Added Value of [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT and PET/MRI in Patients With Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Impact on Detection Rates and Clinical Management.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) can change management in a large fraction of patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BCR). PURPOSE: To investigate the added value of PET to MRI and CT for this patient group, and to explore whether the choice of the PET paired modality (PET/MRI vs. PET/CT) impacts detection rates and clinical management. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. SUBJECTS: 41 patients with BCR (median age [range]: 68 [55-78]). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T, including T1-weighted gradient echo (GRE), T2-weighted turbo spin echo (TSE) and dynamic contrast-enhanced GRE sequences, diffusion-weighted echo-planar imaging, and a T1-weighted TSE spine sequence. In addition to MRI, [18F]PSMA-1007 PET and low-dose CT were acquired on the same day. ASSESSMENT: Images were reported using a five-point Likert scale by two teams each consisting of a radiologist and a nuclear medicine physician. The radiologist performed a reading using CT and MRI data and a joint reading between radiologist and nuclear medicine physician was performed using MRI, CT, and PET from either PET/MRI or PET/CT. Findings were presented to an oncologist to create intended treatment plans. Intrareader and interreader agreement analysis was performed. STATISTICAL TESTS: McNemar test, Cohen's κ, and intraclass correlation coefficients. A P-value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: 7 patients had positive findings on MRI and CT, 22 patients on joint reading with PET/CT, and 18 patients joint reading with PET/MRI. For overall positivity, interreader agreement was poor for MR and CT (κ = 0.36) and almost perfect with addition of PET (PET/CT κ = 0.85, PET/MRI κ = 0.85). The addition of PET from PET/CT and PET/MRI changed intended treatment in 20 and 18 patients, respectively. Between joint readings, intended treatment was different for eight patients. DATA CONCLUSION: The addition of [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/MRI or PET/CT to MRI and CT may increase detection rates, could reduce interreader variability, and may change intended treatment in half of patients with BCR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Second Cancers in Patients With Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer Randomized to Lifelong Endocrine Treatment With or Without Radical Radiation Therapy: Long-Term Follow-up of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-7 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Curative radiation therapy (RT) constitutes a cornerstone in prostate cancer (PC) treatment. We present long-term follow-up estimates for second cancer (SC) risk and overall survival (OS) in patients randomized to hormone therapy (ET) alone or combined with 70 Gy prostatic RT in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-7 (SPCG-7) study. We explored the effect of salvage RT (≥60 Gy to the ET group) and reported causes of death. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The SPCG-7 study (1996-2002) was a randomized controlled trial that included 875 men with locally advanced nonmetastatic PC. In this analysis, including data from the Norwegian and Swedish Cancer and Cause of Death registries for 651 Norwegian and 209 Swedish study patients, we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for SC and death, and cumulative incidences of SC. RESULTS: Median follow-up of the 860 (431 ET and 429) ET + RT patients was 12.2 years for SC risk analysis and 12.6 years for the OS analysis. Eighty-three of the Norwegian ET patients received salvage RT, and median time to salvage RT was 5.9 years. We found 125 and 168 SCs in the ET and ET + RT patients, respectively. With ET alone as reference, ET + RT patients had an HR of 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-1.54) for all SCs and 2.54 (95% CI, 1.14-5.69) for urinary bladder cancer (UBC). The total number of UBC was 31 (23 in ET + RT; 8 in ET), and the vast majority (85%) were superficial. The HR for SC in salvage RT patients was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.24-0.94). Median OS was 12.8 (95% CI, 11.8-13.8) and 15.3 (95%, CI 14.3-16.4) years in the ET and ET + RT groups, respectively. Compared with ET alone, the risk of death was reduced in ET + RT patients (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.86) and in ET patients receiving salvage RT (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.30-0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Although the risk of UBC was increased in PC patients who received RT in addition to ET, this disadvantage is outweighed by the OS benefit of RT confirmed in our study. The risk of SC, and especially UBC, should be discussed with patients and be reflected in follow-up programs.

Second cancers in radically treated Norwegian prostate cancer patients.

Introduction: The aim of this registry-based cohort study was to estimate second cancer (SC) risk following radical prostate cancer (PC) treatment and evaluate if the risk was influenced by radiotherapy. Materials and methods: We collected data from the Cancer Registry of Norway on all patients with PC as first cancer diagnosis, from 1997 to 2014. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for SC were calculated by comparing our cohort to the standard male population. Subdistribution hazard ratios were estimated in treatment groups, using patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) as reference. Results: We analyzed 24,592 radically treated PC patients. The median follow-up was 7.75 and 6.25 years in the external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and RP-groups, respectively. SIR for SC was indifferent from the reference population in 24,592 radically treated patients, higher following EBRT, SIR 1.12 (1.07-1.17), and lower following RP, SIR 0.93 (0.87-0.99). EBRT treated patients had higher rectal and urinary bladder cancer incidences, SIR 1.38 (1.16-1.64) and 1.49 (1.31-1.69), respectively. The EBRT patients and the patients treated with radiation after RP (RT after RP) had 38 and 27% higher risk of any SC. We found higher risk of bladder cancer for all treatment groups as compared to RP patients. Only EBRT treated patients showed higher risk of rectal and lung cancer. Discussion/conclusions: In our study, we found that PC patients treated with EBRT had an increased incidence of SC compared to the general population. Patients treated with EBRT and RT after RP were found to have increased risk of SCs, using RP patients as reference. The risks of rectal and urinary bladder cancer in patients receiving EBRT were higher compared to both the general population and to patients treated with radical prostatectomy. The risk of SC should be taken into account when discussing treatment for patients and designing follow-up.

Dose to penile bulb is not associated with erectile dysfunction 18 months post radiotherapy: A secondary analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Erectile dysfunction is a common side effect of prostate cancer (PC) therapy. In this randomized study (The RIC-study) we used patient reported outcomes to evaluate sexual function 18 months after combined endocrine therapy and radical radiotherapy (RT) given with either wide or tight planning target volume (PTV) margins. We also analyzed the impact of radiation dose to penile bulb on sexual function. METHODS: The RIC-study included 257 men with intermediate and high-risk PC. All patients received 6 months of total androgen blockage started 3 months prior to randomization. In high-risk patients, an oral anti-androgen (Bicalutamide) was administered for an additional 2.5 years. Patients were randomized to receive 78 Gy in 39 fractions guided either by weekly offline orthogonal portal imaging or by daily online cone beam computed tomography image-guided RT. Sexual function was evaluated at 18 months after start of RT using the Questionnaire Umeå Fransson Widmark 1994. Ability to have an erection was assessed on an 11-point scale numerical rating scale (0 = no and 10 = very much) as the primary outcome. In addition, the association between penile bulb (PB) radiation dose and erectile function was analyzed. FINDINGS: Of 250 evaluable patients, 228 (mean age 71.8 years) returned the questionnaires. The patients reported a high degree of sexual related problems with mean scores to the primary outcome question (221 respondents) of 7.44 and 7.39 in the 2D weekly IGRT-arm and 3D daily IGRT-arm (p = 0.93) respectively. For four additional questions (scale 0-10) regarding sexual function resulted in mean scores >6.5 with no difference between study arms. The mean dose to PB was substantially larger in the 2D weekly IGRT-arm vs the 3D daily IGRT-arm (mean 59.8 Gy vs mean 35.1 Gy).We found no effect of mean PB-dose on the primary outcome adjusted for study-site, risk-group and age. When adjusting for serum-testosterone level at 18 months in addition, the effect of mean PB-dose remained insignificant. INTERPRETATION: IGRT protocol or PB dose had no effect on ED 18 months after RT in this study population. The low potency rates can partly be explained by the prolonged use of anti-androgen in high risk patients. Longer follow-up is needed to confirm the results from the RIC-study.

Does Prophylactic Radiation Therapy to Avoid Gynecomastia in Patients With Prostate Cancer Increase the Risk of Breast Cancer?

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (PC) patients who undergo antiandrogen monotherapy are offered prophylactic radiation therapy (PRT) to the breast buds to avoid gynecomastia. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the risk of breast cancer (BC) in men with PC as their first cancer diagnosis was influenced by PRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From the Norwegian Cancer Registry, we collected data from all patients with PC as their first cancer diagnosis from 1997 to 2014. We registered all RT given to the patients in the same period and the occurrence of BC diagnosed ≥3 months after the PC diagnosis. The histopathologic diagnoses of all BC cases were collected. Subdistribution hazard ratios for the risk of BC in the PRT and non-PRT groups were estimated. A standardized incidence ratio for BC was calculated by comparing our cohort to the standard male population. RESULTS: We analyzed 59,169 patients with PC, of whom 7864 (13.3%) had received PRT. The median follow-up time was 4 years. Of the 12 men with a diagnosis of BC, 3 had received PRT, and 2 of the 3 were phyllodes tumors. The risk of BC was not significantly different statistically for the patients given PRT compared with the non-PRT group (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.62, 95% confidence interval 0.41-5.62, adjusted for age and time of diagnosis). The standardized incidence ratio was 0.996 (95% confidence interval 0.57-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: In this registry-based study, we did not find an increased risk of BC in PC patients who received PRT. The number of BC cases in our study was low, and the risk of secondary BC after PRT seems to be negligible. The incidence of BC could, however, increase with additional follow-up. Also, 2 patients who had received PRT developed a malignant phyllodes tumor, an extremely rare type of BC associated with gynecomastia.

Randomized phase II trial comparing twice daily hyperfractionated with once daily hypofractionated thoracic radiotherapy in limited disease small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) is recommended for limited disease small cell lung cancer (LD SCLC). Twice daily TRT is well documented, but not universally implemented - probably mainly due to inconvenience and concerns about toxicity. A schedule of three-week hypofractionated TRT is a commonly used alternative. This is the first randomized trial comparing twice daily and hypofractionated TRT in LD SCLC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients received four courses of cisplatin/etoposide (PE) and were randomized to TRT of 42 Gy in 15 fractions (once daily, OD) or 45 Gy in 30 fractions (twice daily, BID) between the second and third PE course. Good responders received prophylactic cranial irradiation of 30 Gy in 15 fractions. RESULTS: 157 patients were enrolled between May 2005 and January 2011 (OD: n = 84, BID: n = 73). Median age was 63 years, 52% were men, 84% had performance status 0-1, 72% had stage III disease and 11% non-malignant pleural effusion. The treatment arms were well balanced. The response rates were similar (OD: 92%, BID: 88%; p = 0.41), but more BID patients achieved a complete response (OD: 13%, BID: 33%; p = 0.003). There was no difference in one-year progression-free survival (PFS) (OD: 45%, BID: 49%; p = 0.61) or median PFS (OD: 10.2 months, BID: 11.4 months; p = 0.93). The median overall survival in the BID arm was 6.3 months longer (OD: 18.8 months, BID: 25.1 months; p = 0.61). There were no differences in grade 3-4 esophagitis (OD: 31%, BID: 33%, p = 0.80) or pneumonitis (OD: 2%, BID: 3%, p = 1.0). Patients on the BID arm reported slightly more dysphagia at the end of the TRT. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in severe toxicity between the two TRT schedules. The twice daily schedule resulted in significantly more complete responses and a numerically longer median overall survival, but no firm conclusions about efficacy could be drawn from this phase II trial.