Comparing morbidity and cancer control after 3D-conformal (70/74 Gy) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (78/82 Gy) for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to compare toxicity and cancer control between patients with prostate cancer treated using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and those treated using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 553 patients with prostate cancer were treated with 3D-CRT 70-74 Gy (3D-CRT 70, 3D-CRT 74) or IMRT 78-82 Gy (IMRT 78, IMRT/SIB 82). Late toxicity was scored according to FC-RTOG/LENT criteria. Biochemical failure was defined using the Phoenix and ASTRO definitions. RESULTS: The 5-year risk of grade 2-4 genitourinary toxicity was 26.3 % (3D-CRT 70), 27.2 % (3D-CRT 74), 17.3 % (IMRT 78), and 25.1 % (IMRT/SIB 82) without statistical differences. The 5-year risk of grade 2-4 gastrointestinal toxicity was 19.4 % (3D-CRT 70), 42.1 % (3D-CRT 74), 20.5 % (IMRT 78), and 26.6 % (IMRT/SIB 82). The differences between 3D-CRT 74 and 3D-CRT 70 and between 3D-CRT 74 and IMRT 78 were statistically significant (log rank p = 0.03). The 5-year Phoenix PSA relapse-free survival (PSA-RFS) in low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients treated using 3D-CRT were 89.4, 65.5, and 57.8 %, respectively. Patients treated with IMRT achieved the following results: 90.9, 89.4, and 83.9 %. Clinical relapse-free survival (C-RFS) in patients treated using 3D-CRT vs. IMRT for the aforementioned groups were 94.7 vs. 100 %, 86.8 vs. 98.6 %, and 84.4 vs. 94.5 %. Disease-free survival (DFS) for patients treated using 3D-CRT were 83.1, 70.9, and 71.5 %. The IMRT group reached 95.8, 89.1, and 87.6 %. The PSA-RFS for intermediate- and high-risk patients were statistically significant, while C-RFS and DFS were marginally better. CONCLUSION: Dose escalation with IMRT was associated with improved cancer control in intermediate- and high-risk patients in comparison with 3D-CRT, without compromising toxicity.

Utilization of cone beam CT for reconstruction of dose distribution delivered in image-guided radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma - bony landmark setup compared to fiducial markers setup.

The purpose of this study was to compare two different styles of prostate IGRT: bony landmark (BL) setup vs. fiducial markers (FM) setup. Twenty-nine prostate patients were treated with daily BL setup and 30 patients with daily FM setup. Delivered dose distribution was reconstructed on cone-beam CT (CBCT) acquired once a week immediately after the alignment. Target dose coverage was evaluated by the proportion of the CTV encompassed by the 95% isodose. Original plans employed 1 cm safety margin. Alternative plans assuming smaller 7 mm margin between CTV and PTV were evaluated in the same way. Rectal and bladder volumes were compared with initial ones. While the margin reduction in case of BL setup makes the prostate coverage significantly worse (p = 0.0003, McNemar's test), in case of FM setup with the reduced 7 mm margin, the prostate coverage is even better compared to BL setup with 10 mm margin (p = 0.049, Fisher's exact test). Moreover, partial volumes of organs at risk irradiated with a specific dose can be significantly lowered (p < 0.0001, unpaired t-test). Reducing of safety margin is not acceptable in case of BL setup, while the margin can be lowered from 10 mm to 7 mm in case of FM setup.

Utilization of cone-beam CT for offline evaluation of target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment.

AIM: To assess target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment and to assess possibility of safety margin reduction. BACKGROUND: Implementation of IGRT should influence safety margins. Utilization of cone-beam CT provides current 3D anatomic information directly in irradiation position. Such information enables reconstruction of the actual dose distribution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen prostate patients were treated with daily bony anatomy image-guidance. Cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans were acquired once a week immediately after bony anatomy alignment. After the prostate, seminal vesicles, rectum and bladder were contoured, the delivered dose distribution was reconstructed. Target dose coverage was evaluated by the proportion of the CTV encompassed by the 95% isodose. Original plans employed a 1 cm safety margin. Alternative plans assuming a smaller 7 mm margin between CTV and PTV were evaluated in the same way. Rectal and bladder volumes were compared with the initial ones. Rectal and bladder volumes irradiated with doses higher than 75 Gy, 70 Gy, 60 Gy, 50 Gy and 40 Gy were analyzed. RESULTS: In 12% of reconstructed plans the prostate coverage was not sufficient. The prostate underdosage was observed in 5 patients. Coverage of seminal vesicles was not satisfactory in 3% of plans. Most of the target underdosage corresponded to excessive rectal or bladder filling. Evaluation of alternative plans assuming a smaller 7 mm margin revealed 22% and 11% of plans where prostate and seminal vesicles coverage, respectively, was compromised. These were distributed over 8 and 7 patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Sufficient dose coverage of target volumes was not achieved for all patients. Reducing of safety margin is not acceptable. Initial rectal and bladder volumes cannot be considered representative for subsequent treatment.

Radical prostatectomy in high-grade prostate cancer, salvage and adjuvant radiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer with a Gleason score (GS) of 8-10 is linked to a higher risk of recurrence and progression. The aim of this paper is to evaluate treatment results of our high-risk patient cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The cohort of 42 patients with radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen histology GS 8-10 was assessed. The patients were followed up after RP and radiotherapy (RT) was delivered in case of a biochemical relapse. Adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) was delivered only in case of a positive surgical margin (PSM). The following parameters were evaluated: biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS), overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The second objective was to evaluate adverse effects of RP and RT. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 88 months (18-168). RP led to BPFS in 16 patients (38%). Five patients with PSM underwent aRT and 20 underwent salvage radiotherapy (sRT). One patient died of myocardial infarction and 1 patient died of metastatic disease. Skeletal metastases were recorded in 2 patients. The BPFS in RP combinations with sRT or aRT was reached in 29 patients (69%). The OS and CSS in our cohort reached 95 and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Management with aRT only in PSM was very effective, according to our retrospective study.

Dose escalation in prostate radiotherapy up to 82 Gy using simultaneous integrated boost: direct comparison of acute and late toxicity with 3D-CRT 74 Gy and IMRT 78 Gy.

PURPOSE: To compare acute and late toxicity after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to the prostate to 74 Gy (3D-CRT) with intensity-modulated radiotherapy to 78 Gy (IMRT 78) and IMRT using simultaneous integrated boost to 82 Gy (IMRT/SIB 82). PATIENTS AND METHODS: 94 patients treated with 3D-CRT to the prostate and base of seminal vesicles to 74 Gy represented the first group. The second group consisted of 138 patients subjected to IMRT covering the prostate and base of seminal vesicles to 78 Gy. The last group was treated with IMRT using SIB. The prescribed doses were 82 Gy and 73.8 Gy in 42 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles. Late toxicity was prospectively scored according to the RTOG/FC-LENT scale. RESULTS: Acute gastrointestinal toxicity >or= grade 2 occurred in 35.1% of patients treated with 3D-CRT, in 16% subjected to IMRT 78, and in 7.7% receiving IMRT/SIB 82. Acute genitourinary toxicity >or= grade 2 was observed in 26.6% (3D-CRT), 33% (IMRT 78), and 30.7% (IMRT/SIB 82). At 3 years, the estimated cumulative incidence of grade 3 late gastrointestinal toxicity was 14% for 3D-CRT, 5% for IMRT 78, and 2% for IMRT/SIB 82. The difference became significant (log rank p = 0.02). The estimated cumulative incidence of grade 3 late genitourinary toxicity was 9% (3D-CRT), 7% (IMRT 78), and 6% (IMRT/SIB 82) without statistical differences (log rank p = 0.32) CONCLUSION: SIB enables dose escalation up to 82 Gy with a lower rate of gastrointestinal toxicity grade 3 in comparison with 3D-CRT up to 74 Gy.

Late toxicity after conformal and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: impact of previous surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively compare late toxicity of conventional-dose three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: A total of 340 patients with T1-3 prostate cancer were treated with 3D-CRT (n = 228) and IMRT (n = 112). The median follow-up time was 5.9 years and 3.0 years, respectively. The prescription dose was 70 Gy for 3D-CRT and 78 Gy for IMRT. Late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were graded according to the Fox Chase modification of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Late Effects Normal Tissue Task Force criteria. RESULTS: There was no difference between 3D-CRT and IMRT in the incidence of GI and GU toxicity at 3 years. On multivariate analysis, transurethral resection of prostate/open transvesical prostatectomy (TURP/TVPE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia, carried out before radiotherapy, significantly increased the risk of Grade >or=2 GU toxicity (risk ratio 1.88). Among patients who experienced TURP/TVPE, the 5-year actuarial likelihood of Grade 2-3 urinary incontinence was 23%, compared with 9% for those without prostate surgery (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Tolerance of 3D-CRT and IMRT was similar, despite the use of high radiation dose with IMRT. Previous TURP/TVPE increased the risk of GU toxicity.

Magnetic resonance imaging in postprostatectomy radiotherapy planning.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in prostate bed treatment planning could influence definition of the clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 21 consecutive patients referred for prostate bed radiotherapy were included in the present retrospective study. The CTV was delineated according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer recommendations on computed tomography (CT) and T(1)-weighted (T(1)w) and T(2)-weighted (T(2)w) MRI. The CTV magnitude, agreement, and spatial differences were evaluated on the planning CT scan after registration with the MRI scans. RESULTS: The CTV was significantly reduced on the T(1)w and T(2)w MRI scans (13% and 9%, respectively) compared with the CT scans. The urinary bladder was drawn smaller on the CT scans and the rectum was smaller on the MRI scans. On T(1)w MRI, the rectum and urinary bladder were delineated larger than on T(2)w MRI. Minimal agreement was observed between the CT and T(2)w images. The main spatial differences were measured in the superior and superolateral directions in which the CTV on the MRI scans was 1.8-2.9 mm smaller. In the posterior and inferior border, no difference was seen between the CT and T(1)w MRI scans. On the T(2)w MRI scans, the CTV was larger in these directions (by 1.3 and 1.7 mm, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The use of MRI in postprostatectomy radiotherapy planning resulted in a reduction of the CTV. The main differences were found in the superior part of the prostate bed. We believe T(2)w MRI enables more precise definition of prostate bed CTV than conventional planning CT.