Variation in management of lymph node positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy within a statewide quality improvement consortium.

BACKGROUND: Patients with lymph node positive (pN+) disease found at the time of radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer (CaP) are at high risk of disease persistence and progression. Contemporary management trends of pN+ CaP are not well described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in the Michigan Urologic Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2012 and 2023 with cN0/pN+ disease were identified. The primary outcome was to evaluate patient and practice-level factors associated with time to secondary post-RP treatment. Secondary outcomes included practice-level variation in management of pN+ CaP and rates of secondary treatment modality. To assess factors associated with secondary treatment, a Cox proportional hazards model of a 60-day landmark analysis was performed. RESULTS: We identified 666 patients with pN+ disease. Overall, 66% underwent secondary treatment within 12 months post-RP. About 19% of patients with detectable post-RP PSA did not receive treatment. Of patients receiving secondary treatment after 60-days post-RP, 34% received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone, 27% received radiation (RT) alone, 36% received combination, and 4% received other systemic therapies. In the multivariable model, pathologic grade group (GG)3 (HR 1.5; 95%CI: 1.05-2.14), GG4-5 (HR 1.65; 95%CI: 1.16-2.34), positive margins (HR 1.46; 95%CI: 1.13-1.88), and detectable postoperative PSA ≥0.1 ng/ml (HR 3.46; 95%CI: 2.61-4.59) were significantly associated with secondary post-RP treatment. There was wide variation in adjusted practice-level 12-month secondary treatment utilization (28%-79%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority pN+ patients receive treatment within 12 months post-RP which was associated with high-risk pathological features and post-RP PSA. Variation in management of pN+ disease highlights the uncertainty regarding the optimal management. Understanding which patients will benefit from secondary treatment, and which type, will be critical to minimize variation in care.

More Than Words: Defining Adjuvant, Consolidative, and Salvage Treatment after Radical Prostatectomy.

After radical prostatectomy, adjuvant therapy should be used sparingly when prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is undetectable. Instead, early salvage therapy is recommended for PSA recurrence. Patients with PSA persistence after prostatectomy are at high risk and should be offered consolidative therapy.

External Validation of a Digital Pathology-based Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Architecture in the NRG/RTOG 9902 Phase 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Accurate risk stratification is critical to guide management decisions in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previously, we had developed and validated a multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) model generated from digital histopathology and clinical features. Here, we externally validate this model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the MMAI model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Our validation cohort included 318 localized high-risk PCa patients from NRG/RTOG 9902 with available histopathology (337 [85%] of the 397 patients enrolled into the trial had available slides, of which 19 [5.6%] failed due to poor image quality). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Two previously locked prognostic MMAI models were validated for their intended endpoint: distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM). Individual clinical factors and the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk features served as comparators. Subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was reported per standard deviation increase of the score with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using Fine-Gray or Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The DM and PCSM MMAI algorithms were significantly and independently associated with the risk of DM (sHR [95% CI] = 2.33 [1.60-3.38], p < 0.001) and PCSM, respectively (sHR [95% CI] = 3.54 [2.38-5.28], p < 0.001) when compared against other prognostic clinical factors and NCCN high-risk features. The lower 75% of patients by DM MMAI had estimated 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 4% and 7%, and the highest quartile had average 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 19% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for the PCSM MMAI algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: We externally validated the prognostic ability of MMAI models previously developed among men with localized high-risk disease. MMAI prognostic models further risk stratify beyond the clinical and pathological variables for DM and PCSM in a population of men already at a high risk for disease progression. This study provides evidence for consistent validation of our deep learning MMAI models to improve prognostication and enable more informed decision-making for patient care. PATIENT SUMMARY: This paper presents a novel approach using images from pathology slides along with clinical variables to validate artificial intelligence (computer-generated) prognostic models. When implemented, clinicians can offer a more personalized and tailored prognostic discussion for men with localized prostate cancer.

Effect of Pelvic External Beam Radiation Therapy on Bone Mineral Density: A Secondary Analysis of a Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Pelvic radiation therapy may lead to decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and increased risk of fracture that could be of particular concern in patients with prostate cancer who also receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We performed an exploratory analysis of a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether exposure to prior pelvic external beam radiation therapy (XRT) affects BMD and risk of fracture in patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer aged ≥70 years or <70 years with low BMD (T-score < -1) or osteoporotic fracture who had been receiving ADT for ≥12 months were randomly assigned to receive densoumab or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. BMD was measured at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36. We applied multivariable linear mixed-effects models with an interaction term between the treatment arm and exposure to prior pelvic XRT to evaluate differential XRT effect on percent BMD change between the 2 treatment arms. RESULTS: Among 1407 eligible patients, 31% (n = 447) received prior pelvic XRT. There was no significant difference in any clinical fractures among patients with (5.8%, 26 of 447) or without (5.2%, 50 of 960) prior pelvic XRT (P = .42). Prior pelvic XRT was associated with a significant (0.54%) improvement in BMD (95% CI, 0.05-1.02) in the placebo group and a nonsignificant (0.04%) decline in BMD (95% CI, -0.47 to -0.35) in the denosumab group (interaction P = .007). There was no significant difference in pelvic XRT effect on percent BMD change in the lumbar spine (P = .65) or total hip (P = .39) between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find sufficient evidence to suggest any detrimental effect of pelvic XRT on the treatment effect from denosumab on percent BMD change, with only an approximately 5% incidence of clinical fractures.

Impact of sequencing of androgen receptor-signaling inhibition and radiotherapy in prostate cancer: importance of homologous recombination disruption.

PURPOSE: The synergy of combining androgen receptor-signaling inhibition (ARSI) to radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer has been largely attributed to non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) inhibition. However, this mechanism is unlikely to explain recently observed trial results that demonstrated the sequencing of ARSI and RT significantly impacts clinical outcomes, with adjuvant ARSI following RT yielding superior outcomes to neoadjuvant/concurrent therapy. We hypothesized this is driven by differential effects on AR-signaling and alternative DNA repair pathway engagement based on ARSI/RT sequencing. METHODS: We explored the effects of ARSI sequencing with RT (neoadjuvant vs concurrent vs adjuvant) in multiple prostate cancer cell lines using androgen-deprived media and validation with the anti-androgen enzalutamide. The effects of ARSI sequencing were measured with clonogenic assays, AR-target gene transcription and translation quantification, cell cycle analysis, DNA damage and repair assays, and xenograft animal validation studies. RESULTS: Adjuvant ARSI after RT was significantly more effective at killing colony forming cells and decreasing the transcription and translation of downstream AR-target genes across all prostate cancer models evaluated. These results were reproduced in xenograft studies. The differential effects of ARSI sequencing were not fully explained by NHEJ inhibition alone, but by the additional disruption of homologous recombination specifically with adjuvant sequencing of ARSI. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that altered sequencing of ARSI and RT mediates differential anti-AR-signaling and anti-cancer effects, with the greatest benefit from adjuvant ARSI following RT. These results, combined with our prior clinical findings, support the superiority of an adjuvant-based sequencing approach when using ARSI with RT.

Prospective Evaluation of Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer Radiotherapy Fractionation Regimen Usage and Acute Toxicity in a Large Statewide Quality Collaborative.

PURPOSE: National guidelines on limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) treatment give preference to a hyperfractionated regimen of 45 Gy in 30 fractions delivered twice daily; however, use of this regimen is uncommon compared with once-daily regimens. The purpose of this study was to characterize the LS-SCLC fractionation regimens used throughout a statewide collaborative, analyze patient and treatment factors associated with these regimens, and describe real-world acute toxicity profiles of once- and twice-daily radiation therapy (RT) regimens. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Demographic, clinical, and treatment data along with physician-assessed toxicity and patient-reported outcomes were prospectively collected by 29 institutions within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium between 2012 and 2021 for patients with LS-SCLC. We modeled the influence of RT fractionation and other patient-level variables clustered by treatment site on the odds of a treatment break specifically due to toxicity with multilevel logistic regression. National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, incident grade 2 or worse toxicity was longitudinally compared between regimens. RESULTS: There were 78 patients (15.6% overall) treated with twice-daily RT and 421 patients treated with once-daily RT. Patients receiving twice-daily RT were more likely to be married or living with someone (65% vs 51%; P = .019) and to have no major comorbidities (24% vs 10%; P = .017). Once-daily RT fractionation toxicity peaked during RT, and twice-daily toxicity peaked within 1 month after RT. After stratifying by treatment site and adjusting for patient-level variables, once-daily treated patients had 4.11 (95% confidence interval, 1.31-12.87) higher odds of treatment break specifically due to toxicity than twice-daily treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperfractionation for LS-SCLC remains infrequently prescribed despite the lack of evidence demonstrating superior efficacy or lower toxicity of once-daily RT. With peak acute toxicity after RT and lower likelihood of a treatment break with twice-daily fractionation in real-word practice, providers may start using hyperfractionated RT more frequently.

Cardiac and Pulmonary Dosimetric Parameters in Patients With Lung Cancer Undergoing Postoperative Radiation Therapy Across a Statewide Consortium.

PURPOSE: The recently published Lung Adjuvant Radiotherapy Trial (Lung ART) reported increased rates of cardiac and pulmonary toxic effects in the postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) arm. It remains unknown whether the dosimetric parameters reported in Lung ART are representative of contemporary real-world practice, which remains relevant for patients undergoing PORT for positive surgical margins. The purpose of this study was to examine heart and lung dose exposure in patients receiving PORT for non-small cell lung cancer across a statewide consortium. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2012 to 2022, demographic and dosimetric data were prospectively collected for 377 patients at 27 academic and community centers within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium undergoing PORT for nonmetastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Dosimetric parameters for target coverage and organ-at-risk exposure were calculated using data from dose-volume histograms, and rates of 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) utilization were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-one percent of patients in this cohort had N2 disease at the time of surgery, and 25% had a positive margin. Sixty-six percent of patients were treated with IMRT compared with 32% with 3D-CRT. The planning target volume was significantly smaller in patients treated with 3D-CRT (149.2 vs 265.4 cm3; P < .0001). The median mean heart dose for all patients was 8.7 Gy (interquartile range [IQR], 3.5-15.3 Gy), the median heart volume receiving at least 5 Gy (V5) was 35.2% (IQR, 18.5%-60.2%), and the median heart volume receiving at least 35 Gy (V35) was 9% (IQR, 3.2%-17.7%). The median mean lung dose was 11.4 Gy (IQR, 8.1-14.3 Gy), and the median lung volume receiving at least 20 Gy (V20) was 19.6% (IQR, 12.7%-25.4%). These dosimetric parameters did not significantly differ by treatment modality (IMRT vs 3D-CRT) or in patients with positive versus negative surgical margins. CONCLUSIONS: With increased rates of IMRT use, cardiac and lung dosimetric parameters in this statewide consortium were slightly lower than those reported in Lung ART. These data provide useful benchmarks for treatment planning in patients undergoing PORT for positive surgical margins.

Evaluation of Social Determinants of Health and Prostate Cancer Outcomes Among Black and White Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: As the field of medicine strives for equity in care, research showing the association of social determinants of health (SDOH) with poorer health care outcomes is needed to better inform quality improvement strategies. Objective: To evaluate the association of SDOH with prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) among Black and White patients with prostate cancer. Data Sources: A MEDLINE search was performed of prostate cancer comparative effectiveness research from January 1, 1960, to June 5, 2020. Study Selection: Two authors independently selected studies conducted among patients within the United States and performed comparative outcome analysis between Black and White patients. Studies were required to report time-to-event outcomes. A total of 251 studies were identified for review. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Three authors independently screened and extracted data. End point meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed, and 2 authors independently reviewed all steps. All conflicts were resolved by consensus. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was PCSM, and the secondary outcome was OS. With the US Department of Health and Human Services Healthy People 2030 initiative, an SDOH scoring system was incorporated to evaluate the association of SDOH with the predefined end points. The covariables included in the scoring system were age, comorbidities, insurance status, income status, extent of disease, geography, standardized treatment, and equitable and harmonized insurance benefits. The scoring system was discretized into 3 categories: high (≥10 points), intermediate (5-9 points), and low (<5 points). Results: The 47 studies identified comprised 1 019 908 patients (176 028 Black men and 843 880 White men; median age, 66.4 years [IQR, 64.8-69.0 years]). The median follow-up was 66.0 months (IQR, 41.5-91.4 months). Pooled estimates found no statistically significant difference in PCSM for Black patients compared with White patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08 [95% CI, 0.99-1.19]; P = .08); results were similar for OS (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.95-1.07]; P = .68). There was a significant race-SDOH interaction for both PCSM (regression coefficient, -0.041 [95% CI, -0.059 to 0.023]; P < .001) and OS (meta-regression coefficient, -0.017 [95% CI, -0.033 to -0.002]; P = .03). In studies with minimal accounting for SDOH (<5-point score), Black patients had significantly higher PCSM compared with White patients (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.17-1.41; P < .001). In studies with greater accounting for SDOH variables (≥10-point score), PCSM was significantly lower among Black patients compared with White patients (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that there is a significant interaction between race and SDOH with respect to PCSM and OS among men with prostate cancer. Incorporating SDOH variables into data collection and analyses are vital to developing strategies for achieving equity.

A Phase I Trial of Neoadjuvant Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Prior to Radical Prostatectomy for Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Men with locally advanced prostate cancer who undergo radical prostatectomy (RP) often develop recurrence and require postoperative radiotherapy. We aimed to determine the safety of neoadjuvant stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) before RP in this population. METHODS AND PATIENTS: A single-institution phase 1 trial (NCT02946008) of men with high-risk or node-positive prostate cancer were enrolled between March and October 2017. The primary endpoint was to determine the maximum tolerated dose of SBRT based on a composite 30-day post-RP toxicity goal of ≤28% of patients experiencing a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Secondary outcomes included toxicity, efficacy, and multiple quality of life (QoL) inventories. SBRT (30-35 Gy/5 fractions) was delivered to the prostate and seminal vesicles, and 25 Gy/5 fractions to the pelvic lymph nodes. RP was performed for a median of 6 weeks post-SBRT. Hormone therapy was not allowed. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 40 months (range, 33-44). Twenty-five percent of the patients (n = 4) experienced a DLT within 30 days post-RP; however, the trial was stopped early (n = 16 of planned 38 patients) owing to the proportion and severity of the late adverse events. Post-RP grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities occurred in 75% (n = 12) and 25% (n = 4) of patients, respectively. Two patients required cystectomy and urinary diversion ≥2 years post-RP. At 24 months post-RP, 75% (n = 12) of men used ≥1 pad/d and 0% had erections suitable for intercourse. Surgical margins were negative in all patients and 31% (n = 5) had complete or partial (pre-RP) MRI-response to SBRT. Three-year biochemical recurrence and distant metastasis were 45% (95% CI, 5%-68%) and 28% (95% CI, 0%-49%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant SBRT followed by RP resulted in unacceptably high toxicity and severe QoL declines.

External Beam Radiation Therapy With or Without Brachytherapy Boost in Men With Very-High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Large Multicenter International Consortium Analysis.

PURPOSE: Very-high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (PC) is an aggressive subgroup with high risk of distant disease progression. Systemic treatment intensification with abiraterone or docetaxel reduces PC-specific mortality (PCSM) and distant metastasis (DM) in men receiving external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Whether prostate-directed treatment intensification with the addition of brachytherapy (BT) boost to EBRT with ADT improves outcomes in this group is unclear. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This cohort study from 16 centers across 4 countries included men with VHR PC treated with either dose-escalated EBRT with ≥24 months of ADT or EBRT + BT boost with ≥12 months of ADT. VHR was defined by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria (clinical T3b-4, primary Gleason pattern 5, or ≥2 NCCN high-risk features), and results were corroborated in a subgroup of men who met Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy (STAMPEDE) trials inclusion criteria (≥2 of the following: clinical T3-4, Gleason 8-10, or PSA ≥40 ng/mL). PCSM and DM between EBRT and EBRT + BT were compared using inverse probability of treatment weight-adjusted Fine-Gray competing risk regression. RESULTS: Among the entire cohort, 270 underwent EBRT and 101 EBRT + BT. After a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 6.7% and 5.9% of men died of PC and 16.3% and 9.9% had DM after EBRT and EBRT + BT, respectively. There was no significant difference in PCSM (sHR, 1.47 [95% CI, 0.57-3.75]; P = .42) or DM (sHR, 0.72, [95% CI, 0.30-1.71]; P = .45) between EBRT + BT and EBRT. Results were similar within the STAMPEDE-defined VHR subgroup (PCSM: sHR, 1.67 [95% CI, 0.48-5.81]; P = .42; DM: sHR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.15-2.04]; P = .38). CONCLUSIONS: In this VHR PC cohort, no difference in clinically meaningful outcomes was observed between EBRT alone with ≥24 months of ADT compared with EBRT + BT with ≥12 months of ADT. Comparative analyses in men treated with intensified systemic therapy are warranted.

Meta-Analysis of Candidate Surrogate End Points in Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Meta-Analysis of Surrogate End Points in Prostate CancerGharzai et al. report on the results of a meta-analysis, which concludes that unlike the case in localized prostate cancer, surrogate end points in advanced prostate cancer may not track overall survival.

Association of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Rates With Subsequent Metastatic Prostate Cancer Incidence at US Veterans Health Administration Facilities.

Importance: There is controversy about the benefit of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Prostate-specific antigen screening rates have decreased since 2008 in the US, and the incidence of metastatic prostate cancer has increased. However, there is no direct epidemiologic evidence of a correlation between population PSA screening rates and subsequent metastatic prostate cancer rates. Objective: To assess whether facility-level variation in PSA screening rates is associated with subsequent facility-level metastatic prostate cancer incidence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort used data for all men aged 40 years or older with an encounter at 128 facilities in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2019. Exposures: Yearly facility-level PSA screening rates, defined as the proportion of men aged 40 years or older with a PSA test in each year, and long-term nonscreening rates, defined as the proportion of men aged 40 years or older without a PSA test in the prior 3 years, from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were facility-level yearly counts of incident metastatic prostate cancer diagnoses and age-adjusted yearly metastatic prostate cancer incidence rates (per 100 000 men) 5 years after each PSA screening exposure year. Results: The cohort included 4 678 412 men in 2005 and 5 371 701 men in 2019. Prostate-specific antigen screening rates decreased from 47.2% in 2005 to 37.0% in 2019, and metastatic prostate cancer incidence increased from 5.2 per 100 000 men in 2005 to 7.9 per 100 000 men in 2019. Higher facility-level PSA screening rates were associated with lower metastatic prostate cancer incidence 5 years later (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.91 per 10% increase in PSA screening rate; 95% CI, 0.87-0.96; P < .001). Higher long-term nonscreening rates were associated with higher metastatic prostate cancer incidence 5 years later (IRR, 1.11 per 10% increase in long-term nonscreening rate; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: From 2005 to 2019, PSA screening rates decreased in the national VHA system. Facilities with higher PSA screening rates had lower subsequent rates of metastatic prostate cancer. These data may be used to inform shared decision-making about the potential benefits of PSA screening among men who wish to reduce their risk of metastatic prostate cancer.

Biochemical Failure Is Not a Surrogate End Point for Overall Survival in Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Analysis of NRG Oncology/RTOG 9601.

PURPOSE: Metastasis-free survival (MFS), but not event-free survival, is a validated surrogate end point for overall survival (OS) in men treated for localized prostate cancer. It remains unknown if this holds true in biochemically recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy. Leveraging NRG/RTOG 9601, we aimed to determine the performance of intermediate clinical end points (ICEs) as surrogate end points for OS in recurrent prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: NRG/RTOG 9601 randomly assigned 760 men with recurrence after prostatectomy to salvage radiation therapy with 2 years of placebo versus bicalutamide 150 mg daily. ICEs assessed were biochemical failure (BF) per NRG/RTOG 9601 (prostate-specific antigen nadir + 0.3-0.5 ng/mL or initiation of salvage hormone therapy; [BF1]) and NRG/RTOG 0534 (prostate-specific antigen nadir+2 ng/mL; [BF2]), distant metastasis (DM), and MFS (DM or death). Surrogacy was assessed by the Prentice criteria and a two-stage meta-analytic approach (condition one assessed at the patient level with Kendall's τ and condition two assessed by randomly dividing the entire trial cohort into 10 pseudo trial centers and calculating the average R2 between treatment hazard ratios for ICE and OS). RESULTS: BF1, BF2, DM, and MFS satisfied the four Prentice criteria. However, with the two-condition meta-analytic approach, there was strong correlation between MFS and OS (τ = 0.86), moderate correlation between DM and OS (τ = 0.66), and weaker correlation between BF1 (τ = 0.25) or BF2 (τ = 0.40) and OS. Similarly, for condition two, the treatment effect of antiandrogen therapy on MFS and OS were correlated (R2 = 0.67), but this was not true for BF1 (R2 = 0.09), BF2 (R2 = 0.12), or DM (R2 = 0.18) and OS. CONCLUSION: MFS is also a strong surrogate for OS in men receiving salvage radiation therapy for recurrence after prostatectomy. Caution should be used when inferring survival benefit from effects on BF in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Lack of comorbidity data did not allow us to assess whether BF in men with no/minimal comorbidity could serve as a surrogate for OS.

High-dose Radiotherapy or Androgen Deprivation Therapy (HEAT) as Treatment Intensification for Localized Prostate Cancer: An Individual Patient-data Network Meta-analysis from the MARCAP Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The relative benefits of radiotherapy (RT) dose escalation and the addition of short-term or long-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT or LTADT) in the treatment of prostate cancer are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) of relevant randomized trials to compare the relative benefits of RT dose escalation ± STADT or LTADT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An NMA of individual patient data from 13 multicenter randomized trials was carried out for a total of 11862 patients. Patients received one of the six permutations of low-dose RT (64 to <74 Gy) ± STADT or LTADT, high-dose RT (≥74 Gy), or high-dose RT ± STADT or LTADT. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Metastasis-free survival (MFS) was the primary endpoint. Frequentist and Bayesian NMAs were performed to rank the various treatment strategies by MFS and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Median follow-up was 8.8 yr (interquartile range 5.7-11.5). The greatest relative improvement in outcomes was seen for addition of LTADT, irrespective of RT dose, followed by addition of STADT, irrespective of RT dose. RT dose escalation did not improve MFS either in the absence of ADT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.18) or with STADT (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.8-1.23) or LTADT (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.37). According to P-score ranking and rankogram analysis, high-dose RT + LTADT was the optimal treatment strategy for both BCRFS and longer-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Conventionally escalated RT up to 79.2 Gy, alone or in the presence of ADT, does not improve MFS, while addition of STADT or LTADT to RT alone, regardless of RT dose, consistently improves MFS. RT dose escalation does provide a high probability of improving BCRFS and, provided it can be delivered without compromising quality of life, may represent the optimal treatment strategy when used in conjunction with ADT. PATIENT SUMMARY: Using a higher radiotherapy dose when treating prostate cancer does not reduce the chance of developing metastases or death, but it does reduce the chance of having a rise in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) signifying recurrence of cancer. Androgen deprivation therapy improves all outcomes. A safe increase in radiotherapy dose in conjunction with androgen deprivation therapy may be the optimal treatment.

Development and validation of a life expectancy calculator for US patients with prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an accurate, usable prediction model for other-cause mortality (OCM) in patients with prostate cancer diagnosed in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Model training was performed using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010 including men aged >40 years with follow-up to the year 2014. The model was validated in the Prostate, Lung, Colon, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial prostate cancer cohort, which enrolled patients between 1993 and 2001 with follow-up to the year 2015. Time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) and calibration were assessed in the validation cohort. Analyses were performed to assess algorithmic bias. RESULTS: The 2420 patient training cohort had 459 deaths over a median follow-up of 8.8 years among survivors. The final model included eight predictors: age; education; marital status; diabetes; hypertension; stroke; body mass index; and smoking. It had an AUC of 0.75 at 10 years for predicting OCM in the validation cohort of 8220 patients. The final model significantly outperformed the Social Security Administration life tables and showed adequate predictive performance across race, educational attainment, and marital status subgroups. There is evidence of major variability in life expectancy that is not captured by age, with life expectancy predictions differing by 10 or more years among patients of the same age. CONCLUSION: Using two national cohorts, we have developed and validated a simple and useful prediction model for OCM for patients with prostate cancer treated in the United States, which will allow for more personalized treatment in accordance with guidelines.

Uptake of Adjuvant Durvalumab After Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Stage III Nonsmall-cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The addition of adjuvant durvalumab improves overall survival in locally advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with definitive chemoradiation, but the real-world uptake of adjuvant durvalumab is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients with stage III NSCLC treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiation from January 2018 to October 2020 from a statewide radiation oncology quality consortium, representing a mix of community (n=22 centers) and academic (n=5) across the state of Michigan. Use of adjuvant durvalumab was ascertained at the time of routine 3-month or 6-month follow-up after completion of chemoradiation. RESULTS: Of 421 patients with stage III NSCLC who completed chemoradiation, 322 (76.5%) initiated adjuvant durvalumab. The percentage of patients initiating adjuvant durvalumab increased over time from 66% early in the study period to 92% at the end of the study period. There was substantial heterogeneity by treatment center, ranging from 53% to 90%. In multivariable logistic regression, independent predictors of durvalumab initiation included more recent month (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05 per month, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.08, P=0.003), lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score (OR: 4.02 for ECOG 0 vs. 2+, 95% CI: 1.67-9.64, P=0.002), and a trend toward significance for female sex (OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 0.98-2.82, P=0.06). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant durvalumab for stage III NSCLC treated with definitive chemoradiation was rapidly and successfully incorporated into clinical care across a range of community and academic settings in the state of Michigan, with over 90% of potentially eligible patients starting durvalumab in more recent months.

Racial Differences in Treatments and Toxicity in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Thoracic Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Historical racial disparities in lung cancer surgery rates resulted in lower survival in Black patients. Our objective was to examine racial differences in thoracic radiation treatments and toxicities in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A large institutional review board-approved statewide patient-level database of patients with stage II-III non-small-cell lung cancer who received definitive thoracic radiation from March 2012 to November 2019 was analyzed to assess associations between race and other variables. Race (White or Black) was defined by patient self-report. Provider-reported toxicity was defined by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Patient-reported toxicity was determined by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung quality-of-life instrument. Univariable and multivariable regression models were fitted to assess relationships between race and variables of interest. Spearman rank-correlation coefficients were calculated between provider-reported toxicity and similar patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred forty-one patients from 24 institutions with mean age 68 years (range, 38-94 years) were evaluated. Race was not significantly associated with radiation or chemotherapy approach. There was significantly increased patient-reported general pain in Black patients at the preradiation and end-of-radiation time points. Black patients were significantly less likely to have provider-reported grade 2+ pneumonitis (odds ratio 0.36, P = .03), even after controlling for known patient and treatment factors. Correlation coefficients between provider- and patient-reported toxicities were generally similar across race groups except for a stronger correlation between patient- and provider-reported esophagitis in White patients. CONCLUSION: In this large multi-institutional study, we found no evidence of racial differences in radiation treatment or chemotherapy approaches. We did, however, unexpectedly find that Black race was associated with lower odds of provider-reported grade 2+ radiation pneumonitis. The stronger correlation between patient- and provider-reported esophagitis and swallowing symptoms for White patients also suggests possible under-recognition of symptoms in Black patients. Further research is needed to study the implications for Black patients.

Effect of Education and Standardization of Cardiac Dose Constraints on Heart Dose in Patients With Lung Cancer Receiving Definitive Radiation Therapy Across a Statewide Consortium.

PURPOSE: Cardiac radiation exposure is associated with an increased rate of adverse cardiac events in patients receiving radiation therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). Previous analysis of practice patterns within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium (MROQC) revealed 1 in 4 patients received a mean heart dose >20 Gy and significant heterogeneity existed among treatment centers in using cardiac dose constraints. The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of education and initiation of standardized cardiac dose constraints on heart dose across a statewide consortium. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2012 to 2020, 1681 patients from 27 academic and community centers who received radiation therapy for locally advanced NSCLC were included in this analysis. Dosimetric endpoints including mean heart dose (MHD), mean lung dose, and mean esophagus dose were calculated using data from dose-volume histograms. These dose metrics were grouped by year of treatment initiation for all patients. Education regarding data for cardiac dose constraints first occurred in small lung cancer working group meetings and then consortium-wide starting in 2016. In 2018, a quality metric requiring mean heart dose <20 Gy while maintaining dose coverage (D95) to the target was implemented. Dose metrics were compared before (2012-2016) versus after (2017-2020) initiation of interventions targeting cardiac constraints. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: After education and implementation of the heart dose performance metric, mean MHD declined from an average of 12.2 Gy preintervention to 10.4 Gy postintervention (P < .0001), and the percentage of patients receiving MHD >20 Gy was reduced from 21.1% to 10.3% (P < .0001). Mean lung dose and mean esophagus dose did not increase, and target coverage remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Education and implementation of a standardized cardiac dose quality measure across a statewide consortium was associated with a reduction of mean heart dose in patients receiving radiation therapy for locally advanced NSCLC. These dose reductions were achieved without sacrificing target coverage, increasing mean lung dose, or increasing mean esophagus dose. Analysis of the clinical ramifications of the reduction in cardiac doses is ongoing.

Interplay Between Duration of Androgen Deprivation Therapy and External Beam Radiotherapy With or Without a Brachytherapy Boost for Optimal Treatment of High-risk Prostate Cancer: A Patient-Level Data Analysis of 3 Cohorts.

IMPORTANCE: Radiotherapy combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a standard of care for high-risk prostate cancer. However, the interplay between radiotherapy dose and the required minimum duration of ADT is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the specific ADT duration threshold that provides a distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) benefit in patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or EBRT with a brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT). DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a cohort study of 3 cohorts assembled from a multicenter retrospective study (2000-2013); a post hoc analysis of the Randomized Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy 03/04 (RADAR; 2003-2007) randomized clinical trial (RCT); and a cross-trial comparison of the RADAR vs the Deprivación Androgénica y Radio Terapía (Androgen Deprivation and Radiation Therapy; DART) 01/05 RCT (2005-2010). In all, the study analyzed 1827 patients treated with EBRT and 1108 patients treated with EBRT+BT from the retrospective cohort; 181 treated with EBRT and 203 with EBRT+BT from RADAR; and 91 patients treated with EBRT from DART. The study was conducted from October 15, 2020, to July 1, 2021, and the data analyses, from January 5 to June 15, 2021. EXPOSURES: High-dose EBRT or EBRT+BT for an ADT duration determined by patient-physician choice (retrospective) or by randomization (RCTs). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was DMFS; secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). Natural cubic spline analysis identified minimum thresholds (months). RESULTS: This cohort study of 3 studies totaling 3410 men (mean age [SD], 68 [62-74] years; race and ethnicity not collected) with high-risk prostate cancer found a significant interaction between the treatment type (EBRT vs EBRT+BT) and ADT duration (binned to <6, 6 to <18, and ≥18 months). Natural cubic spline analysis identified minimum duration thresholds of 26.3 months (95% CI, 25.4-36.0 months) for EBRT and 12 months (95% CI, 4.9-36.0 months) for EBRT+BT for optimal effect on DMFS. In RADAR, the prolongation of ADT for patients receiving only EBRT was not associated with significant improvements in DMFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.65-1.57); however, for patients receiving EBRT+BT, a longer duration was associated with improved DMFS (DMFS HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87; P = .01). For patients receiving EBRT alone (DART), 28 months of ADT was associated with improved DMFS compared with 18 months (RADAR HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.17-0.80; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These cohort study findings suggest that the optimal minimum ADT duration for treatment with high-dose EBRT alone is more than 18 months; and for EBRT+BT, it is 18 months or possibly less. Additional studies are needed to determine more precise minimum durations.