A unified strategy to focal brachytherapy incorporating transperineal biopsy, image fusion, and real-time implantation with and without rectal spacer simulated in prostate phantoms.

Purpose: To develop an approach to the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer using one platform for fusion biopsy, followed by focal gland ablation utilizing permanent prostate brachytherapy with and without a rectal spacer. Material and methods: Prostate phantoms containing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) regions of interest (ROI) underwent fusion biopsy, followed by image co-registration of positive sites to a treatment planning brachytherapy program. A partial hemi-ablation and both posterior lobes using a Mick applicator and linked stranded seeds were simulated. Dummy sources were modeled as iodine-125 (125I) with a prescribed dose of at least 210 Gy to gross tumor (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV), as defined by mpMRI visible ROI and surrounding negative biopsy sites. Computer tomograms (CT) were performed post-implant prior to and after rectal spacer insertion. Different prostate and rectal constraints were compared with and without the spacer. Results: The intra-operative focal volumes of CTV ranged from 6.2 to 14.9 cc (mean, 11.3 cc), and the ratio of focal volume/whole prostate volume ranged between 0.19 and 0.42 (mean, 0.31). The intra- and post-operative mean focal D90 of GTV, CTV, and for the entire prostate gland was 265 Gy and 235 Gy, 214 Gy and 213 Gy, and 66.1 Gy and 57 Gy, respectively. On average, 13 mm separation was achieved between the prostate and the rectum (range, 12-14 mm) on post-operative CT. The mean doses in Gy to 2 cc of the rectum (D2cc) without spacer vs. with spacer were 39.8 Gy vs. 32.6 Gy, respectively. Conclusions: Doses above 200 Gy and the implantation of seeds in clinically significant region for focal therapy in phantoms are feasible. All rectal dosimetric parameters improved for the spacer implants, as compared with the non-spacer implants. Further validation of this concept is warranted in clinical trials.

Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Nomogram Predicting the Outcome of Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy in Patients without Metastases on Restaging Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography.

Background and objective: Owing to the greater use of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), patient selection for local salvage radiation therapy (sRT) has changed. Our objective was to determine the short-term efficacy of sRT in patients with BCR after RARP, and to develop a novel nomogram predicting BCR-free survival after sRT in a nationwide contemporary cohort of patients who underwent PSMA PET/CT before sRT for BCR of PCa, without evidence of metastatic disease. Methods: All 302 eligible patients undergoing PCa sRT in four reference centers between September 2015 and August 2020 were included. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis using a backward elimination procedure to develop a nomogram for predicting biochemical progression of PCa, defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥0.2 ng/ml above the post-sRT nadir within 1 yr after sRT. Key findings and limitations: Biochemical progression of disease within 1 yr after sRT was observed for 56/302 (19%) of the study patients. The final predictive model included PSA at sRT initiation, pathological grade group, surgical margin status, PSA doubling time, presence of local recurrence on PSMA PET/CT, and the presence of biochemical persistence (first PSA result ≥0.1 ng/ml) after RARP. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.64-0.79). Using our nomogram, patients with a predicted risk of >20% had a 30.8% chance of developing biochemical progression within 1 yr after sRT. Conclusions: Our novel nomogram may facilitate better patient counseling regarding early oncological outcome after sRT. Patients with high risk of biochemical progression may be candidates for more extensive treatment. Patient summary: We developed a new tool for predicting cancer control outcomes of radiotherapy for patients with recurrence of prostate cancer after surgical removal of their prostate. This tool may help in better counseling of these patients with recurrent cancer regarding their early expected outcome after radiotherapy.

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy for primary kidney cancer (TROG 15.03 FASTRACK II): a non-randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a novel non-invasive alternative for patients with primary renal cell cancer who do not undergo surgical resection. The FASTRACK II clinical trial investigated the efficacy of SABR for primary renal cell cancer in a phase 2 trial. METHODS: This international, non-randomised, phase 2 study was conducted in seven centres in Australia and one centre in the Netherlands. Eligible patients aged 18 years or older had biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of primary renal cell cancer, with only a single lesion; were medically inoperable, were at high risk of complications from surgery, or declined surgery; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. A multidisciplinary decision that active treatment was warranted was required. Key exclusion criteria were a pre-treatment estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 30 mL/min per 1·73 m2, previous systemic therapies for renal cell cancer, previous high-dose radiotherapy to an overlapping region, tumours larger than 10 cm, and direct contact of the renal cell cancer with the bowel. Patients received either a single fraction SABR of 26 Gy for tumours 4 cm or less in maximum diameter, or 42 Gy in three fractions for tumours more than 4 cm to 10 cm in maximum diameter. The primary endpoint was local control, defined as no progression of the primary renal cell cancer, as evaluated by the investigator per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1). Assuming a 1-year local control of 90%, the null hypothesis of 80% or less was considered not to be worthy of proceeding to a future randomised controlled trial. All patients who commenced trial treatment were included in the primary outcome analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02613819, and has completed accrual. FINDINGS: Between July 28, 2016, and Feb 27, 2020, 70 patients were enrolled and initiated treatment. Median age was 77 years (IQR 70-82). Before enrolment, 49 (70%) of 70 patients had documented serial growth on initial surveillance imaging. 49 (70%) of 70 patients were male and 21 (30%) were female. Median tumour size was 4·6 cm (IQR 3·7-5·5). All patients enrolled had T1-T2a and N0-N1 disease. 23 patients received single-fraction SABR of 26 Gy and 47 received 42 Gy in three fractions. Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 38-60). Local control at 12 months from treatment commencement was 100% (p<0·0001). Seven (10%) patients had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events, with no grade 4 adverse events observed. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were nausea and vomiting (three [4%] patients), abdominal, flank, or tumour pain (four [6%]), colonic obstruction (two [3%]), and diarrhoea (one [1%]). No treatment-related or cancer-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first multicentre prospective clinical trial of non-surgical definitive therapy in patients with primary renal cell cancer. In a cohort with predominantly T1b or larger disease, SABR was an effective treatment strategy with no observed local failures or cancer-related deaths. We observed an acceptable side-effect profile and renal function after SABR. These outcomes support the design of a future randomised trial of SABR versus surgery for primary renal cell cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Australia Priority-driven Collaborative Cancer Research Scheme.

Pretrial Quality Assurance for Hypofractionated Salvage Radiation Therapy After Prostatectomy in the Multi-Institutional PERYTON-trial.

Purpose: The PERYTON trial is a multicenter randomized controlled trial that will investigate whether the treatment outcome of salvage external beam radiation therapy (sEBRT) will be improved with hypofractionated radiation therapy. A pretrial quality assurance (QA) program was undertaken to ensure protocol compliance within the PERYTON trial and to assess variation in sEBRT treatment protocols between the participating centers. Methods and Materials: Completion of the QA program was mandatory for each participating center (N = 8) to start patient inclusion. The pretrial QA program included (1) a questionnaire on the center-specific sEBRT protocol, (2) a delineation exercise of the clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk, and (3) a treatment planning exercise. All contours were analyzed using the pairwise dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the 50th and 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD50 and HD95, respectively). The submitted treatment plans were reviewed for protocol compliance. Results: The results of the questionnaire showed that high-quality, state-of-the-art radiation therapy techniques were used in the participating centers and identified variations of the sEBRT protocols used concerning the position verification and preparation techniques. The submitted CTVs showed significant variation, with a range in volume of 29 cm3 to 167 cm3, a mean pairwise DSC of 0.52, and a mean HD50 and HD95 of 2.3 mm and 24.4 mm, respectively. Only in 1 center the treatment plan required adaptation before meeting all constraints of the PERYTON protocol. Conclusions: The pretrial QA of the PERYTON trial demonstrated that high-quality, but variable, radiation techniques were used in the 8 participating centers. The treatment planning exercise confirmed that the dose constraints of the PERYTON protocol were feasible for all participating centers. The observed variation in CTV delineation led to agreement on a new (image-based) delineation guideline to be used by all participating centers within the PERYTON trial.

Radical cystectomy or trimodality therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a qualitative study exploring patient priorities and counselling needs when making a treatment choice.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to explore the priorities and counselling needs of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer faced with a decision between radical cystectomy and trimodality therapy. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study according to the phenomenological approach. Sixteen muscle-invasive bladder cancer survivors who underwent radical cystectomy or trimodality therapy completed a semi-structured interview between May 2022 and February 2023. Patients were recruited via Ghent University Hospital and a patient organisation. Data were analysed with inductive thematic analysis by a multi-disciplinary team using an iterative approach and investigators' triangulation. RESULTS: Four main priorities determining the treatment decision were identified. (1) curing the disease; (2) health-related quality of life (physical, mental and social); (3) confidence in the treatment, which was mainly based on trust in the clinician; and (4) personal attributes. Trust in the clinician can be achieved by fulfilling the patient's information needs (accurate, complete, clear, impartial, personalised, realistic, and transparent information), ensuring accessibility of the clinician, and creating a clear and personalised treatment plan, involving patients to the extend they desire. Many patients considered a patient decision aid as a valuable asset in this process. CONCLUSION: Priorities vary between patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Identifying individual priorities and offering personalised information about them is crucial for ensuring trust in the clinician and confidence in the treatment. Use of a patient decision aid can be beneficial in this process.

Radiotherapy Use in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Review of the Guidelines and Impact of Increased Awareness in Patient Referral at a Tertiary Center in Belgium.

Purpose: Pronounced underuse of radiotherapy (RT) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is reported. This study aims to assess the awareness about the role of RT in different MIBC settings and see whether this has increased since 2017. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the bladder cancer guidelines of the EAU, ESMO, NCCN, NICE, and AUA/ASCO/ASTRO/SUO, focusing on the role of RT in MIBC. In 2017, we evaluated the use of RT in MIBC in Belgium. This raised awareness about the indications of RT in different MIBC settings. Here, we present a retrospective pattern of care analysis of the RT use for MIBC patients at our center from January 2012 until December 2021. Frequency of RT use, patient, disease and treatment characteristics were compared between two 5-year periods (2012-2016 and 2017-2021). Results: Review of the guidelines suggested that RT can be used as a treatment option in most MIBC settings. However, differences between guideline recommendations existed and high-level evidence was often lacking. Overall, 221 unique MIBC patients received RT at our center. RT use for MIBC was 39% higher in the second 5-year period (Between the same periods, the number of new MIBC registrations increased with 26%). The most pronounced increase, ie, 529%, was observed in the primary setting and was in parallel with patient preference becoming the main indication for RT. Participation in clinical trials seems to have had an important impact on the frequency of RT use in the adjuvant and metastatic setting. Conclusion: We provide a critical overview of the RT indications in MIBC as recommended by the international guidelines. Increased awareness about RT as a treatment option in MIBC seems to have an impact on the treatment choice in clinical practice, as was observed in our tertiary center.

A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer.

Introduction: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common side effect of prostate cancer treatment, but in clinical practice, it is difficult to predict. Machine learning (ML) models have shown promising results in predicting outcomes, yet the lack of transparency in complex models known as "black-box" has made clinicians wary of relying on them in sensitive decisions. Therefore, finding a balance between accuracy and explainability is crucial for the implementation of ML models. The aim of this study was to employ three different ML classifiers to predict the probability of experiencing UI in men with localized prostate cancer 1-year and 2-year after treatment and compare their accuracy and explainability. Methods: We used the ProZIB dataset from the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland; IKNL) which contained clinical, demographic, and PROM data of 964 patients from 65 Dutch hospitals. Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithms were applied to predict (in)continence after prostate cancer treatment. Results: All models have been externally validated according to the TRIPOD Type 3 guidelines and their performance was assessed by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC. While all three models demonstrated similar performance, LR showed slightly better accuracy than RF and SVM in predicting the risk of UI one year after prostate cancer treatment, achieving an accuracy of 0.75, a sensitivity of 0.82, and an AUC of 0.79. All models for the 2-year outcome performed poorly in the validation set, with an accuracy of 0.6 for LR, 0.65 for RF, and 0.54 for SVM. Conclusion: The outcomes of our study demonstrate the promise of using non-black box models, such as LR, to assist clinicians in recognizing high-risk patients and making informed treatment choices. The coefficients of the LR model show the importance of each feature in predicting results, and the generated nomogram provides an accessible illustration of how each feature impacts the predicted outcome. Additionally, the model's simplicity and interpretability make it a more appropriate option in scenarios where comprehending the model's predictions is essential.

Focal salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy with implantable rectum spacer for locally recurrent prostate cancer after initial low-dose-rate with grade 3 rectal toxicity.

Purpose: Locally recurrent prostate cancer after previous radiation therapy remains challenging. One of the curative options for these patients is salvage brachytherapy. There are no reports available on the use of a biodegradable rectal balloon implantation (RBI) in combination with brachytherapy in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after previous radiotherapy. Case presentation: Here, we report on a patient with a local recurrence at five years after previous low-dose-rate brachytherapy with a prescribed dose of 145 Gray (Gy) for a low-risk prostate adenocarcinoma. The patient experienced grade 3 rectal toxicity, which was resolved at the time of local recurrence. He was treated with focal high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy of 2 fr. × 13 Gy after RBI implantation. Four years post-salvage treatment, there was no evidence of biochemical recurrence according Phoenix definition, and no gastro-intestinal or genitourinary toxicity. Conclusions: This case describes the use of RBI implantation in combination with a focal salvage HDR in a patient with recurrent disease, with significant initial grade 3 rectal toxicity after previous irradiation. The use of a biodegradable RBI proved to be a promising solution for such a patient; however, this method needs to be further investigated.

Dosimetric and Hematologic Implications of Prostate-Only Versus Whole Pelvic Radiotherapy: Results of the Multicentric Phase 3 PROPER Study.

Objectives: The aim is to evaluate the incidental dose to the lymphatic regions in prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) and to compare hematological outcome between PORT and whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) in node-positive prostate cancer (pN1 PCa), in the era of modern radiotherapy techniques. Methods: We performed a prospective phase 3 trial in which a total of 64 pN1 PCa patients were randomized between PORT (ARM A) and WPRT (ARM B) delivered with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The lymph node (LN) regions were delineated separately and differences between groups were calculated using Welch t-tests. Hematological toxicity was scored according to common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4.03. To evaluate differences in the evolution of red blood cell (RBC), white blood cell (WBC), and platelet count over time between PORT and WPRT, 3 linear mixed models with a random intercept for the patient was fit with model terms randomization group, study time point, and the interaction between both categorical predictors. Results: Except for dose to the obturator region, the incidental dose to the surrounding LN areas was low in ARM A. None of the patients developed severe hematological toxicity. The change in RBC from time point pre-external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) to month 3 and for WBC from time point pre-EBRT to months 3 and 12 was significantly different with ARM B showing a larger decrease. Conclusion: The incidental dose to the lymphatic areas becomes neglectable when PORT is delivered with VMAT. Hematological toxicity is very low after WPRT with VMAT and when bone marrow constraints are used for planning, although WPRT causes a decrease in RBC and WBC count over time.

Advances in radiotherapy and its impact on second primary cancer risk: A multi-center cohort study in prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Modelling studies suggest that advanced intensity-modulated radiotherapy may increase second primary cancer (SPC) risks, due to increased radiation exposure of tissues located outside the treatment fields. In the current study we investigated the association between SPC risks and characteristics of applied external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) protocols for localized prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: We collected EBRT protocol characteristics (2000-2016) from five Dutch RT institutes for the 3D-CRT and advanced EBRT era (N = 7908). From the Netherlands Cancer Registry we obtained patient/tumour characteristics, SPC data, and survival information. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) were calculated for pelvis and non-pelvis SPC. Nationwide SIRs were calculated as a reference, using calendar period as a proxy to label 3D-CRT/advanced EBRT. RESULTS: From 2000-2006, 3D-CRT with 68-78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, delivered with 10-23 MV and weekly portal imaging was the most dominant protocol. By the year 2010 all institutes routinely used advanced EBRT (IMRT, VMAT, tomotherapy), mainly delivering 78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, using various kV/MV imaging protocols. Sixteen percent (N = 1268) developed ≥ 1 SPC. SIRs for pelvis and non-pelvis SPC (all institutes, advanced EBRT vs 3D-CRT) were 1.17 (1.00-1.36) vs 1.39 (1.21-1.59), and 1.01 (0.89-1.07) vs 1.03 (0.94-1.13), respectively. Nationwide non-pelvis SIR was 1.07 (1.01-1.13) vs 1.02 (0.98-1.07). Other RT protocol characteristics did not correlate with SPC endpoints. CONCLUSION: None of the studied RT characteristics of advanced EBRT was associated with increased out-of-field SPC risks. With constantly evolving EBRT protocols, evaluation of associated SPC risks remains important.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of prediction models used in cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers in women with an incidence of around 6.5 % of all the cancer in women worldwide. Early detection and adequate treatment according to staging improve the patient's life expectancy. Outcome prediction models might aid treatment decisions, but a systematic review on prediction models for cervical cancer patients is not available. DESIGN: We performed a systematic review for prediction models in cervical cancer following PRISMA guidelines. Key features that were used for model training and validation, the endpoints were extracted from the article and data were analyzed. Selected articles were grouped based on prediction endpoints i.e. Group1: Overall survival, Group2: progression-free survival; Group3: recurrence or distant metastasis; Group4: treatment response; Group5: toxicity or quality of life. We developed a scoring system to evaluate the manuscript. As per our criteria, studies were divided into four groups based on scores obtained in our scoring system, the Most significant study (Score > 60 %); Significant study (60 % > Score > 50 %); Moderately Significant study (50 % > Score > 40 %); least significant study (score < 40 %). A meta-analysis was performed for all the groups separately. RESULTS: The first line of search selected 1358 articles and finally 39 articles were selected as eligible for inclusion in the review. As per our assessment criteria, 16, 13 and 10 studies were found to be the most significant, significant and moderately significant respectively. The intra-group pooled correlation coefficient for Group1, Group2, Group3, Group4, and Group5 were 0.76 [0.72, 0.79], 0.80 [0.73, 0.86], 0.87 [0.83, 0.90], 0.85 [0.77, 0.90], 0.88 [0.85, 0.90] respectively. All the models were found to be good (prediction accuracy [c-index/AUC/R2] >0.7) in endpoint prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Prediction models of cervical cancer toxicity, local or distant recurrence and survival prediction show promising results with reasonable prediction accuracy [c-index/AUC/R2 > 0.7]. These models should also be validated on external data and evaluated in prospective clinical studies.

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

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

Development and external validation of multivariate prediction models for erectile dysfunction in men with localized prostate cancer.

While the 10-year survival rate for localized prostate cancer patients is very good (>98%), side effects of treatment may limit quality of life significantly. Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common burden associated with increasing age as well as prostate cancer treatment. Although many studies have investigated the factors affecting erectile dysfunction (ED) after prostate cancer treatment, only limited studies have investigated whether ED can be predicted before the start of treatment. The advent of machine learning (ML) based prediction tools in oncology offers a promising approach to improve the accuracy of prediction and quality of care. Predicting ED may help aid shared decision-making by making the advantages and disadvantages of certain treatments clear, so that a tailored treatment for an individual patient can be chosen. This study aimed to predict ED at 1-year and 2-year post-diagnosis based on patient demographics, clinical data and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) measured at diagnosis. We used a subset of the ProZIB dataset collected by the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland; IKNL) that contained information on 964 localized prostate cancer cases from 69 Dutch hospitals for model training and external validation. Two models were generated using a logistic regression algorithm coupled with Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE). The first predicted ED 1 year post-diagnosis and required 10 pre-treatment variables; the second predicted ED 2 years post-diagnosis with 9 pre-treatment variables. The validation AUCs were 0.84 and 0.81 for 1 year and 2 years post-diagnosis respectively. To immediately allow patients and clinicians to use these models in the clinical decision-making process, nomograms were generated. In conclusion, we successfully developed and validated two models that predicted ED in patients with localized prostate cancer. These models will allow physicians and patients alike to make informed evidence-based decisions about the most suitable treatment with quality of life in mind.

Is It Safe to Switch from a Standard Anterior to Retzius-Sparing Approach in Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy?

BACKGROUND: Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) has been shown to lead to better outcomes regarding early continence compared to standard anterior RARP (SA-RARP). The goal of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of implementing RS-RARP in a tertiary center with experience in SA-RARP. METHODS: From February 2020, all newly diagnosed non-metastatic prostate cancer patients for whom RARP was indicated were evaluated for RS-RARP. Data from the first 100 RS-RARP patients were prospectively collected and compared with data from the last 100 SA-RARP patients. Patients were evaluated for Clavien Dindo grade ≥3a complications, urinary continence after 2 and 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months, erectile function, positive surgical margins (PSMs) and biochemical recurrence (BCR). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in postoperative complications at Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3a (SA-RARP: 6, RS-RARP: 4; p = 0.292). At all time points, significantly higher proportions of RS-RARP patients were continent (p < 0.001). No significant differences in postoperative potency were observed (52% vs. 59%, respectively, p = 0.608). PSMs were more frequent in the RS-RARP group (43% vs. 29%, p = 0.034), especially in locally advanced tumors (pT3: 64.6% vs. 43.8%, p = 0.041-pT2: 23.5% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.329). The one-year BCR-free survival was 82.6% vs. 81.6% in the SA-RARP and RS-RARP groups, respectively (p = 0.567). The median follow-up was 22 [18-27] vs. 24.5 [17-35] months in the RS-RARP and SA-RARP groups, respectively (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The transition from SA-RARP to RS-RARP can be safely performed by surgeons proficient in SA-RARP. Continence results after RS-RARP were significantly better at any time point. A higher proportion of PSMs was observed, although it did not result in a worse BCR-free survival.

Genetic Aspects and Molecular Testing in Prostate Cancer: A Report from a Dutch Multidisciplinary Consensus Meeting.

Background: Germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) is becoming more broadly accepted, but testing indications and clinical consequences for carriers in each disease stage are not yet well defined. Objective: To determine the consensus of a Dutch multidisciplinary expert panel on the indication and application of germline and tumour genetic testing in PCa. Design setting and participants: The panel consisted of 39 specialists involved in PCa management. We used a modified Delphi method consisting of two voting rounds and a virtual consensus meeting. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was reached if ≥75% of the panellists chose the same option. Appropriateness was assessed by the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. Results and limitations: Of the multiple-choice questions, 44% reached consensus. For men without PCa having a relevant family history (familial PCa/BRCA-related hereditary cancer), follow-up by prostate-specific antigen was considered appropriate. For patients with low-risk localised PCa and a family history of PCa, active surveillance was considered appropriate, except in case of the patient being a BRCA2 germline pathogenic variant carrier. Germline and tumour genetic testing should not be done for nonmetastatic hormone-sensitive PCa in the absence of a relevant family history of cancer. Tumour genetic testing was deemed most appropriate for the identification of actionable variants, with uncertainty for germline testing. For tumour genetic testing in metastatic castration-resistant PCa, consensus was not reached for the timing and panel composition. The principal limitations are as follows: (1) a number of topics discussed lack scientific evidence, and therefore the recommendations are partly opinion based, and (2) there was a small number of experts per discipline. Conclusions: The outcomes of this Dutch consensus meeting may provide further guidance on genetic counselling and molecular testing related to PCa. Patient summary: A group of Dutch specialists discussed the use of germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) patients, indication of these tests (which patients and when), and impact of these tests on the management and treatment of PCa.

Treatment verification in high dose rate brachytherapy using a realistic 3D printed head phantom and an imaging panel.

PURPOSE: Even though High Dose Rate (HDR) brachytherapy has good treatment outcomes in different treatment sites, treatment verification is far from widely implemented because of a lack of easily available solutions. Previously it has been shown that an imaging panel (IP) near the patient can be used to determine treatment parameters such as the dwell time and source positions in a single material pelvic phantom. In this study we will use a heterogeneous head phantom to test this IP approach, and simulate common treatment errors to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the error-detecting capabilities of the IP. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A heterogeneous head-phantom consisting of soft tissue and bone equivalent materials was 3D-printed to simulate a base of tongue treatment. An High Dose Rate treatment plan with 3 different catheters was used to simulate a treatment delivery, using dwell times ranging from 0.3 s to 4 s and inter-dwell distances of 2 mm. The IP was used to measure dwell times, positions and detect simulated errors. Measured dwell times and positions were used to calculate the delivered dose. RESULTS: Dwell times could be determined within 0.1 s. Source positions were measured with submillimeter accuracy in the plane of the IP, and average distance accuracy of 1.7 mm in three dimensions. All simulated treatment errors (catheter swap, catheter shift, afterloader errors) were detected. Dose calculations show slightly different distributions with the measured dwell positions and dwell times (gamma pass rate for 1 mm/1% of 96.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Using an IP, it was possible to verify the treatment in a realistic heterogeneous phantom and detect certain treatment errors.

Evaluating the Impact of Prostate Only Versus Pelvic Radiotherapy for Pathological Node-positive Prostate Cancer: First Results from the Multicenter Phase 3 PROPER Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for patients with pathological node-positive (pN1) prostate cancer (PCa) is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) improves clinical relapse-free survival (cRFS) in comparison to prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in pN1 PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: PROPER was a phase 3 trial randomizing patients to WPRT or PORT. All patients had pN1cM0 PCa with fewer than five lymph nodes involved. INTERVENTION: All patients underwent pelvic lymph node dissection followed by radical prostatectomy/primary radiotherapy + 2 yr of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Patients were randomized to PORT (arm A) or WPRT (arm B). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was cRFS. The secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS), and toxicity. The study was stopped because of poor accrual in June 2021 after the inclusion of 69 patients. We report on OS, bRFS, cRFS, and acute and late toxicity. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up was 30 mo in arm A (n = 33) and 36 mo in arm B (n = 31). The 3-yr OS rate was 92% ± 5% in arm A and 93% ± 5% in arm B (p = 0.61). None of the patients died of PCa. The 3-yr bRFS was 79% ± 9% in arm A and 92% ± 5% in arm B (p = 0.08). The 3-yr cRFS rate was 88% ± 6% in arm A and 92% ± 5% in arm B (p = 0.31). No pelvic recurrence was observed in arm B. Acute grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was higher with WPRT (15% in arm A vs 45% in arm B; p = 0.03). Limitations are the early closure because of poor accrual and the limited follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our trial are hypothesis-generating but add evidence supporting the recommendation to offer WPRT to patients with pN1 PCa. However, WPRT is associated with more acute gastrointestinal toxicity. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at the impact of radiotherapy to the whole pelvis (WPRT) for patients with prostate cancer that had spread to the lymph nodes. Although the trial was closed early because of poor enrolment, we found that WPRT improves survival free from relapse, and no recurrences were observed in the pelvis. WPRT is associated with more acute side effects on the gastrointestinal system in comparison to radiotherapy to just the prostate.

International consensus on radiotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for most cases. While radiotherapy has historically served as a palliative modality in metastatic NSCLC, considerable advances in its technology and the continuous development of cutting-edge therapeutic agents, such as targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), are increasing its role in the multi-disciplinary management of the disease. Methods: International radiotherapy experts were convened to consider and reach consensuses on the clinical utilities of radiotherapy in metastatic NSCLC, with the aim to provide patient-focused, up to date, evidence-based, recommendations to assist cancer specialists in the management of patients with metastatic NSCLC worldwide. Results: Timely radiotherapy can offer rapid symptom alleviation and allow subsequent aggressive treatment approaches in patients with heavy tumor burden and/or oncologic emergencies. In addition, appropriate incorporation of radiotherapy as concurrent, consolidation, or salvage therapy makes it possible to achieve long-term survival, or even cure, for patients with oligo-metastatic disease. Cranial radiotherapy plays an important role in the management of brain metastasis, potentially augmenting the response and prolonging survival associated with targeted agents and ICIs. However, key questions remain, such as the appropriate choice of radiation techniques, optimal sequence of systemic therapies and radiotherapy, and optimal patient selection for such combination strategies. Although a strong rationale for combining radiotherapy and ICIs exists, its optimal parameters in this setting remain to be established. Conclusions: In the modern era, radiotherapy serves not only as a palliative tool in metastatic NSCLC, but also plays active roles in patients with oligo-focal disease, CNS metastasis and receiving ICIs.

Endorectal contact radiation boosting: Making the case for dose AND volume reporting.

INTRODUCTION: The various rectal endoluminal radiation techniques all have steep, but different, dose gradients. In rectal contact brachytherapy (CXB) doses are typically prescribed and reported to the applicator surface and not to the gross tumor volume (GTV), clinical target volume (CTV) or organs at risk (OAR), which is crucial to understand tumor response and toxicity rates. To quantify the above-described problem, we performed a dose modeling study using a fixed prescription dose at the surface of the applicator and varied tumor response scenarios. METHODS: Endorectal ultrasound-based 3D-volume-models of rectal tumors and the rectal wall were used to simulate the delivered dose to GTV, CTV and the rectal wall layers, assuming treatment with Maastro HDR contact applicator for rectal cancer with a fixed prescription dose to the applicator surface (equivalent to 3 × 30 Gy CXB) and various response scenarios. RESULTS: An identical prescribed dose to the surface of the applicator resulted in a broad range of doses delivered to the GTV, CTV and the uninvolved intestinal wall. For example, the equieffective dose in 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) D90% of the GTV varied between 63 and 231 Gy, whereas the EQD2 D2cc of the rectal wall varied between 97 and 165 Gy. CONCLUSION: Doses prescribed at the surface are not representative of the dose received by the tumor and the bowel wall. This stresses the relevance of dose reporting and prescription to GTV and CTV volumes and OAR in order to gain insight between delivered dose, local control and toxicity and to optimize treatment protocols.

Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on prostate cancer care in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 outbreak has affected care for non-COVID diseases like cancer. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on prostate cancer care in the Netherlands. METHODS: Prostate cancer diagnoses per month in 2020-2021 versus 2018-2019 were compared based on preliminary data of the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) and nationwide pathology network. Detailed data was retrieved from the NCR for the cohorts diagnosed from March-May 2020 (first COVID-19 wave) and March-May 2018-2019 (reference). Changes in number of diagnoses, age, disease stage and first-line treatment were compared. RESULTS: An initial decline of 17% in prostate cancer diagnoses during the first COVID-19 wave was observed. From May onwards the number of diagnoses started to restore to approximately 95% of the expected number by the end of 2020. Stage at diagnosis remainedstable over time. In low-risk localised prostate cancer radical prostatectomy was conducted more often in week 9-12 (21% versus 12% in the reference period; OR=1.9, 95% CI; 1.2-3.1) and less active surveillance was applied (67% versus 78%; OR=0.6, 95% CI; 0.4-0.9). In the intermediate-risk group, a similar change was observed in week 13-16. Radical prostatectomy volumes in 2020 were comparable to 2018-2019. CONCLUSION: During the first COVID-19 wave the number of prostate cancer diagnoses declined. In the second half of 2020 this largely restored although the number remained lower than expected. Changes in treatment were temporary and compliant with adapted guidelines. Although delayed diagnoses could result in a less favourable stage distribution, possibly affecting survival, this seems not very likely.