Elective irradiation of pelvic lymph nodes during postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Success rates with salvage radiotherapy (SRT) in men who have a postprostatectomy biochemical relapse are suboptimal. One treatment-intensification strategy includes elective irradiation of the pelvic lymph nodes with whole pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT). METHODS: An inter-institutional retrospective cohort study compared outcomes for patients who received SRT at 2 separate academic institutions with disparate treatment paradigms: almost exclusively favoring WPRT (n = 112) versus limiting treatment to the prostate bed (PBRT) (n = 135). Patients were excluded if they had lymph node involvement or if they received androgen-deprivation therapy. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: In total, 247 patients were analyzed with a median follow-up of 4 years. The pre-SRT prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.58; P < .0001) and a Gleason score of 8 to 10 (adjusted HR, 3.21; P < .0001) were identified as independent predictors of increased risk of biochemical PSA progression after SRT. However, WPRT was not independently associated with biochemical progression-free survival in the multivariate model (adjusted HR, 0.79; P = .20). Neither low-risk patients nor high-risk patients (defined a priori by a preoperative PSA level ≥20 ng/mL, a pathologic Gleason score between 8 and 10, or pathologic T3 tumor classification) benefited from WPRT. Overall survival was similar between treatment groups. When restricting the analysis to patients with pre-SRT PSA levels ≥0.4 ng/mL (n = 139), WPRT was independently associated with a 53% reduction in the risk of biochemical progression (adjusted HR, 0.47; P = .031). CONCLUSIONS: WPRT did not improve outcomes among the entire group but was independently associated with improved biochemical control among patients with pre-SRT PSA levels ≥0.4 ng/mL.

Identifying appropriate patients for early salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: It remains unclear whether relapsed prostate specific antigen at postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy impacts outcomes as long it is 1.0 ng/ml or less. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 197 patients treated with salvage radiotherapy in the setting of detectable relapsed prostate specific antigen 1.0 ng/ml or less. Patients were excluded from analysis if they had lymph node involvement or received androgen deprivation therapy. Freedom from prostate specific antigen progression after salvage radiotherapy was analyzed by a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Median relapsed prostate specific antigen was 0.33 ng/ml (range 0.07 to 1.0). There was 86% freedom from prostate specific antigen progression at a median followup of 52 months. Relapsed prostate specific antigen (HR 1.9, p = 0.004), Gleason score 8-10 (HR 5.2, p <0.001) and negative margin status (HR 2.0, p = 0.02) were independently associated with an increased risk of prostate specific antigen progression after salvage radiotherapy. We identified interaction between relapsed prostate specific antigen and Gleason score (p = 0.04) but not margin status. A significant association was noted between higher relapsed prostate specific antigen and prostate specific antigen progression after salvage radiotherapy in patients with Gleason score 8-10 but not 7 or less. In patients with Gleason score 8-10 the rate of freedom from prostate specific antigen progression at 53 months was 77% vs 26% when salvage radiotherapy was initiated at a relapsed prostate specific antigen of 0.33 or less vs 0.34 to 1.0 ng/ml (log rank p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Different relapsed prostate specific antigen thresholds for unsuccessful salvage radiotherapy may exist based on Gleason score. These data suggest that patients with Gleason score 8-10 should be offered salvage radiotherapy at the earliest detectable relapsed prostate specific antigen, even 0.33 ng/ml or less. Those with Gleason score 7 or less may have the opportunity to be followed with serial prostate specific antigen measurements to improve risk stratification, and delay and/or avoid the potential toxicity of salvage radiotherapy.

Management of Postprostatectomy Biochemical Relapse With Salvage Radiotherapy: Results of an International Survey.

OBJECTIVES: The management of patients with postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy (SRT) presents radiation oncologists (ROs) with multiple treatment decisions that may impact outcomes. As the evidence addressing these issues is limited to retrospective data, it was hypothesized that widely disparate treatment paradigms exist. METHODS: A 21-question survey was sent through SurveyMonkey to members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. RESULTS: A total of 999 ROs responded. Threshold rPSA values to initiate SRT ranged from 0.1 to 1 ng/mL. The highest dose prescribed by ROs ranged from <60 to >70.2 Gy. Elective lymph node irradiation was offered by 74%, and the majority (64%) referenced the Roach formula, Kattan nomogram, or D'Amico risk stratification to decide when it was appropriate. There was variability in pelvic field design with a preference to place the superior field border at either the upper, middle, or lower sacroiliac joint by 57.6%, 28.8%, and 13.6% of respondents, respectively. Adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was offered by 74%. CONCLUSIONS: Disparate treatment paradigms exist for SRT that may impact patient outcomes. Variability includes patient selection, treatment design, and recommendations for ADT. Many reference formulas to predict the benefit of pelvic lymph node irradiation that are not yet validated in the postprostatectomy setting. These data make it clear that well-designed, prospective clinical trials are needed to better evaluate the role of larger treatment fields, dose escalation, and ADT for the thousands of patients who are treated with postprostatectomy SRT each year.

Examining the relationship between pre- and postimplant geometry in prostate low-dose-rate brachytherapy and its correlation with dosimetric quality using the similarity concept.

PURPOSE: This is a retrospective study in which we define multiple metrics for similarity and then inquire on the relationship between similarity and currently used dosimetric quantities describing preimplant and postimplant plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed a unique cohort of 94 consecutively performed prostate seed implant patients, associated with excellent dosimetric and clinical outcomes. For each patient, an ultrasound (US) preimplant and two CT postimplant (Day 0 and Day 30) studies were available. Measures for similarity were created and computed using feature vectors based on two classes of moments: first, invariant to rotation and translation, and the second polar-radius moments invariant to rotation, translation, and scaling. Both similarity measures were calibrated using controlled perturbations (random and systematic) of seed positions and contours in different size implants, thus producing meaningful numerical threshold values used in the clinical analysis. RESULTS: An important finding is that similarity, for both seed distributions and contours, improves significantly when scaling invariance is added to translation and rotation. No correlation between seed and contours similarity was found. In the setting of preplanned prostate seed implants using preloaded needles, based on our data, similarity between preimplant and postimplant plans does not correlate with either minimum dose to 90% of the volume of the prostate or analogous similarity metrics for prostate contours. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed novel tools and metrics, which will allow practitioners to better understand the relationship between preimplant and postimplant plans. Geometrical similarity between a preplan and an actual implant, although useful, does not seem to be necessary to achieve minimum dose to 90% of the volume of the prostate-good dosimetric implants.