Increasing Use of Shorter-Course Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the noninferiority of shorter radiotherapy (RT) courses (termed hypofractionation) compared with longer RT courses in patients with localized prostate cancer. Although shorter courses are associated with cost-effectiveness, convenience, and expanded RT access, their adoption remains variable. Objective: To identify the current practice patterns of external beam RT for prostate cancer in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study obtained data from the National Cancer Database, which collects hospital registry data from more than 1500 accredited US facilities on approximately 72% of US patients with cancer. Patients were included in the sample if they had localized prostate adenocarcinoma that was diagnosed between 2004 and 2020 and underwent external beam RT with curative intent. Analyses were conducted between February and March 2023. Exposures: Radiotherapy schedules, which were categorized as ultrahypofractionation (≤7 fractions), moderate hypofractionation (20-30 fractions), and conventional fractionation (31-50 fractions). Main Outcomes and Measures: Longitudinal pattern in RT fractionation schedule was the primary outcome. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the variables associated with shorter RT courses. Covariables included age, National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, rurality, race, facility location, facility type, median income, insurance type or status, and Charlson-Deyo Comorbidity Index. Results: A total of 313 062 patients with localized prostate cancer (mean [SD] age, 68.8 [7.7] years) were included in the analysis. There was a temporal pattern of decline in the proportion of patients who received conventional fractionation, from 76.0% in 2004 to 36.6% in 2020 (P for trend <.001). From 2004 to 2020, use of moderate hypofractionation increased from 22.0% to 45.0% (P for trend <.001), and use of ultrahypofractionation increased from 2.0% to 18.3% (P for trend <.001). By 2020, the most common RT schedule was ultrahypofractionation for patients in the low-risk group and moderate hypofractionation for patients in the intermediate-risk group. On multivariable analysis, treatment at a community cancer program (compared with academic or research program; odds ratio [OR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.52-0.56]; P < .001), Medicaid insurance (compared with Medicare; OR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.41-1.57]; P < .001), Black race (compared with White race; OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.87-0.92]; P < .001), and higher median income (compared with lower median income; OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.25-1.31]; P < .001) were associated with receipt of shorter courses of RT. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study showed an increase in the use of shorter courses of RT for prostate cancer from 2004 to 2020; a number of social determinants of health appeared to be associated with reduced adoption of shorter treatment courses. Realignment of reimbursement models may be necessary to enable broader adoption of ultrahypofractionation to support technology acquisition costs.

Use of the Decipher genomic classifier among men with prostate cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Management of localized or recurrent prostate cancer since the 1990s has been based on risk stratification using clinicopathological variables, including Gleason score, T stage (based on digital rectal exam), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). In this study a novel prognostic test, the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC), was used to stratify risk of prostate cancer progression in a US national database of men with prostate cancer. METHODS: Records of prostate cancer cases from participating SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program registries, diagnosed during the period from 2010 through 2018, were linked to records of testing with the GC prognostic test. Multivariable analysis was used to quantify the association between GC scores or risk groups and use of definitive local therapy after diagnosis in the GC biopsy-tested cohort and postoperative radiotherapy in the GC-tested cohort as well as adverse pathological findings after prostatectomy. RESULTS: A total of 572 545 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 8927 patients underwent GC testing. GC biopsy-tested patients were more likely to undergo active active surveillance or watchful waiting than untested patients (odds ratio [OR] =2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04 to 2.38, P < .001). The highest use of active surveillance or watchful waiting was for patients with a low-risk GC classification (41%) compared with those with an intermediate- (27%) or high-risk (11%) GC classification (P < .001). Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network patients with low and favorable-intermediate risk, higher GC risk class was associated with greater use of local therapy (OR = 4.79, 95% CI = 3.51 to 6.55, P < .001). Within this subset of patients who were subsequently treated with prostatectomy, high GC risk was associated with harboring adverse pathological findings (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.38 to 6.27, P = .005). Use of radiation after prostatectomy was statistically significantly associated with higher GC risk groups (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.89 to 3.84). CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong association between use of the biopsy GC test and likelihood of conservative management. Higher genomic classifier scores are associated with higher rates of adverse pathology at time of surgery and greater use of postoperative radiotherapy.In this study the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC) was used to analyze a US national database of men with prostate cancer. Use of the GC was associated with conservative management (ie, active surveillance). Among men who had high-risk GC scores and then had surgery, there was a 3-fold higher chance of having worrisome findings in surgical specimens.

Comprehensive genomic profiling and treatment patterns across ancestries in advanced prostate cancer: a large-scale retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Men of African ancestry experience the greatest burden of prostate cancer globally, but they are under-represented in genomic and precision medicine studies. Therefore, we sought to characterise the genomic landscape, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) utilisation patterns, and treatment patterns across ancestries in a large, diverse, advanced prostate cancer cohort, to determine the impact of genomics on ancestral disparities. METHODS: In this large-scale retrospective analysis, the CGP-based genomic landscape was evaluated in biopsy sections from 11 741 patients with prostate cancer, with ancestry inferred using a single nucleotide polymorphism-based approach. Admixture-derived ancestry fractions for each patient were also interrogated. Independently, clinical and treatment information was retrospectively reviewed for 1234 patients in a de-identified US-based clinicogenomic database. Prevalence of gene alterations, including actionable gene alterations, was assessed across ancestries (n=11 741). Furthermore, real-world treatment patterns and overall survival was assessed in the subset of patients with linked clincogenomic information (n=1234). FINDINGS: The CGP cohort included 1422 (12%) men of African ancestry and 9244 (79%) men of European ancestry; the clinicogenomic database cohort included 130 (11%) men of African ancestry and 1017 (82%) men of European ancestry. Men of African ancestry received more lines of therapy before CGP than men of European ancestry (median of two lines [IQR 0-8] vs one line [0-10], p=0·029). In genomic analyses, ancestry-specific mutational landscapes were observed, but the prevalence of alterations in AR, the DNA damage response pathway, and other actionable genes were similar across ancestries. Similar genomic landscapes were observed in analyses that accounted for admixture-derived ancestry fractions. After undergoing CGP, men of African ancestry were less likely to receive a clinical study drug compared with men of European ancestry (12 [10%] of 118 vs 246 [26%] of 938, p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Similar rates of gene alterations with therapy implications suggest that differences in actionable genes (including AR and DNA damage response pathway genes) might not be a main driver of disparities across ancestries in advanced prostate cancer. Later CGP utilisation and a lower rate of clinical trial enrolment observed in men of African ancestry could affect genomics, outcomes, and disparities. FUNDING: American Society for Radiation Oncology, Department of Defense, Flatiron Health, Foundation Medicine, Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center.