Prospective results for 5-year survival and toxicity of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in (very) high-risk prostate cancer.

Purpose: High-risk (HR) prostate cancer patients usually receive high-dose radiotherapy (RT) using a two-phase sequential technique, but data on a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique are lacking. We prospectively evaluated the long-term results of urinary (GU) and digestive (GI) toxicity and survival data for high-dose RT using a SIB technique in HR and very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer. Methods: Patients were treated using an SIB technique in 34 fractions, at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and seminal vesicles and 74.8 Gy to the prostate, combined with 36 months of androgen-depriving therapy in a prospective multicenter study. Acute and late GU and GI toxicity data were collected. Overall survival (OS), biochemical-relapse-free survival (bRFS), loco-regional-relapse-free survival (LRRFS), metastasis-free-survival (MFS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were assessed. Results: We recruited 114 patients. After a median follow-up of 62 months, very few patients experienced acute (M0-M3) (G3-4 GU = 3.7 %; G3-4 GI = 0.9 %) or late (M6-M60) severe toxicity (G3-4 GU = 5.6 %; G3-4 GI = 2.8 %). The occurrence of acute G2 + GU or GI toxicity was significantly related to the consequential late G2 + toxicity (p < 0.01 for both GU and GI). Medians of OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were not reached. At 60 months, OS, bRFS, LRRFS, MFS and DFS were 88.2 % [82.1; 94.7], 86.0 % [79.4 %;93.2 %], 95.8 % [91.8 %;99.9 %], 87.2 % [80.9 %;94.0 %] and 84.1 % [77.2 %;91.6 %] respectively. Conclusion: SIB RT at a dose of 54.4 Gy to the pelvis and 74.8 Gy to the prostate is feasible, leading to satisfying tumor control and reasonable toxicity in HR and VHR prostate cancer.

Cost and Toxicity Comparisons of Two IMRT Techniques for Prostate Cancer: A Micro-Costing Study and Weighted Propensity Score Analysis Based on a Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the standard treatment for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Two techniques of rotational IMRT are commonly used in this indication: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). To the best of our knowledge, no study has compared their related costs and clinical effectiveness and/or toxicity in prostate cancer. We aimed to assess differences in costs and toxicity between VMAT and HT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer with pelvic irradiation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used data from the "RCMI pelvis" prospective multicenter study (NCT01325961) including 155 patients. We used a micro-costing methodology to identify cost differences between VMAT and HT. To assess the effects of the two techniques on total actual costs per patient and on toxicity we used stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: The mean total cost for HT, €2019 3,069 (95% CI, 2,885-3,285) was significantly higher than the mean cost for VMAT €2019 2,544 (95% CI, 2,443-2,651) (p <.0001). The mean ± SD labor and accelerator cost for HT was €2880 (± 583) and €1978 (± 475) for VMAT, with 81 and 76% for accelerator, respectively. Acute GI and GU toxicity were more frequent in VMAT than in HT (p = .021 and p = .042, respectively). Late toxicity no longer differed between the two groups up to 24 months after completion of treatment. CONCLUSION: Use of VMAT was associated with lower costs for IMRT planning and treatment than HT. Similar stabilized long-term toxicity was reported in both groups after higher acute GI and GU toxicity in VMAT. The estimates provided can benefit future modeling work like cost-effectiveness analysis.

Daily Versus Weekly Prostate Cancer Image Guided Radiation Therapy: Phase 3 Multicenter Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal frequency of prostate cancer image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) has not yet been clearly identified. This study sought to compare the safety and efficacy of daily versus weekly IGRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3 randomized trial recruited patients with N0 localized prostate cancer. The total IGRT doses in the prostate ranged from 70 Gy to 80 Gy, sparing the lymph nodes. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to 2 prostate IGRT frequency groups: daily and weekly (ie, on days 1, 2, and 3 and then weekly). The primary outcome was 5-year recurrence-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival and toxicity. Post hoc analyses included biochemical progression-free interval, clinical progression-free interval, and other cancer-free interval. RESULTS: Between June 2007 and November 2012, 470 men from 21 centers were randomized into the 2 groups. Median follow-up was 4.1 years. There was no statistically significant difference in recurrence-free survival between the groups (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; P = .330). Overall survival was worse in the daily group than in the weekly group (HR = 2.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-4.37]; P = .042). Acute rectal bleeding (grade ≥1) was significantly lower in the daily group (6%) (n = 14) than in the weekly group (11%) (n = 26) (P = .014). Late rectal toxicity (grade ≥1) was significantly lower in the daily group (HR = 0.71 [95% CI, 0.53-0.96]; P = .027). Biochemical progression-free interval (HR = 0.45 [95% CI, 0.25 - 0.80]; P = .007) and clinical progression-free interval (HR = 0.50 [95% CI, 0.24-1.02]; P = .057) were better in the daily group, whereas other cancer-free interval was worse in the daily group (HR = 2.21 [95% CI, 1.10-4.44]; P = .026). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with weekly control, daily IGRT control in prostate cancer significantly improves biochemical progression-free and clinical progression-free interval, and rectal toxicity.

Radiotherapy equipment and departments in the European countries: final results from the ESTRO-HERO survey.

BACKGROUND: Documenting the distribution of radiotherapy departments and the availability of radiotherapy equipment in the European countries is an important part of HERO - the ESTRO Health Economics in Radiation Oncology project. HERO has the overall aim to develop a knowledge base of the provision of radiotherapy in Europe and build a model for health economic evaluation of radiation treatments at the European level. The aim of the current report is to describe the distribution of radiotherapy equipment in European countries. METHODS: An 84-item questionnaire was sent out to European countries, principally through their national societies. The current report includes a detailed analysis of radiotherapy departments and equipment (questionnaire items 26-29), analyzed in relation to the annual number of treatment courses and the socio-economic status of the countries. The analysis is based on validated responses from 28 of the 40 European countries defined by the European Cancer Observatory (ECO). RESULTS: A large variation between countries was found for most parameters studied. There were 2192 linear accelerators, 96 dedicated stereotactic machines, and 77 cobalt machines reported in the 27 countries where this information was available. A total of 12 countries had at least one cobalt machine in use. There was a median of 0.5 simulator per MV unit (range 0.3-1.5) and 1.4 (range 0.4-4.4) simulators per department. Of the 874 simulators, a total of 654 (75%) were capable of 3D imaging (CT-scanner or CBCT-option). The number of MV machines (cobalt, linear accelerators, and dedicated stereotactic machines) per million inhabitants ranged from 1.4 to 9.5 (median 5.3) and the average number of MV machines per department from 0.9 to 8.2 (median 2.6). The average number of treatment courses per year per MV machine varied from 262 to 1061 (median 419). While 69% of MV units were capable of IMRT only 49% were equipped for image guidance (IGRT). There was a clear relation between socio-economic status, as measured by GNI per capita, and availability of radiotherapy equipment in the countries. In many low income countries in Southern and Central-Eastern Europe there was very limited access to radiotherapy and especially to equipment for IMRT or IGRT. CONCLUSIONS: The European average number of MV machines per million inhabitants and per department is now better in line with QUARTS recommendations from 2005, but the survey also showed a significant heterogeneity in the access to modern radiotherapy equipment in Europe. High income countries especially in Northern-Western Europe are well-served with radiotherapy resources, other countries are facing important shortages of both equipment in general and especially machines capable of delivering high precision conformal treatments (IMRT, IGRT).

Cost of prostate image-guided radiation therapy: results of a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: This cost analysis aimed to quantify the cost of IGRT in relation to IGRT frequency and modality with Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) or orthogonal electronic portal imaging with fiducial markers (EPI-FM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients undergoing IGRT for localized prostate cancer were randomized into two prostate control frequencies (daily or weekly). Costs were calculated based on the micro-costing results according to hospitals' perspectives (in Euros, 2009) and the time horizon was radiation therapy. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients were enrolled in seven French cancer centers. A total of 6865 fractions were individually analyzed. The mean total treatment fraction duration was 21.0 min for daily CBCT and 18.3 min for daily EPI-FM. Increasing the control frequency from weekly to daily increased the mean treatment fraction duration by 7.3 min (+53%) for CBCT and 1.7 min (+10%) for EPI-FM (p ≤ 0.01). The mean additional cost per patient of daily controls compared with weekly controls was €679 and €187 for CBCT and EPI-FM, respectively (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The incremental costs due to different prostate IGRT strategies are relatively moderate, suggesting that daily IGRT combined with intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) could be administered in cases of high-dose radiation delivery to the prostate.

[Radiation therapy in France in 2010]. / La radiothérapie en France en 2010.

Radiation therapy contributes, with others therapeutic means, to cure many cancers without mutilation and sparing conservative functions. In France, in 2010, about 180,000 patients underwent external radiation therapy in 177 centers assumed by 660 radiation oncologists. Many progress and changes have been made during the past years with the implementation of new techniques as conformal and intensity modulated techniques. Renewal of innovative treatment machines is rapidly ongoing. Since 2007, after medical accidents, quality and security policies have been improved and coordinated to a national level with the active cooperation of the main institutional and professional partners. The new national "Plan Cancer 2009-2013" leads to improvement for patients to access to innovative and safe treatments and to clinical research.

Quality of life assessment after concurrent chemoradiation for invasive bladder cancer: results of a multicenter prospective study (GETUG 97-015).

PURPOSE: To evaluate bladder preservation and functional quality after concurrent chemoradiotherapy for muscle-invasive cancer in 53 patients included in a Phase II trial. PATIENT AND METHODS: Pelvic irradiation delivered 45 Gy, followed by an 18-Gy boost. Concurrent chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil by continuous infusion was performed at Weeks 1, 4, and 7 during radiotherapy. Patients initially suitable for surgery were evaluated with macroscopically complete transurethral resection after 45 Gy, followed by radical cystectomy in case of incomplete response. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30, specific items on bladder function, and the Late Effects in Normal Tissues-Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic (LENT-SOMA) symptoms scale were used to evaluate quality of life before treatment and 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after treatment. RESULTS: Median age was 68 years for 51 evaluable patients. Thirty-two percent of patients had T2a tumors, 46% T2b, 16% T3, and 6% T4. A visibly complete transurethral resection was possible in 66%. Median follow-up was 8 years. Bladder was preserved in 67% (95% confidence interval, 52-79%) of patients. Overall survival was 36% (95% confidence interval, 23-49%) at 8 years for all patients, and 45% (28-61%) for the 36 patients suitable for surgery. Satisfactory bladder function, according to LENT-SOMA, was reported for 100% of patients with preserved bladder and locally controlled disease 6-36 months after the beginning of treatment. Satisfactory bladder function was reported for 35% of patients before treatment and for 43%, 57%, and 29%, respectively, at 6, 18, and 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent chemoradiation therapy allowed bladder preservation with tumor control for 67% patients at 8 years. Quality of life and quality of bladder function were satisfactory for 67% of patients.

70 Gy versus 80 Gy in localized prostate cancer: 5-year results of GETUG 06 randomized trial.

PURPOSE: To perform a randomized trial comparing 70 and 80 Gy radiotherapy for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 306 patients with localized prostate cancer were randomized. No androgen deprivation was allowed. The primary endpoint was biochemical relapse according to the modified 1997-American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and Phoenix definitions. Toxicity was graded using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1991 criteria and the late effects on normal tissues-subjective, objective, management, analytic scales (LENT-SOMA) scales. The patients' quality of life was scored using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30-item cancer-specific and 25-item prostate-specific modules. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 61 months. According to the 1997-American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology definition, the 5-year biochemical relapse rate was 39% and 28% in the 70- and 80-Gy arms, respectively (p = .036). Using the Phoenix definition, the 5-year biochemical relapse rate was 32% and 23.5%, respectively (p = .09). The subgroup analysis showed a better biochemical outcome for the higher dose group with an initial prostate-specific antigen level >15 ng/mL. At the last follow-up date, 26 patients had died, 10 of their disease and none of toxicity, with no differences between the two arms. According to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale, the Grade 2 or greater rectal toxicity rate was 14% and 19.5% for the 70- and 80-Gy arms (p = .22), respectively. The Grade 2 or greater urinary toxicity was 10% at 70 Gy and 17.5% at 80 Gy (p = .046). Similar results were observed using the LENT-SOMA scale. Bladder toxicity was more frequent at 80 Gy than at 70 Gy (p = .039). The quality-of-life questionnaire results before and 5 years after treatment were available for 103 patients with no differences found between the 70- and 80-Gy arms. CONCLUSION: High-dose radiotherapy provided a better 5-year biochemical outcome with slightly greater toxicity.

The GETUG 70 Gy vs. 80 Gy randomized trial for localized prostate cancer: feasibility and acute toxicity.

PURPOSE: To describe treatments and acute tolerance in a randomized trial comparing 70 Gy and 80 Gy to the prostate in patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between September 1999 and February 2002, 306 patients were randomized to receive 70 Gy (153 patients) or 80 Gy (153 patients) in 17 institutions. Patients exhibited intermediate-prognosis tumors. If the risk of node involvement was greater than 10%, surgical staging was required. Previous prostatectomy was excluded, and androgen deprivation was not admitted. The treatment was delivered in two steps. PTV1-including seminal vesicles, prostate, and a 1-0.5-cm margin-received 46 Gy given with a 4-field conformal technique. PTV2, reduced to prostate with the same margins, irradiated with at least 5 fields. Dose was prescribed according to ICRU recommendations in the 70 Gy group, but adapted at the 80 Gy level. RESULTS: All patients but one in the 80 Gy arm completed the treatment. In the 70 Gy arm, the mean dose to the PTV2 was 69.5 Gy. In the 80 Gy arm, the mean dose in the PTV2 was 78.5 Gy. Acute toxicity according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale during treatment was reported in 306 patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the two arms: 12% had no toxicity, 80% complained of bladder toxicity, and 70% complained of rectal symptoms. Two months after the end of treatment, 43% of the 70 Gy level and 48% of the 80 Gy level complained of side effects, including 24% and 20% of sexual disorders. There was 6% and 2% of Grade 3 urinary and rectal toxicity. Five patients required a 10-29-day suspension of the treatment. Acute Grade 2 and 3 side effects were related to PTV and CTV1 size, which was the only independent predictive factor in multivariate analysis. Toxicity was not related to the center, age, arm of treatment, or selected data from dose-volume histogram of organ at risk. CONCLUSION: Treatments were completed in respect to constraints. Acute toxicity was acceptable. Intensity of toxicity depended on target volumes.

Outcome and prognostic factors in orbital lymphoma: a Rare Cancer Network study on 90 consecutive patients treated with radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To assess the outcome and prognostic factors in patients with orbital lymphoma treated by radiotherapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1980 and 1999, 90 consecutive patients with primary orbital lymphoma were treated in 13 member institutions of the Rare Cancer Network. A full staging workup was completed in 56 patients. Seventy-eight patients had low-, 6 intermediate-, and 6 high-grade lymphoma, and 75 had a single orbital localization. All patients underwent RT with a median dose of 34.2 Gy (range 4.0-50.4). Eleven patients received chemotherapy in addition to RT. RESULTS: After RT, local control was achieved in 97% of the patients. Local progression occurred in 2% and local relapse 1%. The rate of systemic relapse was 20%, and 9% of the patients developed metachronous contralateral eye involvement. The 5-year disease-free survival, overall survival, and cause-specific survival rate was 65%, 78%, and 87%, respectively. In univariate analyses, the statistically significant favorable prognostic factors were younger age, low grade, normal erythrocyte sedimentation rate, absence of muscular infiltration, complete response to treatment, conjunctival localization, and normal lactate dehydrogenase value for overall survival, disease-free survival, and freedom from treatment failure. In multivariate analysis, the favorable factors were younger age and low grade for overall and disease-free survival; a favorable response, conjunctival localization, and complete staging were highly significant for disease-free survival and freedom from treatment failure. Neither the RT technique nor the total dose influenced the outcome. Cataract and xerophthalmia were the most prominent late toxicities. CONCLUSION: Moderate- to low-dose RT alone is able to control primary orbital lymphoma with low morbidity. A full staging workup is warranted in these patients. Prognostic factors were identified that could be useful in the overall management of this uncommon site of primary lymphoma.

[Update on screening, diagnosis and treatment of cancer of the prostate]. / Actualités sur le dépistage, le diagnostic et le traitement des cancers de prostate.

Recent progress in management of prostate cancer concern screening and treatment. The use of PSA and rectal examination advances the diagnosis by 5 to 10 years and shift the stage at the time of diagnosis toward curative localized intraprostatic disease. The impact of systematic screening remains controversial. However, individual screening explains, at least in part, the decrease of specific mortality due to prostatic cancer, recently observed in USA. PSA and lymphadenectomy have also contributed to a better selection of patients referred for local treatment by prostatectomy or radiotherapy. Radical prostatectomy is recommended for patients before 70 with T2 or less, Gleason score less than 8 and PSA less than 15 ng/ml. With that selection, disease-free survival reaches 75 to 80% at 10 years. Recently, dramatic improvement in radiotherapy techniques have been achieved, leading to a better local control by increasing the dose over 70 Gy without additional toxicity. Brachytherapy is also widely used for good prognosis localized disease. Limitant acute urinary side effects have been reported and results seem similar to those reported after prostatectomy or conformal radiotherapy. Recent randomized trials have demonstrated a benefit of early hormonal therapy concurrent with radiotherapy for patients with poor prognosis localized disease. For hormonoresistant metastatic disease, chemotherapy has been used with limited palliative benefit. New drugs are currently evaluated.