RESUMEN
Metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) has been tested in clinical trials as a treatment option for oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa). However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the impact of using different imaging techniques interchangeably for defining lesions and guiding MDT within clinical trials. Methods: We retrospectively identified oligorecurrent PCa patients who had 5 or fewer nodal, bone, or visceral metastases detected by choline or prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT and who underwent MDT stereotactic body radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy in 8 tertiary-level cancer centers. Imaging-guided MDT was assessed as progression-free survival (PFS), time to systemic treatment change due to polymetastatic conversion (PFS2), and overall survival predictor. Propensity score matching was performed to account for clinical differences between groups. Results: Of 402 patients, 232 (57.7%) and 170 (42.3%) underwent MDT guided by [18F]fluorocholine and PSMA PET/CT, respectively. After propensity score matching, patients treated with PSMA PET/CT-guided MDT demonstrated longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49 [95% CI, 0.36-0.67]; P < 0.0001), PFS2 (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.28-0.63]; P < 0.0001), and overall survival (HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.15-0.99]; P < 0.05) than those treated with choline PET/CT-guided MDT. Additionally, we matched patients who underwent [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 versus [18F]F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, observing longer PFS and PFS2 in the former subgroup (PFS: HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.26-1.00]; P < 0.05; PFS2: HR, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.09-0.60]; P < 0.05). Conclusion: Diverse imaging methods may influence outcomes in oligorecurrent PCa patients undergoing MDT. However, prospective, head-to-head studies, ideally incorporating a randomized design, are necessary to provide definitive evidence and facilitate the practical application of these findings.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy of a schedule of low-dose radiotherapy (LDRT) with 4 Gy (2 Gy x 2) in a cohort of unselected MALT or MZL patients. METHODS: We retrospectively collected all patients receiving LDRT, either for cure or palliation, for a stage I-IV histologically proven MALT or MZL between 2016 and 2020. Response to LDRT was evaluated with the Lugano criteria. Local control (LC), distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were stratified for treatment intent (curative vs palliative) and estimated by the Kaplan-Meier product-limit. RESULTS: Among 45 consecutively enrolled patients with a median age of 68 years (range 22-86), 26 (58%) were female. Thirty-one patients (69%) with a stage I-II disease received LDRT as first line therapy and with a curative intent. Overall response rate was 93%, with no significant difference among curative and palliative intent. With a median follow-up of 18 months, LC, DRFS, PFS and OS at 2 years were 93, 92, 76 and 91%, respectively, in the overall population. Patients receiving curative LDRT had a better PFS at 2 years (85% vs 54%, p < 0.01) compared to patients receiving palliative treatment. LDRT was well tolerated in all patients, without any significant acute or chronic side-effect. CONCLUSIONS: LDRT is effective and well tolerated in patients affected with MALT or nodal MZL, achieving high response rates and durable remission at 2 years. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study shows the efficacy of LDRT in the treatment of MALT and MZL.
