PEACE V-Salvage Treatment of OligoRecurrent nodal prostate cancer Metastases (STORM): Acute Toxicity of a Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment recommendations for patients with limited nodal recurrences are lacking, and different locoregional treatment approaches are currently being used. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this trial is to compare metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) with or without elective nodal pelvic radiotherapy (ENRT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: PEACE V-Salvage Treatment of OligoRecurrent nodal prostate cancer Metastases (STORM) is an international, phase 2, open-label, randomized, superiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03569241). Patients diagnosed with positron emission tomography-detected pelvic nodal oligorecurrence (five or fewer nodes) following radical local treatment for prostate cancer were randomized in a 1:1 ratio between arm A (MDT and 6 mo of androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) and arm B (ENRT [25 × 1.8 Gy] with MDT and 6 mo of ADT). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We report the secondary endpoint acute toxicity, defined as worst grade ≥2 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity within 3 mo of treatment. The chi-square test was used to compare toxicity between treatment arms. We also compare the quality of life (QoL) using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ C30 and PR25 questionnaires. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between June 2018 and April 2021, 196 patients were assigned randomly to MDT or ENRT. Ninety-seven of 99 patients allocated to MDT and 93 of 97 allocated to ENRT received per-protocol treatment. Worst acute GI toxicity proportions were as follows: grade ≥2 events in three (3%) in the MDT group versus four (4%) in the ENRT group (p = 0.11). Worst acute GU toxicity proportions were as follows: grade ≥2 events in eight (8%) in the MDT group versus 12 (13%) in the ENRT group (p = 0.95). We observed no significant difference between the study groups in the proportion of patients with a clinically significant QoL reduction from baseline for any subdomain score area. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically meaningful differences were observed in worst grade ≥2 acute GI or GU toxicity or in QoL subdomains between MDT and ENRT. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found no evidence of differential acute bowel or urinary side effects using metastasis-directed therapy and elective nodal radiotherapy for the treatment of patients with a pelvic lymph node recurrence.

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.

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.

Oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer: Radiotherapy quality assurance of the randomized PEACE V-STORM phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Aim of this study is to report the results of the radiotherapy quality assurance program of the PEACE V-STORM randomized phase II trial for pelvic nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A benchmark case (BC) consisting of a postoperative case with 2 nodal recurrences was used for both stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT, 30 Gy/3 fx) and whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT, 45 Gy/25 fx + SIB boost to 65 Gy). RESULTS: BC of 24 centers were analyzed. The overall grading for delineation variation of the 1st BC was rated as 'UV' (Unacceptable Variation) or 'AV' (Acceptable Variation) for 1 and 7 centers for SBRT (33%), and 3 and 8 centers for WPRT (46%), respectively. An inadequate upper limit of the WPRT CTV (n = 2), a missing delineation of the prostate bed (n = 1), and a missing nodal target volume (n = 1 for SBRT and WPRT) constituted the observed 'UV'. With the 2nd BC (n = 11), the overall delineation review showed 2 and 8 'AV' for SBRT and WPRT, respectively, with no 'UV'. For the plan review of the 2nd BC, all treatment plans were per protocol for WPRT. SBRT plans showed variability in dose normalization (Median D90% = 30.1 Gy, range 22.9-33.2 Gy and 30.6 Gy, range 26.8-34.2 Gy for nodes 1 and 2 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Up to 46% of protocol deviations were observed in delineation of WPRT for nodal oligorecurrent PCa, while dosimetric results of SBRT showed the greatest disparities between centers. Repeated BC resulted in an improved adherence to the protocol, translating in an overall acceptable contouring and planning compliance rate among participating centers.

The Multicenter, Randomized, Phase 2 PEACE V-STORM Trial: Defining the Best Salvage Treatment for Oligorecurrent Nodal Prostate Cancer Metastases.

Optimal local treatment for nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer is unknown. The randomized phase 2 PEACE V-STORM trial will explore the best treatment approach in this setting. Early results on the acute toxicity profile are projected to be published in quarter 3, 2021.

Phase II open-label study investigating apalutamide in patients with biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy.

Apalutamide, a competent inhibitor of the androgen receptor, has shown promising clinical efficacy results for patients with advanced prostate cancer. Here, we describe the rationale and design for the SAVE trial, a multi-center, Phase II study, wherein 202 men with biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy are randomly assigned 1:1 to apalutamide plus salvage radiotherapy (SRT) or androgen-deprivation therapy with an luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist plus SRT. The primary objective is to compare sexual function between the two treatment arms based on the expanded prostate cancer index-26 sexual domain score at nine months after start of hormonal treatment. The key secondary objectives are to assess quality of life, to evaluate the safety profile and the short-term efficacy of apalutamide in combination with SRT. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03899077.

Subjective, but not objective, cognitive complaints impact long-term quality of life in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: Cognitive complaints, of objective or subjective nature, may negatively impact cancer patients' quality of life (QoL). Further, the early detection of cognitive alterations may lead to an improved QoL. However, the content of such screening is yet unclear. This paper presents long-term QoL data of cancer patients treated with curative intent and its relation with objective and subjective cognitive complaints, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: QoL data, measured by the EORTC QLQ C-30, were obtained at baseline, 6 (T1), 12 (T2), and 24 months (T3) after treatment start, and compared between patients with and without objective and subjective cognitive complaints. The predictive value of PROMs was also examined. RESULTS: QoL data at baseline was collected in 125 patients. Response rates at T1, T2, and T3 were 84.7%, 81.5%, and 83.1%, respectively. Eighty-nine patients returned their QoL questionnaires at all times. Baseline subjective cognitive complaints had a stronger association with worse scores on patients' overall QoL and QoL subscale scores than objective cognitive complaints. An exploratory analysis into the value of PROMs in predicting long-term QoL at T3 revealed a significant effect for the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression and FACIT Fatigue scale. CONCLUSIONS: Self-perceived cognitive alterations are negatively associated with patients' overall QoL. As these troubles may already be present at baseline, oncology nurses should screen for the early signs of subjective cognitive complaints by use of PROMs, in order to refer the patient to proper intervention programs which may lead to an improved long-term QoL and faster reintegration into society.

Oligometastatic prostate cancer: The game is afoot.

Oligometastatic prostate cancer represents an intermediate state between a localized tumor and widespread metastatic disease. Its specific clinical features suggest the existence of a distinct biology which still needs to be elucidated. New imaging techniques like prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET scans have shown to perform well in the staging and restaging of this category of patients, at different phases of disease evolution. Despite limited prospective evidence, metastasis-directed therapies (MDT) are emerging as valid treatment options able to postpone systemic therapies and probably improve survival outcome. The aim of this review is to shed light on the clinical scenario of prostate cancer patients with limited metastatic disease burden and highlight the role of MDT strategies in this setting.