Actionable Genomic Alterations in Prostate Cancer Among Black and White United States Veterans.

Black Veterans have higher a incidence of localized and metastatic prostate cancer compared to White Veterans yet are underrepresented in reports of frequencies of somatic and germline alterations. This retrospective analysis of somatic and putative germline alterations was conducted in a large cohort of Veterans with prostate cancer (N = 835 Black, 1613 White) who underwent next generation sequencing through the VA Precision Oncology Program, which facilitates molecular testing for Veterans with metastatic cancer. No differences were observed in gene alterations for FDA approved targetable therapies (13.5% in Black Veterans vs. 15.5% in White Veterans, P = .21), nor in any potentially actionable alterations (25.5% vs. 28.7%, P =.1). Black Veterans had higher rates of BRAF (5.5% vs. 2.6%, P < .001) alterations, White Veterans TMPRSS2 fusions (27.2% vs. 11.7%, P < .0001). Putative germline alteration rates were higher in White Veterans (12.0% vs. 6.1%, P < .0001). Racial disparities in outcome are unlikely attributable to acquired somatic alterations in actionable pathways.

Multimodality Therapies for Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Multimodality therapy including radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy are frequently deployed in the management of localized prostate cancer. We sought to perform a critical appraisal of the most contemporary literature focusing on the multimodality management of localized prostate cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Men who are ideal candidates for multimodality therapy include those with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, high-risk disease, and very high-risk disease. Enhancements in both systemic agents (including second-generation antiandrogens) as well as localized therapies (such as stereotactic body radiotherapy and brachytherapy) are refining the optimal balance between the use of systemic and local therapies for localized prostate cancer. Genomic predictors are emerging as critical tools for more precisely allocating treatment intensification with multimodality therapies as well as treatment de-intensification. Close collaboration among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists will be critical for coordinating evidence-based multimodality therapies when clearly indicated and for supporting shared decision-making in areas where the evidence is mixed.

Selecting the optimal radiation modality in prostate cancer.

There are numerous radiation modalities for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer. Classic clinical trials have established the basic tenets of treatment approaches, and emerging data have generated new potential avenues of treatment that optimize the therapeutic ratio by increasing prostate cancer tumor control while minimizing treatment-related toxicity. In the definitive setting, the selection of the optimal radiation therapy approach depends largely on the appropriate up-front risk stratification of men with prostate cancer, with greater intensification of treatment and greater integration of multimodality therapies for men with higher-risk disease. Hormonal therapy should be selectively deployed based on prognostic information derived from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group and biologic tumor aggressiveness informed by genomic classifiers. Moreover, treatment intensification and target volume delineation are increasingly informed by molecular imaging and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Herein, we perform a critical appraisal of the literature focusing on the optimal selection of radiation therapy modality for localized prostate cancer. Collaboration among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists will be critical for coordinating evidence-based radiation therapies when clearly indicated and for supporting shared decision-making when the evidence is incomplete.

Androgen deprivation therapy use and duration with definitive radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Randomised trials have investigated various androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) intensification strategies in men receiving radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer. This individual patient data meta-analysis of relevant randomised trials aimed to quantify the benefit of these interventions in aggregate and in clinically relevant subgroups. METHODS: For this meta-analysis, we performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, trial registries, the Web of Science, Scopus, and conference proceedings to identify trials with results published in English between Jan 1, 1962, and Dec 30, 2020. Multicentre randomised trials were eligible if they evaluated the use or prolongation of ADT (or both) in men with localised prostate cancer receiving definitive radiotherapy, reported or collected distant metastasis and survival data, and used ADT for a protocol-defined finite duration. The Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium was accessed to obtain individual patient data from randomised trials. The primary outcome was metastasis-free survival. Hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained through stratified Cox models for ADT use (radiotherapy alone vs radiotherapy plus ADT), neoadjuvant ADT extension (ie, extension of total ADT duration in the neoadjuvant setting from 3-4 months to 6-9 months), and adjuvant ADT prolongation (ie, prolongation of total ADT duration in the adjuvant setting from 4-6 months to 18-36 months). Formal interaction tests between interventions and metastasis-free survival were done for prespecified subgroups defined by age, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group, and radiotherapy dose. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021236855. FINDINGS: Our search returned 12 eligible trials that provided individual patient data (10 853 patients) with a median follow-up of 11·4 years (IQR 9·0-15·0). The addition of ADT to radiotherapy significantly improved metastasis-free survival (HR 0·83 [95% CI 0·77-0·89], p<0·0001), as did adjuvant ADT prolongation (0·84 [0·78-0·91], p<0·0001), but neoadjuvant ADT extension did not (0·95 [0·83-1·09], p=0·50). Treatment effects were similar irrespective of radiotherapy dose, patient age, or NCCN risk group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings provide the strongest level of evidence so far to the magnitude of the benefit of ADT treatment intensification with radiotherapy for men with localised prostate cancer. Adding ADT and prolonging the portion of ADT that follows radiotherapy is associated with improved metastasis-free survival in men, regardless of risk group, age, and radiotherapy dose delivered; however, the magnitude of the benefit could vary and shared decision making with patients is recommended. FUNDING: University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Prostate Cancer Foundation, and the American Society for Radiation Oncology.

Analytical performance of aPROMISE: automated anatomic contextualization, detection, and quantification of [18F]DCFPyL (PSMA) imaging for standardized reporting.

PURPOSE: The application of automated image analyses could improve and facilitate standardization and consistency of quantification in [18F]DCFPyL (PSMA) PET/CT scans. In the current study, we analytically validated aPROMISE, a software as a medical device that segments organs in low-dose CT images with deep learning, and subsequently detects and quantifies potential pathological lesions in PSMA PET/CT. METHODS: To evaluate the deep learning algorithm, the automated segmentations of the low-dose CT component of PSMA PET/CT scans from 20 patients were compared to manual segmentations. Dice scores were used to quantify the similarities between the automated and manual segmentations. Next, the automated quantification of tracer uptake in the reference organs and detection and pre-segmentation of potential lesions were evaluated in 339 patients with prostate cancer, who were all enrolled in the phase II/III OSPREY study. Three nuclear medicine physicians performed the retrospective independent reads of OSPREY images with aPROMISE. Quantitative consistency was assessed by the pairwise Pearson correlations and standard deviation between the readers and aPROMISE. The sensitivity of detection and pre-segmentation of potential lesions was evaluated by determining the percent of manually selected abnormal lesions that were automatically detected by aPROMISE. RESULTS: The Dice scores for bone segmentations ranged from 0.88 to 0.95. The Dice scores of the PSMA PET/CT reference organs, thoracic aorta and liver, were 0.89 and 0.97, respectively. Dice scores of other visceral organs, including prostate, were observed to be above 0.79. The Pearson correlation for blood pool reference was higher between any manual reader and aPROMISE, than between any pair of manual readers. The standard deviations of reference organ uptake across all patients as determined by aPROMISE (SD = 0.21 blood pool and SD = 1.16 liver) were lower compared to those of the manual readers. Finally, the sensitivity of aPROMISE detection and pre-segmentation was 91.5% for regional lymph nodes, 90.6% for all lymph nodes, and 86.7% for bone in metastatic patients. CONCLUSION: In this analytical study, we demonstrated the segmentation accuracy of the deep learning algorithm, the consistency in quantitative assessment across multiple readers, and the high sensitivity in detecting potential lesions. The study provides a foundational framework for clinical evaluation of aPROMISE in standardized reporting of PSMA PET/CT.

False positive PSMA PET for tumor remnants in the irradiated prostate and other interpretation pitfalls in a prospective multi-center trial.

PURPOSE: Readers need to be informed about potential pitfalls of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET interpretation. METHODS: Here we report [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET findings discordant with the histopathology/composite reference standard in a recently published prospective trial on 635 patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. RESULTS: Consensus reads were false positive in 20 regions of 17/217 (8%) patients with lesion validation. Majority of the false positive interpretations (13 of 20, 65%) occurred in the context of suspected prostate (bed) relapse (T) after radiotherapy (n = 11); other false positive findings were noted for prostate bed post prostatectomy (T, n = 2), pelvic nodes (N, n = 2), or extra pelvic lesions (M, n = 5). Major sources of false positive findings were PSMA-expressing residual adenocarcinoma with marked post-radiotherapy treatment effect. False negative interpretation occurred in 8 regions of 6/79 (8%) patients with histopathology validation, including prostate (bed) (n = 5), pelvic nodes (n = 1), and extra pelvic lesions (n = 2). Lesions were missed mostly due to small metastases or adjacent bladder/urine uptake. CONCLUSION: [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET at biochemical recurrence resulted in less than 10% false positive interpretations. Post-radiotherapy prostate uptake was a major source of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET false positivity. In few cases, PET correctly detects residual PSMA expression post-radiotherapy, originating however from treated, benign tissue or potentially indolent tumor remnants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02940262 and NCT03353740.

Phase 3 multicenter randomized trial of PSMA PET/CT prior to definitive radiation therapy for unfavorable intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer [PSMA dRT]: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Definitive radiation therapy (dRT) is an effective initial treatment of intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa). PSMA PET/CT is superior to standard of care imaging (CT, MRI, bone scan) for detecting regional and distant metastatic PCa. PSMA PET/CT thus has the potential to guide patient selection and the planning for dRT and improve patient outcomes. METHODS: This is a multicenter randomized phase 3 trial (NCT04457245). We will randomize 312 patients to proceed with standard dRT (control Arm, n = 150), or undergo a PSMA PET/CT scan at the study site (both 18F-DCFPyL and 68Ga-PSMA-11 can be used) prior to dRT planning (intervention arm, n = 162). dRT will be performed at the treating radiation oncologist facility. In the control arm, dRT will be performed as routinely planned. In the intervention arm, the treating radiation oncologist can incorporate PSMA PET/CT findings into the RT planning. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is administered per discretion of the treating radiation oncologist and may be modified as a result of the PSMA PET/CT results. We assume that approximately 8% of subjects randomized to the PSMA PET arm will be found to have M1 disease and thus will be more appropriate candidates for long-term systemic or multimodal therapy, rather than curative intent dRT. PET M1 patients will thus not be included in the primary endpoint analysis. The primary endpoint is the success rate of patients with unfavorable IR and HR PCa after standard dRT versus PSMA PET-based dRT. Secondary Endpoints (whole cohort) include progression free survival (PFS), metastasis-free survival after initiation of RT, overall survival (OS), % of change in initial treatment intent and Safety. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized phase 3 prospective trial designed to determine whether PSMA PET/CT molecular imaging can improve outcomes in patients with PCa who receive dRT. In this trial the incorporation of PSMA PET/CT may improve the success rate of curative intent radiotherapy in two ways: to optimize patient selection as a biomarker and to personalizes the radiotherapy plan. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UCLA IND#147591 ○ Submission: 02.27.2020 ○ Safe-to-proceed letter issued by FDA: 04.01.2020 UCLA IRB #20-000378 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04457245 . Date of Registry: 07.07.2020. Essen EudraCT 2020-003526-23.

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer (mirage): a phase iii randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is becoming increasingly used in treating localized prostate cancer (PCa), with evidence showing similar toxicity and efficacy profiles when compared with longer courses of definitive radiation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided radiotherapy has multiple potential advantages over standard computed tomography (CT)-guided radiotherapy, including enhanced prostate visualization (abrogating the need for fiducials and MRI fusion), enhanced identification of the urethra, the ability to track the prostate in real-time, and the capacity to perform online adaptive planning. However, it is unknown whether these potential advantages translate into improved outcomes. This phase III randomized superiority trial is designed to prospectively evaluate whether toxicity is lower after MRI-guided versus CT-guided SBRT. METHODS: Three hundred men with localized PCa will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to SBRT using CT or MRI guidance. Randomization will be stratified by baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) (≤15 or > 15) and prostate gland volume (≤50 cc or > 50 cc). Five fractions of 8 Gy will be delivered to the prostate over the course of fourteen days, with or without hormonal therapy and elective nodal radiotherapy (to a dose of 5 Gy per fraction) as per the investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint is the incidence of physician-reported acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity (during the first 90 days after SBRT), as assessed by the CTCAE version 4.03 scale. Secondary clinical endpoints include incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, 5-year cumulative incidences of physician-reported late grade ≥ 2 GU and GI toxicity, temporal changes in patient-reported quality of life (QOL) outcomes, 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and the proportion of fractions of MRI-guided SBRT in which online adaptive radiotherapy is used. DISCUSSION: The MIRAGE trial is the first randomized trial comparing MRI-guided with standard CT-guided SBRT for localized PCa. The primary hypothesis is that MRI-guided SBRT will lead to an improvement in the cumulative incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity when compared to CT-guided SBRT. The pragmatic superiority design focused on an acute toxicity endpoint will allow an early comparison of the two technologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04384770. Date of registration: May 12, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04384770 PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 2.1, Aug 28, 2020.

Correction to: Randomized prospective phase III trial of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT molecular imaging for prostate cancer salvage radiotherapy planning [PSMA-SRT].

Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that one of the author names was listed incorrectly.

Randomized prospective phase III trial of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT molecular imaging for prostate cancer salvage radiotherapy planning [PSMA-SRT].

BACKGROUND: Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) recurrence after prostatectomy offers long-term biochemical control in about 50-60% of patients. SRT is commonly initiated in patients with serum PSA levels < 1 ng/mL, a threshold at which standard-of-care imaging is insensitive for detecting recurrence. As such, SRT target volumes are usually drawn in the absence of radiographically visible disease. 68Ga-PSMA-11 (PSMA) PET/CT molecular imaging is highly sensitive and may offer anatomic localization of PCa biochemical recurrence. However, it is unclear if incorporation of PSMA PET/CT imaging into the planning of SRT could improve its likelihood of success. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the success rate of SRT for recurrence of PCa after prostatectomy with and without planning based on PSMA PET/CT. METHODS: We will randomize 193 patients to proceed with standard SRT (control arm 1, n = 90) or undergo a PSMA PET/CT scan (free of charge for patients) prior to SRT planning (investigational arm 2, n = 103). The primary endpoint is the success rate of SRT measured as biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) after initiation of SRT. Biochemical progression is defined by PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL and rising. The randomization ratio of 1:1.13 is based on the assumption that approximately 13% of subjects randomized to Arm 2 will not be treated with SRT because of PSMA-positive extra-pelvic metastases. These patients will not be included in the primary endpoint analysis but will still be followed. The choice of treating the prostate bed alone vs prostate bed and pelvic lymph nodes, with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), is selected by the treating radiation oncologist. The radiation oncologist may change the radiation plan depending on the findings of the PSMA PET/CT scan. Any other imaging is allowed for SRT planning in both arms if done per routine care. Patients will be followed until either one of the following conditions occur: 5 years after the date of initiation of randomization, biochemical progression, diagnosis of metastatic disease, initiation of any additional salvage therapy, death. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized phase 3 prospective trial designed to determine whether PSMA PET/CT molecular imaging can improve outcomes in patients with PCa early BCR following radical prostatectomy. ACRONYM: PSMA-SRT Phase 3 trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ■ IND#130649 ◦ Submission: 04.26.2016 ◦ Safe-to-proceed letter issued by FDA: 05.25.2016 ■ UCLA IRB #18-000484, ■ First submission: 3.27.2018 ■ Date of approval: 5.31.2018 ■ UCLA JCCC Short Title NUC MED 18-000484 ■ NCI Trial Identifier NCI-2018-01518 ■ ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03582774 ■ First Submitted: 06.19.2018 ■ First Submitted that Met QC Criteria: 06.27.2018 ■ First Posted: 07.11.2018 ■ Last Update Submitted that Met QC Criteria: 07.17.2018 ■ Last Update Posted: 07.19.2018 TRIAL STATUS: Current Trial Status Active as of 08/13/2018 Trial Start Date 09/01/2018-Actual Primary Completion Date 09/01/2023-Anticipated Trial Completion Date 09/01/2024-Anticipated.

Systemic and tumor-directed therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer: study protocol for a phase II trial for veterans with de novo oligometastatic disease.

BACKGROUND: The treatment paradigm for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) patients is evolving. PET/CT now offers improved sensitivity and accuracy in staging. Recent randomized trial data supports escalated hormone therapy, local primary tumor therapy, and metastasis-directed therapy. The impact of combining such therapies into a multimodal approach is unknown. This Phase II single-arm clinical trial sponsored and funded by Veterans Affairs combines local, metastasis-directed, and systemic therapies to durably render patients free of detectable disease off active therapy. METHODS: Patients with newly-diagnosed M1a/b prostate cancer (PSMA PET/CT staging is permitted) and 1-5 radiographically visible metastases (excluding pelvic lymph nodes) are undergoing local treatment with radical prostatectomy, limited duration systemic therapy for a total of six months (leuprolide, abiraterone acetate with prednisone, and apalutamide), metastasis-directed stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and post-operative fractionated radiotherapy if pT ≥ 3a, N1, or positive margins are present. The primary endpoint is the percent of patients achieving a serum PSA of < 0.05 ng/mL six months after recovery of serum testosterone ≥150 ng/dL. Secondary endpoints include time to biochemical progression, time to radiographic progression, time to initiation of alternative antineoplastic therapy, prostate cancer specific survival, health related quality-of-life, safety and tolerability. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first trial that tests a comprehensive systemic and tumor directed therapeutic strategy for patients with newly diagnosed oligometastatic prostate cancer. This trial, and others like it, represent the critical first step towards curative intent therapy for a patient population where palliation has been the norm. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03298087 (registration date: September 29, 2017).

Treatment of the primary tumor in metastatic prostate cancer.

The cornerstone of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer patients has been conventional androgen deprivation therapy, with additional systemic therapy initiated only after castration resistance, and local therapy reserved for palliation. Compelling results from modern trials challenge this paradigm, arguing for initiating escalated hormone therapy and/or chemotherapy during the castration-sensitive disease state for many patients. Furthermore, modern radiotherapy techniques allow for local control of disease with low risk of toxicity. Finally, new PET probes with enhanced sensitivity and accuracy are likely to become a part of routine staging and will lead to an increased incidence of patients with metastatic disease at presentation, with a shift toward identification of patients with limited metastatic disease. As such, the landscape is primed for investigations aimed to explore the role of primary tumor therapy for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We review the existing data evaluating primary tumor therapy for patients with metastatic prostate cancer and describe ongoing clinical trials testing the hypothesis that primary tumor therapy may benefit patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, or External Beam Radiotherapy With Brachytherapy Boost and Disease Progression and Mortality in Patients With Gleason Score 9-10 Prostate Cancer.

Importance: The optimal treatment for Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer is unknown. Objective: To compare clinical outcomes of patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer after definitive treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study in 12 tertiary centers (11 in the United States, 1 in Norway), with 1809 patients treated between 2000 and 2013. Exposures: Radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy, or EBRT plus brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT) with androgen deprivation therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was prostate cancer-specific mortality; distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival were secondary outcomes. Results: Of 1809 men, 639 underwent RP, 734 EBRT, and 436 EBRT+BT. Median ages were 61, 67.7, and 67.5 years; median follow-up was 4.2, 5.1, and 6.3 years, respectively. By 10 years, 91 RP, 186 EBRT, and 90 EBRT+BT patients had died. Adjusted 5-year prostate cancer-specific mortality rates were RP, 12% (95% CI, 8%-17%); EBRT, 13% (95% CI, 8%-19%); and EBRT+BT, 3% (95% CI, 1%-5%). EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower prostate cancer-specific mortality than either RP or EBRT (cause-specific HRs of 0.38 [95% CI, 0.21-0.68] and 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]). Adjusted 5-year incidence rates of distant metastasis were RP, 24% (95% CI, 19%-30%); EBRT, 24% (95% CI, 20%-28%); and EBRT+BT, 8% (95% CI, 5%-11%). EBRT+BT was associated with a significantly lower rate of distant metastasis (propensity-score-adjusted cause-specific HRs of 0.27 [95% CI, 0.17-0.43] for RP and 0.30 [95% CI, 0.19-0.47] for EBRT). Adjusted 7.5-year all-cause mortality rates were RP, 17% (95% CI, 11%-23%); EBRT, 18% (95% CI, 14%-24%); and EBRT+BT, 10% (95% CI, 7%-13%). Within the first 7.5 years of follow-up, EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (cause-specific HRs of 0.66 [95% CI, 0.46-0.96] for RP and 0.61 [95% CI, 0.45-0.84] for EBRT). After the first 7.5 years, the corresponding HRs were 1.16 (95% CI, 0.70-1.92) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.57-1.32). No significant differences in prostate cancer-specific mortality, distant metastasis, or all-cause mortality (≤7.5 and >7.5 years) were found between men treated with EBRT or RP (cause-specific HRs of 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.26], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.70-1.14], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.80-1.44], and 1.34 [95% CI, 0.85-2.11]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer, treatment with EBRT+BT with androgen deprivation therapy was associated with significantly better prostate cancer-specific mortality and longer time to distant metastasis compared with EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy or with RP.

Antitumor activity of a pyrrole-imidazole polyamide.

Many cancer therapeutics target DNA and exert cytotoxicity through the induction of DNA damage and inhibition of transcription. We report that a DNA minor groove binding hairpin pyrrole-imidazole (Py-Im) polyamide interferes with RNA polymerase II (RNAP2) activity in cell culture. Polyamide treatment activates p53 signaling in LNCaP prostate cancer cells without detectable DNA damage. Genome-wide mapping of RNAP2 binding shows reduction of occupancy, preferentially at transcription start sites, but occupancy at enhancer sites is unchanged. Polyamide treatment results in a time- and dose-dependent depletion of the RNAP2 large subunit RPB1 that is preventable with proteasome inhibition. This polyamide demonstrates antitumor activity in a prostate tumor xenograft model with limited host toxicity.

Gene expression changes in a tumor xenograft by a pyrrole-imidazole polyamide.

Gene regulation by DNA binding small molecules could have important therapeutic applications. This study reports the investigation of a DNA-binding pyrrole-imidazole polyamide targeted to bind the DNA sequence 5'-WGGWWW-3' with reference to its potency in a subcutaneous xenograft tumor model. The molecule is capable of trafficking to the tumor site following subcutaneous injection and modulates transcription of select genes in vivo. An FITC-labeled analogue of this polyamide can be detected in tumor-derived cells by confocal microscopy. RNA deep sequencing (RNA-seq) of tumor tissue allowed the identification of further affected genes, a representative panel of which was interrogated by quantitative reverse transcription-PCR and correlated with cell culture expression levels.

Quantifying Intrafraction Motion and the Impact of Gating for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Stereotactic Radiation therapy for Prostate Cancer: Analysis of the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Arm From the MIRAGE Phase 3 Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Real-time intrafraction tracking/gating is an integral component of magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) and may have contributed to the acute toxicity reduction during prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy observed on the MRgRT-arm of the MIRAGE (MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-GUIDED Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer) randomized trial (NCT04384770). Herein we characterized intrafraction prostate motion and assessed gating effectiveness. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventy-nine patients were treated on an MR-LINAC. Real-time cine imaging was acquired at 4Hz in a sagittal plane. If >10% of the prostate area moved outside of a 3-mm gating boundary, an automatic beam hold was initiated. An in-house tool was developed to retrospectively extract gating signal for all patients and identify the tracked prostate in each cine frame for a subgroup of 40 patients. The fraction of time the prostate was within the gating window was defined as the gating duty cycle (GDC). RESULTS: A total of 391 treatments from 79 patients were analyzed. Median GDC was 0.974 (IQR, 0.916-0.983). Fifty (63.2%) and 24 (30.4%) patients had at least 1 fraction with GDC ≤0.9 and GDC ≤0.8, respectively. Incidence of low GDC fractions among patients appeared stochastic. Patients with minimum GDC <0.8 trended toward more frequent grade 2 genitourinary toxicity compared with those with minimum GDC >0.8 (38% vs 18%, P = .065). Prostate intrafraction motion was mostly along the bladder-rectum axis and predominantly in the superior-anterior direction. Motion in the inferior-posterior direction was associated with significantly higher rate of acute grade 2 genitourinary toxicity (66.7% vs 13.9%, P = .001). Gating limited mean prostate motion during treatment delivery in fractions with a GDC <0.9 (<0.8) to 2.9 mm (2.9 mm) versus 4.1 mm (4.7 mm) for ungated motion. CONCLUSIONS: Fractions with large intrafraction motion were associated with increased toxicity and their occurrence among patients appears stochastic. Real-time tracking/gating effectively mitigated this motion and is likely a major contributing factor of acute toxicity reduction associated with MRgRT.

Impact of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography on Prostate Cancer Salvage Radiotherapy Management: Results from a Prospective Multicenter Randomized Phase 3 Trial (PSMA-SRT NCT03582774).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Both imaging and several prognostic factors inform the planning of salvage radiotherapy (SRT). Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) can localize disease unseen by other imaging modalities. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of PSMA-PET on biochemical recurrence-free survival rate after SRT. METHODS: This prospective randomized, controlled, phase 3 clinical trial randomized 193 patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy to proceed with SRT (control arm, n = 90) or undergo a PSMA-PET/computed tomography (CT) scan prior to SRT planning (investigational arm, n = 103) from June 2018 to August 2020. Any other approved imaging modalities were allowed in both arms (including fluciclovine-PET). This is a secondary endpoint analysis: impact of PSMA-PET on SRT planning. Case-report forms were sent to referring radiation oncologists to collect the management plans before randomization and after completion of SRT. The relative frequency (%) of management changes within each arm were compared using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The delivered SRT plan was available in 178/193 patients (92.2%;76/90 control [84.4%] and 102/103 PSMA-PET [99%]). Median prostate-specific antigen levels at enrollment was 0.30 ng/ml (interquartile range [IQR] 0.19-0.91) in the control arm and 0.23 ng/ml (IQR 0.15-0.54) in the PSMA-PET arm. Fluciclovine-PET was used in 33/76 (43%) in the control arm. PSMA-PET localized recurrence(s) in 38/102 (37%): nine of 102 (9%) outside of the pelvis (M1), 16/102 (16%) in the pelvic LNs (N1, with or without local recurrence), and 13/102 (13%) in the prostate fossa only. There was a 23% difference (95% confidence interval [CI] 9-35%, p = 0.002) of frequency of major changes between the control arm (22% [17/76]) and the PSMA-PET intervention arm (45%[46/102]). Of the major changes in the intervention group, 33/46 (72%) were deemed related to PSMA-PET. There was a 17.6% difference (95% CI 5.4-28.5%, p = 0.005) of treatment escalation frequency between the control arm (nine of 76 [12%]) and the intervention arm (30/102 [29%]). Treatment de-escalation occurred in the control and intervention arms in eight of 76 (10.5%) and 12/102 (11.8%) patients, and mixed changes in zero of 76 (0%) and four of 102 (3.9%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In this prospective randomized phase 3 study, PSMA-PET findings provided information that initiated major management changes to SRT planning in 33/102 (33%) patients. The final readout of the primary endpoint planned in 2025 may provide evidence on whether these changes result in improved outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography leads to management changes in one-third of patients receiving salvage radiotherapy for post-radical prostatectomy biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer.

Systemic and Tumor-directed Therapy for Oligorecurrent Metastatic Prostate Cancer (SATURN): Primary Endpoint Results from a Phase 2 Clinical Trial.

Nearly all men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) experience recurrence within 6 mo of testosterone recovery. We conducted a single-arm phase 2 trial to evaluate whether addition of dual androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and metastasis-directed stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to intermittent ADT improves recurrence rates for men with between one and five nonvisceral, extrapelvic metastases on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography after prior radical prostatectomy. Patients received 6 mo of androgen annihilation therapy (AAT; leuprolide, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone, and apalutamide) and metastasis-directed SBRT. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <0.05 ng/ml 6 mo after testosterone recovery (≥150 ng/dl), with the study powered to detect an improvement from 1% to 12%. We enrolled 28 men between March 2021 and June 2022. Median follow-up was 20 mo (interquartile range 16-22). Twenty-six patients (93%) completed SBRT with 6 mo of hormone therapy, of whom six discontinued at least one ARPI; two patients withdrew prematurely. At 6 mo after testosterone recovery, PSA was maintained at <0.05 ng/ml in 13/26 patients (50%, 95% confidence interval 32-67%). Rates of grade 2 and 3 AAT toxicity were 21% and 21%. The results confirm that addition of metastasis-directed SBRT to highly potent systemic therapy can maintain low PSA after testosterone recovery, although further studies are needed to clarify the optimal systemic therapy regimen. PATIENT SUMMARY: We tested a combination of intensified hormone therapy (called androgen annihilation therapy) and radiotherapy targeted at metastases in men with recurrence of metastatic prostate cancer. We found that half of patients were recurrence-free 6 months after their testosterone level recovered, and that less than a quarter of patients experienced a severe drug-related side effect. Overall, this appears to be an effective therapy with acceptable side effects. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03902951.