Stereotactic or conventional radiotherapy for macroscopic prostate bed recurrence: a propensity score analysis.

PURPOSE: To assess outcomes between salvage radiation therapy (SRT) with curative intent and stereotactic radiotherapy for macroscopic prostate recurrence (SSRT) after radical prostatectomy (RP). In order to compare these two different options, we compared their outcomes with a propensity score-based matched analysis. METHODS: Data from 185 patients in seven Italian centres treated for macroscopic prostate bed recurrence after RP were retrospectively collected. To make a comparison between the two treatment groups, propensity matching was applied to create comparable cohorts. RESULTS: After matching, 90 patients in the SRT and SSRT groups were selected (45 in each arm). Kaplan-Meier analysis did not show any significant differences in terms of BRFS and PFS between matched populations (p = 0.08 and p = 0.8, respectively). Multivariate models show that treatment was not associated with BRFS, neither in the whole or matched cohort, with HR of 2.15 (95%CI 0.63-7.25, p = 0.21) and 2.65 (95%CI 0.59-11.97, p = 0.21), respectively. In the matched cohort, lower rate of toxicity was confirmed for patients undergoing SSRT, with acute GI and GU adverse events reported in 4.4 versus 44.4% (p < 0.001) and 28.9 versus 46.7% (p = 0.08) of patients, and late GI and GU adverse events reported in 0 versus 13.3% (p = 0.04) and 6.7 versus 22.2% (p = 0.03) of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering the favourable therapeutic ratio of this approach and the lower number of fractions needed, SSRT should be considered as an attractive alternative to conventional SRT in this setting.

Stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate bed recurrence after prostatectomy, a multicentric series.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of stereotactic salvage radiotherapy (SSRT) in RT-naïve patients affected by macroscopic prostate bed recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients treated for prostate bed macroscopic recurrence in three different Italian institutes were reviewed. Patients were treated with SSRT, with a total dose of 30-40 Gy in five fractions, the mean pre-SSRT PSA level was 2.3 ng/mL. Two different PSA thresholds were defined and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) was reported, in order to better express outcome: BCRFS1 (a PSA level increase of >10% compared to the pre-SSRT value) and BCRFS2 (a PSA level increase of >0.2 ng/mL for patients with a PSA nadir of <0.2 ng/mL or two consecutive PSA level increases of >25% compared to nadir in patients with a PSA nadir of <0.2 ng/mL). RESULTS: In all, 90 patients were treated, with a mean (range) follow-up of 21.2 (2-64) months, and 17 of these patients (19%) had concomitant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) during SSRT. Complete biochemical response, defined as a PSA nadir of <0.2 ng/mL, was obtained in 39 of the 90 patients (43.3%). Considering BCRFS1, 25 patients (27.8%) had BCR, with an actuarial median BCRFS1 time of 36.4 months. For BCRFS2, BCR was reported in 32 patients (35.5%), with an actuarial median BCRFS2 time of 24.3 months. There was no Grade >2 toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: SSRT was found to yield significant biochemical control and allowed ADT delay despite adverse features.

Concomitant Immunotherapy and Metastasis-Directed Radiotherapy in Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Biomarker-Driven, Original, Case-Based Proof-of-Concept Study.

Metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (mUTUC) has a poor prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated efficacy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. However, data supporting the use of ICIs in patients with mUTUC are limited. A promising synergy between ICI and concomitant radiotherapy (RT) has been reported in patients with mUTUC. Our research involved a case-based investigation and emphasized the successful integration of different specialists' skills. Observed after partial urethrectomy procedures for muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), the radiological detection of lung metastases prompted us to implement cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy and molecular characterization in the treatment process. We uncovered alterations in the ERBB2 and FGFR3 genes and mismatch repair deficiency at a molecular level. First-line chemotherapy treatment led to a stable disease, and the patient was started on maintenance immunotherapy with Avelumab. Subsequently, an increase in the size of the lung nodules was described, and the patient received radiotherapy for three lung lesions in combination with immunotherapy. After 3 months, a restaging CT scan reported a complete response, which is still ongoing. We discuss the mechanisms driving RT/ICI synergy and the molecular profile of mUTUC as factors that should be considered in therapeutic strategy planning. Molecular insight enhances the originality of our study, providing a nuanced understanding of the genetic landscape of mUTUC and paving the way for targeted therapeutic strategies. The therapeutic armamentarium expansion encourages the design of a multimodal and personalized approach for each mUTUC patient, taking into account tumor heterogeneity and molecular profiling.