activated inducible co-stimulator-positive and CD25+CD4+ memory T cells, and activated CD25+CD8+ memory T cells increased after SAR to parenchymal sites but not bone or brain. The circulating levels of tumor necrosis factor-α (P = .04) and multiple chemokines, including RANTES (P = .04), decreased after SAR to parenchymal sites but not bone or brain. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest SAR to parenchymal sites induces systemic immune changes, including a decrease in total and cytotoxic NK cells, an increase in TIM3+ NK cells, and an increase in activated memory CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. SAR to nonparenchymal sites did not induce these changes. By comparing the immune response after radiation to different organs, our data suggest SAR induces systemic immunologic changes that are dependent on the irradiated site.

First Report of NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0622: A Phase 2 Trial of Samarium-153 Followed by Salvage Prostatic Fossa Irradiation in High-Risk Clinically Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the utility of 153Sm lexidronam (Quadramet) in the setting of men with prostate cancer status post radical prostatectomy who develop biochemical failure with no clinical evidence of osseous metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Trial NRG Oncology RTOG 0622 is a single-arm phase 2 trial that enrolled men with pT2-T4, N0-1, M0 prostate cancer status post radical prostatectomy, who meet at least 1 of these biochemical failure criteria: (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 1.0 ng/mL; (2) PSA > 0.2 ng/mL if Gleason score 9 to 10; or (3) PSA > 0.2 ng/mL if N1. Patients received 153Sm (2.0 mCi/kg intravenously × 1) followed by salvage external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to the prostatic fossa (64.8-70.2 Gy in 1.8-Gy daily fractions). No androgen deprivation therapy was allowed. The primary objective was PSA response within 12 weeks of receiving 153Sm. The secondary objectives were to: (1) assess the completion rate for the regimen of 153Sm and EBRT; (2) evaluate the hematologic toxicity and other adverse events (AEs) at 12 and 24 weeks; and (3) determine the freedom from progression rate at 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 60 enrolled eligible patients were included in this analysis. Median follow-up was 3.97 years. A PSA response was achieved in 7 of 52 evaluable patients (13.5%), compared with the 25% hypothesized. The 2-year freedom from progression rate was 25.5% (95% confidence interval 14.4%-36.7%), and the biochemical failure rate was 64.4% (95% CI 50.5%-75.2%). Samarium-153 was well tolerated, with 16 (of 60) grade 3 to 4 hematologic AEs and no grade 5 hematologic AEs. Radiation therapy was also well tolerated, with no grade 3 to 5 acute radiation therapy-related AEs and 1 grade 3 to 4 and no grade 5 late radiation therapy-related AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Trial NRG Oncology RTOG 0622 did not meet its primary endpoint of PSA response, although the regimen of 153Sm and salvage EBRT was well tolerated. Although the toxicity profile supports study of 153Sm in high-risk disease, it may not be beneficial in men receiving EBRT.

Postoperative Radiation After Radical Prostatectomy.

A total of 3 randomized clinical trials have demonstrated a significant clinical benefit with adjuvant radiation in patients with high-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy, with each showing improved biochemical control outcomes, and one trial (SWOG 8794) also demonstrating increased overall survival. How broadly these results have informed clinical practice has evolved over time, given the widespread availability of ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen level testing and increased awareness that the high-risk patients are not a uniform cohort. In this review, we discuss the evidence from published and ongoing trials as well as current controversies, focusing on unanswered questions such as when postoperative radiation should be offered and whether the inclusion of androgen-deprivation therapy improves clinical outcomes. The emerging interest in genomic prediction tools and the enhanced sensitivity of novel imaging modalities should offer strategies to improve patient selection, which would help to identify men who may benefit from postoperative radiation while avoiding unnecessary treatment and toxicities in other men.

The impact of concurrent granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor on quality of life in head and neck cancer patients: results of the randomized, placebo-controlled Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9901 trial.

PURPOSE: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of GM-CSF in reducing mucosal injury and symptom burden from curative radiotherapy for head and neck (H&N) cancer. METHODS: Eligible patients with H&N cancer receiving radiation encompassing ≥50 % of the oral cavity or oropharynx received subcutaneous GM-CSF or placebo. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the RTOG-modified University of Washington H&N Symptom Questionnaire at baseline 4, 13, 26, and 48 weeks from radiation initiation. RESULTS: Of 125 eligible patients, 114 were evaluable for QoL (58 GM-CSF, 56 placebo). Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and baseline symptom scores were well balanced between the treatment arms. At the end of the acute period (13 weeks), patients in both arms reported negative change in total symptom score indicating increase in symptom burden relative to baseline (mean -18.4 GM-CSF, -20.8 placebo). There was no difference in change in total symptom score (p > 0.05) or change in mucous, pain, eating, or activity domain scores (p > 0.01) between patients in the GM-CSF and placebo arms. Analysis limited to patients treated per protocol or with an acceptable protocol deviation also found no difference in change in total symptom score (p > 0.05) or change in domain scores (p > 0.01) between treatment arms. Provider assessment of acute mucositis during treatment did not correlate with patient-reported mucous domain and total symptom scores (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: GM-CSF administered concurrently during head and neck radiation does not appear to significantly improve patient-reported QoL symptom burden.

Adjuvant and salvage radiation therapy after prostatectomy: American Society for Radiation Oncology/American Urological Association guidelines.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline was to provide a clinical framework for the use of radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy as adjuvant or salvage therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A systematic literature review using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane database was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the use of radiation therapy after prostatectomy. The review yielded 294 articles; these publications were used to create the evidence-based guideline statements. Additional guidance is provided as Clinical Principles when insufficient evidence existed. RESULTS: Guideline statements are provided for patient counseling, use of radiation therapy in the adjuvant and salvage contexts, defining biochemical recurrence, and conducting a restaging evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should offer adjuvant radiation therapy to patients with adverse pathologic findings at prostatectomy (ie, seminal vesicle invastion, positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension) and salvage radiation therapy to patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or local recurrence after prostatectomy in whom there is no evidence of distant metastatic disease. The offer of radiation therapy should be made in the context of a thoughtful discussion of possible short- and long-term side effects of radiation therapy as well as the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to administer radiation therapy should be made by the patient and the multidisciplinary treatment team with full consideration of the patient's history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status. The American Society for Radiation Oncology and American Urological Association websites show this guideline in its entirety, including the full literature review.

Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: AUA/ASTRO Guideline.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical framework for the use of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy as adjuvant or salvage therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review using the PubMed®, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the use of radiotherapy after prostatectomy. The review yielded 294 articles; these publications were used to create the evidence-based guideline statements. Additional guidance is provided as Clinical Principles when insufficient evidence existed. RESULTS: Guideline statements are provided for patient counseling, the use of radiotherapy in the adjuvant and salvage contexts, defining biochemical recurrence, and conducting a re-staging evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should offer adjuvant radiotherapy to patients with adverse pathologic findings at prostatectomy (i.e., seminal vesicle invasion, positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension) and should offer salvage radiotherapy to patients with prostatic specific antigen or local recurrence after prostatectomy in whom there is no evidence of distant metastatic disease. The offer of radiotherapy should be made in the context of a thoughtful discussion of possible short- and long-term side effects of radiotherapy as well as the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to administer radiotherapy should be made by the patient and the multi-disciplinary treatment team with full consideration of the patient's history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status. Please visit the ASTRO and AUA websites (http://www.redjournal.org/webfiles/images/journals/rob/RAP%20Guideline.pdf and http://www.auanet.org/education/guidelines/radiation-after-prostatectomy.cfm) to view this guideline in its entirety, including the full literature review.

Radiation treatment for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Around 70% of men presenting with prostate cancer will have organ-confined disease, with the majority presenting with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. This article reviews the evidence supporting the current standard of care in radiation oncology for the evaluation and management of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Dose escalation, hormonal therapy, combined modality therapy, and modern techniques for the delivery of radiation therapy are reviewed.

Clinical outcome of patients treated with 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) for prostate cancer on RTOG 9406.

PURPOSE: Report of clinical cancer control outcomes on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9406, a three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) dose escalation trial for localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: RTOG 9406 is a Phase I/II multi-institutional dose escalation study of 3D-CRT for men with localized prostate cancer. Patients were registered on five sequential dose levels: 68.4 Gy, 73.8 Gy, 79.2 Gy, 74 Gy, and 78 Gy with 1.8 Gy/day (levels I-III) or 2.0 Gy/day (levels IV and V). Neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) from 2 to 6 months was allowed. Protocol-specific, American Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and Phoenix biochemical failure definitions are reported. RESULTS: Thirty-four institutions enrolled 1,084 patients and 1,051 patients are analyzable. Median follow-up for levels I, II, III, IV, and V was 11.7, 10.4, 11.8, 10.4, and 9.2 years, respectively. Thirty-six percent of patients received NHT. The 5-year overall survival was 90%, 87%, 88%, 89%, and 88% for dose levels I-V, respectively. The 5-year clinical disease-free survival (excluding protocol prostate-specific antigen definition) for levels I-V is 84%, 78%, 81%, 82%, and 82%, respectively. By ASTRO definition, the 5-year disease-free survivals were 57%, 59%, 52%, 64% and 75% (low risk); 46%, 52%, 54%, 56%, and 63% (intermediate risk); and 50%, 34%, 46%, 34%, and 61% (high risk) for levels I-V, respectively. By the Phoenix definition, the 5-year disease-free survivals were 68%, 73%, 67%, 84%, and 80% (low risk); 70%, 62%, 70%, 74%, and 69% (intermediate risk); and 42%, 62%, 68%, 54%, and 67% (high risk) for levels I-V, respectively. CONCLUSION: Dose-escalated 3D-CRT yields favorable outcomes for localized prostate cancer. This multi-institutional experience allows comparison to other experiences with modern radiation therapy.

Failure mode and effect analysis for delivery of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: To improve the quality and safety of our practice of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), we analyzed the process following the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method. METHODS: The FMEA was performed by a multidisciplinary team. For each step in the SBRT delivery process, a potential failure occurrence was derived and three factors were assessed: the probability of each occurrence, the severity if the event occurs, and the probability of detection by the treatment team. A rank of 1 to 10 was assigned to each factor, and then the multiplied ranks yielded the relative risks (risk priority numbers). The failure modes with the highest risk priority numbers were then considered to implement process improvement measures. RESULTS: A total of 28 occurrences were derived, of which nine events scored with significantly high risk priority numbers. The risk priority numbers of the highest ranked events ranged from 20 to 80. These included transcription errors of the stereotactic coordinates and machine failures. CONCLUSION: Several areas of our SBRT delivery were reconsidered in terms of process improvement, and safety measures, including treatment checklists and a surgical time-out, were added for our practice of gantry-based image-guided SBRT. This study serves as a guide for other users of SBRT to perform FMEA of their own practice.