Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for staging patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Staging patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) with conventional imaging of computed tomography (CT) and bone scintigraphy (BS) is suboptimal. Therefore, we aimed to compare the accuracy of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) with conventional imaging to stage patients with HRPCa. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with newly diagnosed HRPCa (prostate-specific antigen ≥20 ng/ml and/or Grade Group ≥4). Patients underwent BS, CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and WBMRI within 30 days of evaluation. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic performances of detecting metastatic disease to the lymph nodes and bone for WBMRI and conventional imaging. The reference standard was defined by histopathology or by all available clinical information at 6 months of follow-up. To compare diagnostic tests, Exact McNemar's test and area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics curves were utilized. RESULTS: Among 92 patients enrolled, 15 (16.3%) and 8 (8.7%) patients were found to have lymphatic and bone metastases, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of WBMRI in detecting lymphatic metastases were 0.60 (95% confidence interval 0.32-0.84), 0.84 (0.74-0.92), and 0.80 (0.71-0.88), respectively, while CT were 0.20 (0.04-0.48), 0.92 (0.84-0.97), and 0.80 (0.71-0.88). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of WBMRI to detect bone metastases were 0.25 (0.03-0.65), 0.94 (0.87-0.98), and 0.88 (0.80-0.94), respectively, while CT and BS were 0.12 (0-0.53), 0.94 (0.87-0.98), and 0.87 (0.78-0.93). For evaluating lymphatic metastases, WBMRI demonstrated a higher sensitivity (p = 0.031) and discrimination compared to CT (0.72 versus 0.56, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: For staging patients with HRPCa, WBMRI outperforms CT in the detection of lymphatic metastases and performs as well as CT and BS in the detection of bone metastases. Further studies are needed to assess the cost effectiveness of WBMRI and the utility of combined PSMA PET and WBMRI.

Proton therapy toxicity outcomes for localized prostate cancer: Long-term results at a comprehensive cancer center.

Background: Proton therapy (PT) has unique biologic properties with excellent clinical outcomes for the management of localized prostate cancer. Here, we aim to characterize the toxicity of PT for patients with localized prostate cancer and propose mitigation strategies using a large institutional database. Methods: We reviewed medical records of 2772 patients with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive PT between May 2006 through January 2020. Disease risk was stratified according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines as low [LR, n = 640]; favorable-intermediate [F-IR, n = 849]; unfavorable-intermediate [U-IR, n = 851]; high [HR, n = 315]; or very high [VHR, n = 117]. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier estimates assessed toxicity and freedom from biochemical relapse (FFBR). Results: Median follow-up was 7.0 years. The median dose was 78 Gy(RBE)(range: 72-79.2 Gy) in 2.0 Gy(RBE) fractions; 63 % of patients received 78 Gy(RBE) in 39 fractions, and 29 % received 76 Gy(RBE) in 38 fractions. Overall rates of late grade ≥3 GU and GI toxicity were 0.87 % and 1.01 %, respectively. Two patients developed grade 4 late GU toxicity and seven patients with grade 4 late GI toxicity. All patients experiencing severe late grade 4 toxicities were treated to 78 Gy(RBE) in 39 fractions with 80 Gy(RBE) dose to the anterior rectal wall and/or bladder neck. The 10-year FFBR rates for patients with LR to U-IR disease were compared between those treated with 76 and 78 Gy(RBE); the rates were 94.5 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 92.4-96.0 %) and 93.2 % (95 % CI 91.3-95.7 %), respectively (log-rank p = 0.22). Conclusions: Proton therapy is associated with low rates of late grade ≥3 GU and GI toxicity. While rare, late grade 4 toxicities occurred in nine (0.3 %) patients. De-escalation to a total dose of 76 Gy(RBE) yields excellent clinical outcomes for patients with LR to U-IR disease with the potential for significant reductions in grade ≥3 late toxicity.

Implementation and Efficacy of a Large-Scale Radiation Oncology Case-Based Peer-Review Quality Program across a Multinational Cancer Network.

PURPOSE: With expansion of academic cancer center networks across geographically-dispersed sites, ensuring high-quality delivery of care across all network affiliates is essential. We report on the characteristics and efficacy of a radiation oncology peer-review quality assurance (QA) system implemented across a large-scale multinational cancer network. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Since 2014, weekly case-based peer-review QA meetings have been standard for network radiation oncologists with radiation oncology faculty at a major academic center. This radiotherapy (RT) QA program involves pre-treatment peer-review of cases by disease site, with disease-site subspecialized main campus faculty members. This virtual QA platform involves direct review of the proposed RT plan as well as supporting data, including relevant pathology and imaging studies for each patient. Network RT plans were scored as being concordant or nonconcordant based on national guidelines, institutional recommendations, and/or expert judgment when considering individual patient-specific factors for a given case. Data from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2019, were aggregated for analysis. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2019, across 8 network centers, a total of 16,601 RT plans underwent peer-review. The network-based peer-review case volume increased over the study period, from 958 cases in 2014 to 4,487 in 2019. A combined global nonconcordance rate of 4.5% was noted, with the highest nonconcordance rates among head-and-neck cases (11.0%). For centers that joined the network during the study period, we observed a significant decrease in the nonconcordance rate over time (3.1% average annual decrease in nonconcordance, P = 0.01); among centers that joined the network prior to the study period, nonconcordance rates remained stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Through a standardized QA platform, network-based multinational peer-review of RT plans can be achieved. Improved concordance rates among newly added network affiliates over time are noted, suggesting a positive impact of network membership on the quality of delivered cancer care.

Patients' Preferences for Androgen Deprivation Therapy in the Treatment of Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Background. For men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC), adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has shown efficacy, but men are often reluctant to accept it because of its impact on quality of life. Methods. We conducted time tradeoffs (score of 1 = perfect health and 0 = death) and probability tradeoffs with patients aged 51 to 78 y who had received EBRT for IRPC within the past 2 y. Of 40 patients, 20 had received 6 mo of ADT and 20 had declined. Utility assessments explored 4 ADT-related side effects: hot flashes, fatigue, loss of libido/erectile dysfunction, and weight gain. Results. The most commonly reported "worst" treatment-related complication of ADT was fatigue (50% in both cohorts) followed by reduced libido/erectile dysfunction (40% in both cohorts). The utilities for fatigue were mean = 0.71 and median = 0.92 and for reduced libido/erectile dysfunction were mean = 0.81 and median = 0.92. Utilities did not differ significantly between cohorts. Assuming a 6-mo course of ADT, men reported being willing to trade 3 mo of life expectancy to avoid fatigue due to ADT and 1.8 mo to avoid sexual side effects. Patients in the ADT cohort were willing to accept the side effects of ADT in exchange for a mean 8% absolute increase in survival, whereas patients in the no ADT cohort required a 16% increase (P < 0.001). Conclusions. When considering treatment with ADT, men with IRPC identified fatigue and sexual dysfunction as the most bothersome side effects. Patients who declined ADT expected a larger survival benefit than those who opted for treatment. Both groups expected a survival benefit exceeding that shown by recent trials, suggesting some men may be selecting treatments inconsistent with their preferences. Highlights: This study demonstrates that prostate cancer patients receiving radiation therapy are reluctant to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) most commonly due to anticipated fatigue and loss of libido/erectile dysfunction.Men who had received ADT reported they would require an average 8% absolute increase in survival to tolerate its side effects, whereas those who declined ADT would require an average 16% increase.Required thresholds are well above the estimated absolute survival benefit for ADT demonstrated in recent clinical trials, suggesting an unmet need for improved patient education regarding the risks and benefits of ADT.

Improving efficiency and reducing costs of MRI-Guided prostate brachytherapy using Time-Driven Activity-Based costing.

INTRODUCTION: Integrated quality improvement (QI) and cost reduction strategies can help increase value in cancer care. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) is a bottom-up costing tool that measures resource use over the full care cycle. We applied standard QI and TDABC methods to improve workflow efficiency and reduce costs for MRI-guided prostate brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We constructed process maps of the baseline prostate brachytherapy workflow from initial consultation through one year after treatment. Process maps reflected resources and time required at each step. TDABC costs were calculated by multiplying each process time by the cost per min of the resource(s) used at that step. We then used plan-do-study-act methodology to identify workflow inefficiencies and implement solutions to reduce resource consumption. RESULTS: The highest cost components at baseline were the operating room (OR) (40%), imaging (8.7%), and consultation (7.6%). Higher-than-expected costs (3%) were incurred during surgery scheduling. After targeted QI initiatives, OR time was reduced from 90 to 70 min, which reduced overall cost by 5%. Personnel task downshifting reduced costs by 10% at consultation and 77% at surgery scheduling. Re-engineering of follow-up protocols reduced costs by 8.4%. Costs under the new workflow decreased by 18.2%. CONCLUSIONS: TDABC complements traditional QI initiatives by quantifying the highest cost steps and focusing QI initiatives to reduce costs and improve efficiency. As payment reform evolves toward bundled payments, TDABC and QI initiatives will help providers understand, communicate, and improve the value of cancer care.

COVID-19 and Oncology: Operationalizing Best Practices Across Collaborative Health Systems.

To plan for a proactive approach to support patients traveling for their treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic, a network of oncology hospitals worked within existing collaborative agreements to define policies and procedures to transition care for patients living in communities in close proximity to a member institution. Nurse leaders were instrumental in collaborating with and leading interprofessional partners to achieve these outcomes. These efforts led to patients' abilities to continue treatment in their local community, ensuring continuity of cancer care.

Predictors of urinary toxicity with MRI-assisted radiosurgery for low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: MRI-assisted radiosurgery (MARS) is a modern technique for prostate brachytherapy that provides superior soft tissue contrast. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate treatment planning factors associated with urinary toxicity, particularly damage to the membranous urethra (MUL) and external urethral sphincter (EUS), after MARS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 227 patients treated with MARS. Comparisons were made between several factors including preimplantation length of the MUL and EUS dosimetric characteristics after implantation with longitudinal changes in American Urological Association (AUA) urinary symptom score. RESULTS: Rates of grade 3 urinary incontinence and obstructive urinary symptoms were 4% and 2%. A piecewise mixed univariate model revealed that MUL and V200, V150, V125, and D5 to the EUS were all associated with increased rates of urinary toxicity over time. On univariate logistic regression, MUL >14.2 mm (odds ratio [OR] 2.03 per cm3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-3.77, p = 0.025), V125 to the EUS (OR 3.21 cm3, 95% CI 1.18-8.71, p = 0.022), and use of the I-125 isotope (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.55-7.70, p = 0.001) were associated with subacute urinary toxicity (i.e., that occurring at 4-8 months). Optimal dose-constraint limits to the EUS were determined to be V200 < 0.04 cm3 (p = 0.002), V150 < 0.12 cm3 (p = 0.041), V125 < 0.45 cm3 (p = 0.033), D30 < 160 Gy (p = 0.004), and D5 < 218 Gy (p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: MARS brachytherapy provides detailed anatomic information for treatment planning, implantation, and quality assurance. Overall rates of urinary toxicity are low; however, several dosimetric variables associated with the EUS were found to correlate with urinary toxicity.

Increased Frequency of Mesorectal and Perirectal LN Involvement in T4 Prostate Cancers.

PURPOSE: Patients with prostate cancer presenting with advanced T stage, mainly T4, might have a unique pattern of nodal failure and disease involvement that is not typically covered when local therapy is offered. We attempted to identify common sites of nodal disease presentation and failure for patients presenting with cT4 prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All patients with treatment-naïve cT4 prostate cancer were retrospectively identified. All patients were required to have a confirmed diagnosis reviewed by our genitourinary pathologist and completed baseline staging. Lymph node (LN) involvement and location at diagnosis were reviewed by a genitourinary radiologist. All patients' follow-up scans were also reviewed; based on LN size, imaging characteristics, and progression/regression characteristics on systemic therapy, the locations of sites of LN failure were recorded. For patients who underwent surgery, any pathologically involved LNs and their anatomic locations were recorded. A total of 103 patients met these criteria, with a median follow-up of 8 years (range, 0.5-14 years). RESULTS: Rectal involvement by the primary disease was associated with a higher risk of perirectal and mesorectal LN involvement (45%) relative to no rectal involvement (26%) (P < .05). These echelons are typically not covered with conventional pelvic external beam radiation therapy and are not routinely part of pelvic LN dissection in patients treated surgically. Conversely, bladder or pelvic side wall invasion did not correlate with increased frequency of involvement of perirectal/mesorectal LNs (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: When offering local therapy, target modification to include the perirectal and mesorectal LNs should be considered for patients presenting with T4 prostate cancer with rectal involvement.

Costs and Complications After a Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer Treated With Time-Efficient Modalities: An Analysis of National Medicare Data.

PURPOSE: Recent trends in payer and patient preferences increasingly incentivize time-efficient (≤2-week treatment time) prostate cancer treatments. METHODS AND MATERIALS: National Medicare claims from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2014, were analyzed to identify newly diagnosed prostate cancers. Three "radical treatment" cohorts were identified (prostatectomy, brachytherapy, and stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]) and matched to an active surveillance (AS) cohort by using inverse probability treatment weighting via propensity score. Total costs at 1 year after biopsy were calculated for each cohort, and treatment-specific costs were estimated by subtracting total 1-year costs in each radical treatment group from those in the AS group. RESULTS: Mean 1-year adjusted costs were highest among patients receiving SBRT ($26,895), lower for prostatectomy ($23,632), and lowest for brachytherapy ($19,980), whereas those for AS were $9687. Costs of radical modalities varied significantly by region, with the Mid-Atlantic and New England regions having the highest cost ranges (>$10,000) and the West South Central and Mountain regions the lowest range in costs (<$2000). Quantification of toxic effects showed that prostatectomy was associated with higher genitourinary incontinence (hazard ratio [HR] = 10.8 compared with AS) and sexual dysfunction (HR = 3.5), whereas the radiation modalities were associated with higher genitourinary irritation/bleeding (brachytherapy HR = 1.7; SBRT HR = 1.5) and gastrointestinal ulcer/stricture/fistula (brachytherapy HR = 2.7; SBRT HR = 3.0). Overall mean toxicity costs were highest among patients treated with prostatectomy ($3500) followed by brachytherapy ($1847), SBRT ($1327), and AS ($1303). CONCLUSIONS: Time-efficient treatment techniques exhibit substantial variability in toxicity and costs. Furthermore, geographic location substantially influenced treatment costs.

Association of Sociodemographic and Health-Related Factors With Receipt of Nondefinitive Therapy Among Younger Men With High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Multiple randomized clinical trials have shown that definitive therapy improves overall survival among patients with high-risk prostate cancer. However, many patients do not receive definitive therapy because of sociodemographic and health-related factors. Objective: To identify factors associated with receipt of nondefinitive therapy (NDT) among patients aged 70 years and younger with high-risk prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study identified 72 036 patients aged 70 years and younger with high-risk prostate cancer and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores of 2 or less who were entered in the National Cancer Database between January 2004 and December 2014. Data analysis was conducted from November 2018 to December 2019. Exposure: Receipt of NDT as an initial treatment approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival rates were compared based on receipt of definitive therapy or NDT, and sociodemographic and health-related factors were associated with the type of therapy received. Residual life expectancy was estimated from the National Center for Health Statistics to calculate person-years of life lost. Results: A total of 72 036 men with a median (range) age of 63 (30-70) years, Charlson Comorbidity Index scores of 2 or less, and high-risk prostate cancer without regional lymph node or distant metastatic disease were analyzed. Among eligible patients, 5252 (7.3%) received NDT as an initial therapeutic strategy. On univariate and multivariate analyses, NDT was associated with worse overall survival (univariate analysis hazard ratio, 2.54; 95% CI, 2.40-2.69; P < .001; multivariate analysis hazard ratio, 2.40; 95% CI, 2.26-2.56; P < .001). Compared with patients with private insurance or managed care, those with no insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare were more likely to receive systemic therapy only (no insurance: odds ratio [OR], 3.34; 95% CI, 2.81-3.98; P < .001; Medicaid: OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 2.48-3.43; P < .001; Medicare: OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.20-1.53; P < .001) or no treatment (no insurance: OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 2.24-3.08; P < .001; Medicaid: OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.45-2.01; P < .001; Medicare: OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.24; P = .004). Compared with white patients, black patients were more likely to receive systemic therapy only (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.74-2.14; P < .001) or no treatment (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.32-1.61; P < .001), and Hispanic patients were more likely to receive systemic therapy only (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.13-1.64; P = .001) or no treatment (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.14-1.60; P < .001). Between 2004 and 2014, patients without insurance or enrolled in Medicaid had 1.83-fold greater person-years of life lost compared with patients with private insurance (area under the curve, 77 600 vs 42 300 person-years of life lost). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, receipt of NDT was associated with insurance status and race/ethnicity. While treatment decisions should be individualized for every patient, younger men with high-risk prostate cancer and minimal comorbidities should be encouraged to receive definitive local therapy regardless of other factors. These data suggest that significant barriers to life-extending treatment options for patients with prostate cancer remain.

Determining Clinically Based Factors Associated With Reclassification in the Pre-MRI Era using a Large Prospective Active Surveillance Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To report biopsy-related and oncologic outcomes in a large prospective active surveillance cohort that was initiated in the premagnetic resonance imaging era and to additionally identify clinical factors associated with disease reclassification in order to inform future studies designed to improve enrollment and follow-up on active surveillance. METHODS: Patients were prospectively enrolled at a single institution from 2006 to 2014 and followed until 2016. Men with Gleason 6 or 7 disease were eligible, and those with >6 months follow-up were included in the analysis. Patients were risk stratified based on clinical/pathologic criteria, including based on a combination of baseline and confirmatory biopsy tumor characteristics. Reclassification-free survival, based on tumor volume increase or Gleason score increase, was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 825 enrolled patients, 682 met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 40 months (range 6.6-126.8). Disease was reclassified in 249 (36.5%), and 157 (23.0%) underwent treatment. A single positive core with a negative confirmatory biopsy was significantly associated with time to reclassification (median not met vs 43 months, log rank test P <.001). Composite tumor length, defined as the combined tumor length between baseline and confirmatory biopsies, was associated with shorter Gleason upgrade-free survival (hazard ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.40, P <.001) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Baseline stratification using clinical factors including tumor length may refine risk stratification and offer the foundation on which new systems that incorporate modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging may be based.

Contemporary prostate cancer treatment choices in multidisciplinary clinics referenced to national trends.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess treatment choices among men with prostate cancer who presented at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center multidisciplinary (MultiD) clinic compared with nationwide trends. METHODS: In total, 4451 men with prostate cancer who presented at the MultiD clinic from 2004 to 2016 were analyzed. To assess nationwide trends, the authors analyzed 392,710 men with prostate cancer who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The primary endpoint was treatment choice as a function of pretreatment demographics. RESULTS: Univariate analyses revealed similar treatment trends in the MultiD and SEER cohorts. The use of procedural forms of definitive therapy decreased with age, including brachytherapy and prostatectomy (all P < .05). Later year of diagnosis/clinic visit was associated with decreased use of definitive treatments, whereas higher risk grouping was associated with increased use (all P < .001). Patients with low-risk disease treated at the MultiD clinic were more likely to receive nondefinitive therapy than patients in SEER, whereas the opposite trend was observed for patients with high-risk disease, with a substantial portion of high-risk patients in SEER not receiving definitive therapy. In the MultiD clinic, African American men with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease were more likely to receive definitive therapy than white men, but for SEER the opposite was true. CONCLUSIONS: Presentation at a MultiD clinic facilitates the appropriate disposition of patients with low-risk disease to nondefinitive strategies of patients with high-risk disease to definitive treatment, and it may obviate the influence of race.

Radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy for high- and very high-risk prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic experience of patients eligible for either treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare radical prostatectomy (RP) vs radiotherapy (RT) with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in the setting of patients with high-risk and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer who were deemed eligible for either therapy and made a treatment choice after consultation in a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic (MDPCC), and to compare the MDPCC patients' outcomes to a matched Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospectively collected, retrospective study comparing patients who underwent RP (231 patients) vs RT+ADT (73) from 2004 to 2013. Biochemical recurrence (BCR), local recurrence, distant metastasis failure, and overall survival (OS) were calculated for each treatment group overall and according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk strata. A propensity score matched comparison with a SEER cohort was performed for OS. RESULTS: There was no difference in local recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-7.9; P = 0.06), distant metastasis failure (HR 2.5, 95% CI 0.8-7.8; P = 0.1) and OS (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.4-4.8; P = 0.6) between patients undergoing RP vs RT+ADT. Patients treated via the MDPCC survived on average 16.9 months (95% CI 13.1-20.8) longer than those in the matched SEER cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes appear similar amongst patients with high-risk and VHR prostate cancer deemed eligible for either RP or RT, and treated after consultation in a MDPCC. Outcomes of the MDPCC patients were superior to those of the matched SEER cohort.

Dose Escalation for Prostate Adenocarcinoma: A Long-Term Update on the Outcomes of a Phase 3, Single Institution Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: To determine the long-term outcomes for prostate adenocarcinoma when escalating radiation dose from 70 Gy to 78 Gy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1993 and 1998, 301 patients with biopsy-proven clinical stage T1b-T3 prostate adenocarcinoma, any prostate-specific antigen level, and any Gleason score were randomized to 70 Gy in 35 fractions versus 78 Gy in 39 fractions of photon radiation therapy using a 4-field box technique without hormone deprivation therapy. The primary outcome was powered to detect a 15% difference in biochemical or clinical failure. Secondary outcomes included survival, prostate cancer mortality, biochemical failure, local failure, nodal failure, distant failure, and secondary malignancy rates. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 14.3 years, the cumulative incidence of 15-year biochemical or clinical failure was 18.9% versus 12.0% in the 70 Gy versus 78 Gy arms, respectively (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.98; Fine-Gray P = .042). The 15-year cumulative incidence of distant metastasis was 3.4% versus 1.1%, respectively (sHR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.82; Fine-Gray P = .018). The 15-year cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 6.2% versus 3.2%, respectively, (sHR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-0.98; Fine-Gray P = .045). There were no differences in overall survival (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.84-1.45; log rank P = .469) or other-cause survival (sHR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.99-1.79; Fine-Gray P = .061). Salvage therapy was more common in the 70 Gy arm, at 38.7% versus 21.9% in the 78 Gy arm (P = .002). There was a 2.3% secondary solid malignancy rate (1 bladder, 6 rectal) within the radiation treatment field, which was not significantly different between treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Dose escalation by 8 Gy (78 Gy vs 70 Gy) provided a sustained improvement in biochemical and clinical failure, which translated into lower salvage rates and improved prostate cancer-specific mortality, but not overall survival. Long-term follow-up demonstrated a low incidence of potential solid tumor secondary malignancies.

Randomized Trial of Hypofractionated, Dose-Escalated, Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Versus Conventionally Fractionated IMRT for Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Hypofractionated radiotherapy delivers larger daily doses of radiation and may increase the biologically effective dose delivered to the prostate. We conducted a randomized trial testing the hypothesis that dose-escalated, moderately hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (HIMRT) improves prostate cancer control compared with conventionally fractionated IMRT (CIMRT) for men with localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men were randomly assigned to 75.6 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions delivered over 8.4 weeks (CIMRT) or 72 Gy in 2.4 Gy fractions delivered over 6 weeks (HIMRT, biologically equivalent to 85 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions assuming prostate cancer α-to-ß ratio of 1.5). Failure was defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure (nadir plus 2 ng/mL) or initiation of salvage therapy. Modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria were used to grade late (≥ 90 days after completion of radiotherapy) GI and genitourinary toxicity. RESULTS: Most of the 206 men (72%) had cT1, Gleason score 6 or 7 (99%), and PSA level ≤ 10 ng/mL (90%) disease. Androgen deprivation therapy was received by 24%. With a median follow-up of 8.5 years, men treated with HIMRT experienced fewer treatment failures (n = 10) than men treated with CIMRT (n = 21; P = .036). The 8-year failure rate was 10.7% (95% CI, 5.8% to 19.1%) with HIMRT and 15.4% (95% CI, 9.1% to 25.4%) with CIMRT. There was no difference in overall survival ( P = .39). There was a nonsignificant increase in late grade 2 or 3 GI toxicity with HIMRT (8-year 5.0% v 12.6%; P = .08). However, GI toxicity was only 8.6% when rectal volume receiving 65 Gy of HIMRT was ≤ 15%. Late genitourinary toxicity was similar ( P = .84). There was no grade 4 toxicity. CONCLUSION: The results of this randomized trial demonstrate superior cancer control for men with localized prostate cancer who receive dose-escalated moderately hypofractionation radiotherapy while shortening treatment duration.

Genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity among patients with localized prostate cancer treated with conventional versus moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypofractionated (HRT) prostate radiation therapy has the potential to deliver a higher biologically effective dose over a shorter time compared with conventional fractionation (CRT). HRT, giving fewer fractions each with higher dose, might improve the therapeutic ratio, resource use and patient convenience but the toxicity is still controversial. Our objective was to compare the gastroinstestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity of HRT versus CRT. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials studies in PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases published through December 2016 was done. Only randomized trials that evaluated patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing CRT or HRT were included. In these studies, the daily dose was 1.8 Gy or 2 Gy per day for CRT and 2.4 to 3.4 Gy for HRT. RESULTS: 7317 patients in nine studies were analyzed. Six studies included acute GU toxicity data which showed similar rates for both HRT and CRT (32.6vs. 31.9%; RD 0.00; 95% CI; -0.03,0.03; p = .81; I2 = 0%). Similarly, seven studies showed no difference in late GU toxicity based on treatment schedule (28.7 vs. 28.0%; RD -0.01; 95% CI; -0.04,0.03; p = .67; I2 = 52%). GI toxicity at three months after radiotherapy was higher in patients treated with HRT in six studies (27.5 vs. 21.9%; RD 0.06; 95% CI; 0.02,0.10; p = .004; I2 = 39%); however, eight studies showed GI toxicity 12 months or more after radiotherapy that was statistically the same (12.9 HRT vs. 16.2% CRT; RD -0.01; 95% CI; -0.04,0.02; p = .41; I2 = 58%). CONCLUSION: In meta-analysis of the available randomized trials on moderate HRT versus CRT for prostate cancer, acute and late GU toxicity were similar for both treatment schemes. While HRT was associated with higher acute GI toxicity, late toxicity was similar.

Patient-reported Urinary, Bowel, and Sexual Function After Hypofractionated Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Results From a Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy may increase biologically effective dose delivered while shortening treatment duration, but information on patient-reported urinary, bowel, and sexual function after dose-escalated hypofractionated radiotherapy is limited. We report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from a randomized trial comparing hypofractionated and conventional prostate radiotherapy. METHODS: Men with localized prostate cancer were enrolled in a trial that randomized men to either conventionally fractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (CIMRT, 75.6 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions) or to dose-escalated hypofractionated IMRT (HIMRT, 72 Gy in 2.4 Gy fractions). Questionnaires assessing urinary, bowel, and sexual function were completed pretreatment and at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after treatment. RESULTS: Of 203 eligible patients, 185 were evaluable for PROs. A total of 173 completed the pretreatment questionnaire (82 CIMRT, 91 HIMRT) and 102 completed the 2-year questionnaire (46 CIMRT, 56 HIMRT). Patients who completed PROs were similar to those who did not complete PROs (all P>0.05). Patient characteristics, clinical characteristics, and baseline symptoms were well balanced between the treatment arms (all P>0.05). There was no difference in patient-reported bowel (urgency, control, frequency, or blood per rectum), urinary (dysuria, hematuria, nocturia, leakage), or sexual symptoms (erections firm enough for intercourse) between treatment arms at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after treatment (all P>0.01). Concordance between physician-assessed toxicity and PROs varied across urinary and bowel domains. DISCUSSION: We did not detect an increase in patient-reported urinary, bowel, and sexual symptom burden after dose-escalated intensity-modulated prostate radiation therapy using a moderate hypofractionation regimen (72 Gy in 2.4 Gy fractions) compared with conventionally fractionated radiation.