Multi-institutional Analysis of Metastasis-directed Therapy with or Without Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Oligometastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) is increasingly being used in oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (omCSPC). However, it is currently unclear how to optimally integrate MDT with the standard of care of systemic hormonal therapy. OBJECTIVE: To report long-term outcomes of MDT alone versus MDT and a defined course of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in omCSPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Here, a multicenter, international retrospective cohort of omCSPC as defined by conventional imaging was reported. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), distant progression-free survival (dPFS), and combined biochemical or distant progression-free survival (cPFS) were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 263 patients were included, 105 with MDT + ADT and 158 with MDT alone. The majority of patients had metachronous disease (90.5%). Five-year bPFS, dPFS, and cPFS were, respectively, 24%, 41%, and 19% in patients treated with MDT + ADT and 11% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-0.64), 29% (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.78), and 9% (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38-0.67) in patients treated with MDT alone. On a multivariable analysis adjusting for pretreatment variables, the use of ADT was associated with improved bPFS (HR 0.43, p < 0.001), dPFS (HR 0.45, p = 0.002), and cPFS (HR 0.44, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large multi-institutional report, the addition of concurrent ADT to MDT appears to improve time to prostate-specific antigen progression and distant recurrence, noting that about 10% patients had durable control with MDT alone. Ongoing phase 3 studies will help further define treatment options for omCSPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Here, we report a large retrospective review evaluating the outcomes of metastasis-directed therapy with or without a limited course of androgen deprivation for patients with oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. This international multi-institutional review demonstrates that the addition of androgen deprivation therapy to metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) improves progression-free survival. While a proportion of patients appear to have long-term disease control with MDT alone, further work in biomarker discovery is required to better identify which patients would be appropriate for de-escalated therapy.

Stereotactic Body and Conventional Radiotherapy for Painful Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are commonly used treatment options for relieving metastatic bone pain. The effectiveness of SBRT compared with cEBRT in pain relief has been a subject of debate, and conflicting results have been reported. Objective: To compare the effectiveness associated with SBRT vs cEBRT for relieving metastatic bone pain. Data Sources: A structured search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases on June 5, 2023. Additionally, results were added from a new randomized clinical trial (RCT) and additional unpublished data from an already published RCT. Study Selection: Comparative studies reporting pain response after SBRT vs cEBRT in patients with painful bone metastases. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted data from eligible studies. Data were extracted for the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall and complete pain response at 1, 3, and 6 months after radiotherapy, according to the study's definition. Relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated for each study. A random-effects model using a restricted maximum likelihood estimator was applied for meta-analysis. Results: There were 18 studies with 1685 patients included in the systematic review and 8 RCTs with 1090 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 7 RCTs, overall pain response was defined according to the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoints in clinical trials (ICPRE). The complete pain response was reported in 6 RCTs, all defined according to the ICPRE. The ITT meta-analyses showed that the overall pain response rates did not differ between cEBRT and SBRT at 1 (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.30), 3 (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.96-1.47), or 6 (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.96-1.54) months. However, SBRT was associated with a higher complete pain response at 1 (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.01), 3 (RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.16-2.78), and 6 (RR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.24-4.91) months after radiotherapy. The PP meta-analyses showed comparable results. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, patients with painful bone metastases experienced similar overall pain response after SBRT compared with cEBRT. More patients had complete pain alleviation after SBRT, suggesting that selected subgroups will benefit from SBRT.

Long-Term Results of a Phase 1 Dose Escalation Trial of Ablative Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy is increasingly used for oligometastatic disease as well as palliation, but treatment protocols for nonspine bone and nodal metastases are lacking, with a wide variety of schedules applied. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective dose-escalation trial was initiated, involving 90 patients, among whom 52 (58%) had primary prostate tumors, 13 had breast tumors (14%), and 25 (28%) had other primary tumor types. All visible lymph node or nonspine bone oligometastases were treated in 3 consecutive cohorts: 5 × 7.0 Gy, 3 × 10.0 Gy, or 1 × 20.0 Gy. RESULTS: Initial results revealed no dose-limiting toxicity after a median follow-up of 17.2 months. This update provides information on long-term toxicity, local failure (LF), and progression-free survival (PFS). After a median follow-up of 50 months, no new safety signals were observed. Grade 2 toxicity was 13%, 7% and 10% in the respective cohorts (P = .9), without grade 3 to 5 toxicities. LF rates were 9%, 3%, and 6% (P = .5) for the respective treatment groups, with an overall cumulative risk of LF of 7% (95% CI, 2-12) at 4 years. Median PFS was 16.5 months (95% CI, 9.8-21.5), and 4-year PFS was 21% (95% CI, 14-32). Median overall survival across groups was not reached (95% CI, 52.8 - not reached), 4-year OS was 68% (95% CI, 59-78). A subset of patients (23%) remained long-term disease-free, 37% had oligoprogressive disease at first recurrence and 40% developed polymetastatic relapse. CONCLUSIONS: The safe and effective use of dose-escalated single-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy for bone and lymph node metastases is supported by this trial, especially considering patient-convenience and cost-effectiveness. Caution is needed when generalizing these outcomes beyond breast and prostate cancer, given their underrepresentation in our study.

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.

A geometry and dose-volume based performance monitoring of artificial intelligence models in radiotherapy treatment planning for prostate cancer.

Background and Purpose: Clinical Artificial Intelligence (AI) implementations lack ground-truth when applied on real-world data. This study investigated how combined geometrical and dose-volume metrics can be used as performance monitoring tools to detect clinically relevant candidates for model retraining. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients were analyzed for both AI-segmentation and planning. For AI-segmentation, geometrical (Standard Surface Dice 3 mm and Local Surface Dice 3 mm) and dose-volume based parameters were calculated for two organs (bladder and anorectum) to compare AI output against the clinically corrected structure. A Local Surface Dice was introduced to detect geometrical changes in the vicinity of the target volumes, while an Absolute Dose Difference (ADD) evaluation increased focus on dose-volume related changes. AI-planning performance was evaluated using clinical goal analysis in combination with volume and target overlap metrics. Results: The Local Surface Dice reported equal or lower values compared to the Standard Surface Dice (anorectum: (0.93 ± 0.11) vs (0.98 ± 0.04); bladder: (0.97 ± 0.06) vs (0.98 ± 0.04)). The ADD metric showed a difference of (0.9 ± 0.8)Gy for the anorectum D1cm3. The bladder D5cm3 reported a difference of (0.7 ± 1.5)Gy. Mandatory clinical goals were fulfilled in 90 % of the DLP plans. Conclusions: Combining dose-volume and geometrical metrics allowed detection of clinically relevant changes, applied to both auto-segmentation and auto-planning output and the Local Surface Dice was more sensitive to local changes compared to the Standard Surface Dice. This monitoring is able to evaluate AI behavior in clinical practice and allows candidate selection for active learning.

Precision of image-guided spinal stereotactic ablative radiotherapy and impact of positioning variables.

Background and purpose: Spinal stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) requires high precision. We evaluate the intrafraction motion during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) guided SABR with different immobilization techniques. Material and methods: Fifty-seven consecutive patients were treated for 62 spinal lesions with SABR with positioning corrected in six degrees of freedom. A surface monitoring system was used for patient set up and to ensure patient immobilization in 65% of patients. Intrafractional motion was defined as the difference between the last CBCT before the start of treatment and the first CT afterwards. Results: For all 194 fractions, the mean intrafractional motion was 0.1 cm (0-1.1 cm) in vertical direction, 0.1 cm (0-1.1 cm) in longitudinal direction and 0.1 cm (0-0.5 cm) in lateral direction. A mean pitch of 0.6° (0-4.3°), a roll of 0.5° (0-3.4°) and a rotational motion of 0.4° (0-3.9°) was observed. 95.5% of the translational errors and 95.4% of the rotational errors were within safety range. There was a significantly higher rotational motion for patients with arms along the body (p = 0.01) and without the use of the body mask (p = 0.05). For cervical locations a higher rotational motion was seen, although not significant (p = 0.1). The acquisition of an extra CBCT was correlated with a higher rotational (pitch) motion (p = 0 < 0.01). Conclusion: Very high precision in CBCT guided and surface-guided spinal SABR was observed in this cohort. The lowest intrafraction motion was seen in patients treated with arms above their head and a body mask. The use of IGRT with surface monitoring is an added value for patient monitoring leading to treatment interruption if necessary.

Survival Outcomes and Pattern of Relapse After SABR for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer.

Introduction: The addition of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) to standard of care for patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer has the potential of improving survival and delaying further metastases. The primary aim of this analysis is to report survival outcomes and pattern of recurrence of patients with hormone-sensitive (HSPC) and castrate-resistant (CRPC) oligometastatic prostate cancer treated with SABR. Methods: This is a single-center retrospective study of patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer treated in Iridium Network between 2014 and 2018. All patients with oligometastatic (≤3 active lesions) HSPC and CRPC treated with SABR were included. Data were collected using electronic records. Patterns of first progression following SABR were reported. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to determine survival outcomes. Results: Eighty-seven men received SABR to 115 metastases. Nineteen patients were castrate-resistant and 68 hormone-sensitive at the time of SABR. Median follow-up was 41.6 months. In 25% of patients, no decline from baseline PSA was recorded. Median bPFS was 11.7 months (95% CI 7.6 - 18.3) for HSPC as well as CRPC (95% CI 6.4 - 24.0) (p=0.27). Median DMFS was 21.8 (95% CI 16.9 - 43.2) versus 17.6 months (95% CI 6.7 - 26.2) for HSPC versus CRPC, respectively (p=0.018). Median OS was 72.6 months (95% CI 72.6 - not reached) for HSPC and not reached for CRPC (95% CI 35.4 months - not reached) (p=0.026). For the subgroup of oligorecurrent HSPC, short-term androgen-deprivation therapy was associated with improved bPFS (median 6.0 vs. 18.3 months, HR 0.31, p<0.001) and DMFS (median 15.8 vs 29.6 months, HR 0.5, p=0.06). Information on pattern of relapse was retrieved for 79 patients: 45% (36/79) of these patients were long-term disease-free (>18 months), 28% (22/79) of patients wmere oligoprogressive (≤3 new lesions) and 27% (21/79) developed a polymetastatic relapse. Conclusion: In this cohort, oligometastatic HSPC showed potential benefit from SABR with a median DMFS of 21.8 months. Well-selected patients with oligometastatic CRPC may also benefit from SABR. For patients with metachronous and repeat oligorecurrent HSPC, combining SABR with short-term androgen-deprivation therapy was associated with improved bPFS and DMFS. Overall, 36/87 (41%) of patients were still free from clinical relapse at 18 months.

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.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy to All Lesions in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancers: A Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Trial.

PURPOSE: Increasing evidence suggests that patients with a limited number of metastases benefit from SABR to all lesions. However, the optimal dose and fractionation remain unknown. This is particularly true for bone and lymph node metastases. Therefore, a prospective, single-center, dose-escalation trial was initiated. METHODS: Dose-Escalation trial of STereotactic ablative body RadiOtherapY for non-spine bone and lymph node metastases (DESTROY) was an open-label phase 1 trial evaluating SABR to nonspine bone and lymph node lesions in patients with up to 3 metastases. Patients with European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, an estimated life expectancy of at least 6 months, and histologically confirmed nonhematological malignancy were eligible. Three SABR fractionation regimens, ie, 5 fractions of 7.0 Gy versus 3 fractions of 10.0 Gy versus a single fraction of 20.0 Gy, were applied in 3 consecutive patient cohorts. The rate of ≥grade 3 toxicity, scored according to the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v. 4.03, up to 6 months after SABR, was the primary endpoint. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03486431). RESULTS: Between July 2017 and December 2018, 90 patients were enrolled. In total 101 metastases were treated. No ≥grade 3 toxicity was observed in any of the enrolled patients (95% CI 0.0%-12.3% for the first cohort with 28 analyzable patients; 95% CI 0.0%-11.6% for the second and third cohort with 30 analyzable patients each). Treatment-related grade 2 toxicities occurred in 4 out of 30 versus 2 out of 30 versus 2 out of 30 patients for the 5, 3 and 1 fraction schedule, respectively. Actuarial local control rate at 12 months was 94.5%. CONCLUSION: All 3 treatment schedules were feasible and effective with remarkably low toxicity rates and high local control rates. From a patient and resource point of view, the single-fraction schedule is undoubtedly most convenient.

Outcome and toxicity of hypofractionated image-guided SABR for spinal oligometastases.

BACKGROUND: To investigate progression free survival (PFS), local control (LC) and overall survival (OS) outcomes for patients treated with spine hypofractionated stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and to evaluate possible predictors of rapid progression in view of a correct patient selection for this potentially curative SABR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort of 59 patients with spinal metastases were treated with SABR. Patient selection criteria were the following: histologically proven diagnosis of a solid tumor, a World Health Organization (WHO) score ≤ 2, life expectancy > 6 months, Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) ≤ 12 points and presenting with radically treated oligometastatic disease (≤5 lesions) or stable polymetastatic disease with an oligoprogressive lesion. RESULTS: From March 2015 to June 2019, 59 patients were treated with Linac-based SABR to 64 spinal metastases with a median follow-up of 55 months. SABR was standard delivered every other day in 3 to 10 fractions with median prescription dose of 27 Gy (range 21-49 Gy).The 1-,2- and 5-year PFS was 98%, 85% and 75% for all patients. OS at 5 years for all patients was 92%. Metachronous lesions (p < 0.01; HR = 7.1) and oligometastatic (vs. oligoprogressive) lesions (p = 0.02; HR = 0.3) were associated with higher PFS in uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis. No significant predictors in multivariate analysis were demonstrated for rapid progressors.Vertebral compression fractures developed de novo in 6.3% (4/64) of cases. The median time to fracture was 11 months (range 7-15) after treatment. No other adverse events ≥ 3 grade were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor control and toxicity after high-dose hypofractionated SABR was evaluated in patients with spinal oligometastases. High rates of efficacy and minimal toxicity were demonstrated. Oligometastatic patients with metachronous spinal metastases seem to benefit the most from SABR.

A phase III randomized-controlled, single-blind trial to improve quality of life with stereotactic body radiotherapy for patients with painful bone metastases (ROBOMET).

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases represent an important source of morbidity in cancer patients, mostly due to severe pain. Radiotherapy is an established symptomatic treatment for painful bone metastases, however, when conventional techniques are used, the effectiveness is moderate. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), delivering very high doses in a limited number of fractions in a highly conformal manner, could potentially be more effective and less toxic. METHODS: This is a phase III, randomized-controlled, single-blind, multicenter study evaluating the response rate of antalgic radiotherapy for painful bone metastases and the acute toxicity associated with this treatment. A total of 126 patients will be randomly assigned to receive either the standard schedule of a single fraction of 8.0 Gy delivered through three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy or a single fraction of 20.0 Gy delivered through SBRT. Primary endpoint is pain response at the treated site at 1 month after radiotherapy. Secondary endpoints are pain flare at 24-48-72 h after radiotherapy, duration of pain response, re-irradiation need, acute toxicity, late toxicity, quality of life and subsequent serious skeletal events. In a supplementary analysis, patient-compliance for a paper-and-pencil questionnaire will be compared with an electronic mode. DISCUSSION: If a dose-escalated approach within the context of single fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy could improve the pain response to radiotherapy and minimize acute toxicity, this would have an immediate impact on the quality of life for a large number of patients with advanced cancer. Potential disadvantages of this technique include increased pain flare or a higher incidence of radiation-induced fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Ethics committee of the GZA Hospitals (B099201732915) approved this study on September 4th 2018. Trial registered on Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03831243 ) on February 5th 2019.

A phase I dose-escalation trial of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy for non-spine bone and lymph node metastases (DESTROY-trial).

BACKGROUND: In an oligometastatic setting, metastasis-directed treatment could render patients disease free, possibly for a protracted interval. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is one of the treatment modalities that can be offered to these patients. In addition, the radiobiological qualities of SABR are promising for the use in perceived radioresistant tumours. There is also emerging evidence that SABR can stimulate the immune response, and a specific therapeutic window may exist for the optimal use of radiotherapy as an immune adjuvant. However, when SABR is considered for non-spine bone or lymph node metastases, the optimal fractionation schedule is not yet known. METHODS: The DESTROY-trial is a non-randomized prospective phase I trial determining a regimen of choice for patients with non-spine bone and lymph node metastases. A total of 90 patients will be included in three different treatment regimens. They will be offered stereotactic ablative radiotherapy in 5, 3 or 1 fractions. Dose-limiting toxicity will be recorded as primary endpoint. Acute and late toxicity, local response and local recurrence, and progression-free survival are secondary endpoints. Liquid biopsies will be collected throughout the course of this study from the second fractionation schedule on. DISCUSSION: Despite its almost universal use in (oligo-)metastatic patients, the level of evidence supporting radical local treatment in general, and stereotactic radiotherapy in particular, is low. This prospective phase I trial will evaluate different SABR regimens for metastases and the differences in immune-stimulatory effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Ethics committee of the GZA Hospitals (B099201732915) approved this study on 05/07/2017. Amendment for translational research was approved on 06/02/2018. Trial registered on Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03486431 ) on 03/04/2018 - Retrospectively registered.

The effect of a supersaturated calcium phosphate mouth rinse on the development of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients treated with (chemo)radiation: a single-center, randomized, prospective study of a calcium phosphate mouth rinse + standard of care versus standard of care.

OBJECTIVES: Mucosal damage is an important and debilitating side effect when treating head and neck cancer patients with (chemo-)radiation. The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to investigate whether the addition of a neutral, supersaturated, calcium phosphate (CP) mouth rinse benefits the severity and duration of acute mucositis in head and neck cancer patients treated with (chemo)radiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 patients with malignant neoplasms of the head and neck receiving (chemo)radiation were included in this study. Fifty-eight patients were randomized into two treatment arms: a control group receiving standard of care (n = 31) and a study group receiving standard of care + daily CP mouth rinses (n = 27) starting on the first day of (chemo-)radiation. Oral mucositis and dysphagia were assessed twice a week using the National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria scale version 3, oral pain was scored with a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: No significant difference in grade III mucositis (59 vs. 71 %; p = 0.25) and dysphagia (33 vs. 42 %, p = 0.39) was observed between the study group compared to the control group. Also no significant difference in time until development of peak mucositis (28.6 vs. 28.7 days; p = 0.48), duration of peak mucositis (22.7 vs. 24.6 days; p = 0.31), recuperation of peak dysphagia (20.5 vs 24.2 days; p = 0.13) and occurrence of severe pain (56 vs. 52 %, p = 0.5). CONCLUSION: In this randomized study, the addition of CP mouth rinse to standard of care did not improve the frequency, duration or severity of the most common acute toxicities during and early after (chemo)radiation. There is currently no evidence supporting its standard use in daily practice.