Bothersome Hot Flashes Following Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves local cancer control in unfavorable localized prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. ADT is known to cause hormonally related symptoms that resolve with testosterone recovery. Hot flashes are particularly burdensome. This study sought to evaluate the timeline of hot flashes following short-course ADT and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as well as its relationship with testosterone recovery. METHODS: Institutional IRB approval was obtained for this retrospective review of prospectively collected data (IRB#: 2009-510). ADT was initiated three months prior to the start of SBRT. Hot flashes were self-reported via question 13a of the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26 prior to ADT initiation, the first day of robotic SBRT, and at each follow-up (one, three, six, nine, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months). The responses were grouped into three relevant categories (no problem, very small-small problem, and moderate-big problem). Scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale with higher scores reflecting less bother. Testosterone levels were measured at each follow-up. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2010, 122 localized prostate cancer patients (nine low-, 64 intermediate-, and 49 high-risk according to the D'Amico classification) at a median age of 72 years (range 54.5-88.3) were treated with short course ADT (three to six months) and SBRT (35-36.25 Gy) at Georgetown University Hospital. Thirty-two percent were Black and 27% were obese. Seventy-seven percent of patients received three months of ADT. At baseline, 2% of men experienced hot flashes that were a "moderate to big problem" and that proportion peaked at the start of SBRT (45%) before returning to baseline (2%) nine months post-SBRT with a cumulative incidence of 52.4%. The median baseline EPIC-26 hot flash score of 94 declined to 50 at the start of SBRT but this returned to baseline (92) by six months post SBRT. These changes were both statistically and clinically significant (MID = 9.5083, p<0.01). Testosterone recovery (> 230 ng/dL) occurred in approximately 70% of patients by 12 months post SBRT. Resolution of hot flashes correlated with testosterone recovery. CONCLUSION: Bothersome hot flashes occur in greater than 50% of men treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Resolution of hot flashes occurs in the majority of patients within one year after treatment. Reassurance of the temporary nature of hot flashes may assist in reducing patient anxiety. Measuring testosterone levels at follow-up visits may allow for anticipatory counseling that may limit the associated bother.

Impact of Age on Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

Purpose Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivers large radiation doses to the prostate while minimizing exposure to adjacent normal tissues. Large fraction sizes may increase the risks of functional decrements. Elderly men may be at an increased risk of these toxicities due to poor baseline function and hence limited reserve. This study describes patient-reported outcomes following SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer in the elderly. Methods Between 2007 and 2017, 179 hormone-naive elderly patients (≥ 70 years old) and 210 patients under 70 years old with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with 35-36.25 Gy SBRT in five fractions utilizing the CyberKnife Radiosurgical System (Accuray Inc.). Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite-Short Form (EPIC-26) questionnaire at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months following the completion of treatment. EPIC scores range from 0 to 100, with lower values representing worsening symptoms. Results EPIC scores in the elderly cohort mirrored those in the younger cohort. EPIC urinary obstructive/irritative scores declined at one month post-SBRT (mean change from baseline ≥70: -7.9; <70: -11.1) before returning to baseline at three months post-SBRT (mean change from baseline ≥70: -0.4; <70: -1.4). The EPIC urinary incontinence scores declined slowly over the three years following treatment without recovery (mean change from baseline ≥70: -6.6; <70: -4.8). EPIC Bowel scores transiently declined at one month post-SBRT (mean change from baseline ≥70: -8.5; <70: -9.1) and then experienced a second more protracted decline over the next three years without recovery (mean change from baseline ≥70: -4.5; <70: -1.8). Hormonal EPIC scores were not impacted by radiation treatment or age. Older men had lower baseline and post-treatment EPIC sexual summary scores at all time points. However, there was no clinically significant difference in the EPIC sexual bother score between younger and older men at baseline and following treatment. Conclusions In the first three years following treatment, the impact of SBRT treatment on patient-reported outcomes was minimal. Our findings suggest that SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer should not be deferred in older men solely due to concerns of increased morbidity. Further studies should be conducted to evaluate the impact of age on outcomes or morbidity following SBRT.

Utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes to Guide Symptom Management during Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Utilization of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to guide symptom management during radiation therapy is increasing. This study focuses on the use of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) as a tool to assess urinary and bowel bother during stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and its utility in guiding medical management. METHODS: Between September 2015 and January 2017, 107 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with 35-36.25 Gy via SBRT in five fractions. PROs were assessed using EPIC-CP 1 h prior to the first fraction and after each subsequent fraction. Symptom management medications were prescribed based on the physician clinical judgment or if patients reported a moderate to big problem. Clinical significance was assessed using a minimally important difference of 1/2 SD from baseline score. RESULTS: A median baseline EPIC-CP urinary symptom score of 1.5 significantly increased to 3.7 on the day of the final treatment (p < 0.0001). Prior to treatment, 9.3% of men felt that their overall urinary function was a moderate to big problem that increased to 28% by the end of the fifth treatment. A median baseline EPIC-CP bowel symptom score of 0.3 significantly increased to 1.4 on the day of the final treatment (p < 0.0001). Prior to treatment, 1.9% of men felt that their overall bowel function was a moderate to big problem that increased to 3.7% by the end of the fifth treatment. The percentage of patients requiring an increased dose of alpha-antagonist increased to 47% by the end of treatment, and an additional 28% of patients required a short steroid taper to manage moderate to big urinary problems. Similarly, the percentage of patients requiring antidiarrheals reached 12% by the fifth treatment. CONCLUSION: During the course of SBRT, an increasing percentage of patients experienced clinically significant symptoms many of which required medical management. Monitoring patient symptoms during treatment allowed for prompt detection and management of acute urinary and bowel symptoms. The usage of symptom management medications was high in this study compared to historical controls and may be due to increased physician awareness of moderate to big patient problems.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: A Report on 3-Year Toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plus brachytherapy boost for unfavorable prostate cancer provides improved biochemical relapse-free survival over IMRT alone. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may be a less invasive alternative to brachytherapy boost. Here, we report the 3-year gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities of IMRT plus SBRT boost. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2008 and September 2012, patients with prostate cancer were treated with robotic SBRT (19.5 Gy in three fractions) followed by fiducial-guided IMRT (45-50.4 Gy) on an institutional protocol. Toxicity was prospectively graded using the common terminology criteria for adverse events version 4.0 (CTCAEv.4) at the start of and at 1- to 6-month intervals after therapy. Rectal telangiectasias were graded using the Vienna Rectoscopy Score (VRS). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 4.2 years (2.4-7.5), 108 patients (4 low-, 45 intermediate-, and 59 high-risk) with a median age of 74 years (55-92) were treated with SBRT plus IMRT, with 8% on anticoagulation and an additional 48% on antiplatelet therapy at the start of therapy. The cumulative incidence of late ≥grade 2 GI toxicity was 12%. Of these, 7% were due to late rectal bleeding, with six patients requiring up to two coagulation procedures. One patient with rectal telangiectasias was treated with hyperbaric oxygen (grade 3 toxicity). No rectal fistulas or stenoses were observed. Ten patients had multiple non-confluent telangiectasias (VRS grade 2), and three patients had multiple confluent telangiectasias (VRS grade 3). The cumulative incidence of late grade 3 GU toxicity was 6%. Most late toxicities were due to hematuria requiring bladder fulguration. There were no late ≥grade 4 GU toxicities. CONCLUSION: Rates of clinically significant GI and GU toxicities are modest following IMRT plus SBRT boost. Future studies should compare cancer control, quality of life, and toxicity with other treatment modalities for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Proctitis 1 Week after Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Implications for Clinical Trial Design.

BACKGROUND: Proctitis following prostate cancer radiation therapy is a primary determinant of quality of life (QOL). While previous studies have assessed acute rectal morbidity at 1 month after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), little data exist on the prevalence and severity of rectal morbidity within the first week following treatment. This study reports the acute bowel morbidity 1 week following prostate SBRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between May 2013 and August 2014, 103 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions using robotic SBRT delivered on a prospective clinical trial. Bowel toxicity was graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAEv.4). Bowel QOL was assessed using the EPIC-26 questionnaire bowel domain at baseline, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. Time-dependent changes in bowel symptoms were statistically compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Clinically significant change was assessed by the minimally important difference (MID) in EPIC score. This was defined as a change of 1/2 standard deviation (SD) from the baseline score. RESULTS: One-hundred and three patients with a minimum of 3 months of follow-up were analyzed. The cumulative incidence of acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 23%. There were no acute ≥ grade 3 bowel toxicities. EPIC bowel summary scores maximally declined at 1 week after SBRT (-13.9, p < 0.0001) before returning to baseline at 3 months after SBRT (+0.03, p = 0.94). Prior to treatment, 4.9% of men reported that their bowel bother was a moderate to big problem. This increased to 28.4% (p < 0.0001) 1 week after SBRT and returned to baseline at 3 months after SBRT (0.0%, p = 0.66). Only the bowel summary and bowel bother score declines at 1 week met the MID threshold for clinically significant change. CONCLUSION: The rate and severity of acute proctitis following prostate SBRT peaked at 1 week after treatment and returned to baseline by 3 months. Toxicity assessment at 1 week can therefore minimize recall bias and should aid in the design of future clinical trials focused on accurately capturing and minimizing acute morbidity following SBRT.

The Impact of Obesity on Patient Reported Outcomes Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The relationship between obesity (Body Mass Index ->30 kg/m(2)) and quality of life (QoL) following prostate cancer (PCa) radiation therapy (RT) is unknown. Excess abdominal fat may compromise the precise delivery of radiation, putting surrounding organs at risk for greater radiation exposure. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) utilizes a real-time tracking system that provides updated prostate position information and allows for correction of the therapeutic beam during treatment with high accuracy. In this study, we evaluate the impact of obesity on patient reported outcomes following SBRT for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2008 and April 2012, 88 obese and 178 non-obese patients with PCa were treated with SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC. Health-related quality of life (HRQol) was assessed via the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC)-26 at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after 5-fraction delivery of 35-36.25 Gy with the CyberKnife. Patients who received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were excluded from this analysis due to its known negative impact on HRQoL. RESULTS: Pretreatment characteristics of obese and non-obese patient groups were similar except that obese patients had lower total testosterone levels. Urinary and bowel function and bother scores between the two patient cohorts were comparable at baseline and subsequent follow-ups. Sexual function and bother were also similar at baseline between both groups. Bother was defined by displeasure patients may experience from functional decline. At 24 months post-SBRT, obese men experienced borderline clinically significant decrease in sexual function and greater sexual bother compared to non-obese patients. Fatigue was significantly higher in obese patients compared to non-obese patients at 18 months post-SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate SBRT affects obese and non-obese patients similarly in total HRQoL scores and majority of its domains. Obesity has been associated with cancer recurrence; therefore longer follow-up is required to determine the impact of obesity on cancer control.

Acute Urinary Morbidity Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer with Prophylactic Alpha-Adrenergic Antagonist and Urethral Dose Reduction.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivers high doses of radiation to the prostate while minimizing radiation to the adjacent critical organs. Large fraction sizes may increase urinary morbidity due to unavoidable treatment of the prostatic urethra. This study reports rates of acute urinary morbidity following SBRT for localized prostate cancer with prophylactic alpha-adrenergic antagonist utilization and urethral dose reduction (UDR). METHODS: From April 2013 to September 2014, 102 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with robotic SBRT to a total dose of 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions. UDR was employed to limit the maximum point dose of the prostatic urethra to 40 Gy. Prophylactic alpha-adrenergic antagonists were initiated 5 days prior to SBRT and continued until resolution of urinary symptoms. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed before and after treatment using the American Urological Association Symptom Score (AUA) and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26). Clinical significance was assessed using a minimally important difference (MID) of one half SD change from baseline. RESULTS: One hundred two patients underwent definitive prostate SBRT with UDR and were followed for 3 months. No patient experienced acute urinary retention requiring catheterization. A mean baseline AUA symptom score of 9.06 significantly increased to 11.83 1-week post-SBRT (p = 0.0024) and 11.84 1-month post-SBRT (p = 0.0023) but returned to baseline by 3 months. A mean baseline EPIC-26 irritative/obstructive score of 87.7 decreased to 74.1 1-week post-SBRT (p < 0.0001) and 77.8 1-month post-SBRT (p < 0.0001) but returned to baseline at 3 months. EPIC-26 irritative/obstructive score changes were clinically significant, exceeding the MID of 6.0. At baseline, 8.9% of men described their urinary function as a moderate to big problem, and that proportion increased to 37.6% 1 week following completion of SBRT before returning to baseline by 3 months. CONCLUSION: Stereotactic body radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer with utilization of prophylactic alpha-adrenergic antagonist and UDR was well tolerated as determined by acute urinary function and bother, and symptoms were comparable to those observed following conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Longer follow-up is required to assess long-term toxicity and efficacy following SBRT with UDR.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: The Georgetown University Experience.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to brachytherapy to deliver highly conformal, dose--escalated radiation therapy (RT) to the prostate. SBRT alone may not adequately cover the tumor extensions outside the prostate commonly seen in unfavorable prostate cancer. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with high dose rate brachytherapy boost is a proven effective therapy for unfavorable prostate cancer. This study reports on early prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer-specific quality of life (QOL) outcomes in a cohort of unfavorable patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and SBRT boost. MATERIALS/METHODS: Prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT (19.5 Gy in three fractions) followed by fiducial-guided IMRT (45-50.4 Gy) from March 2008 to September 2012 were included in this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Biochemical failure was assessed using the Phoenix definition. Patients completed the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC)-26 at baseline, 1 month after the completion of RT, every 3 months for the first year, then every 6 months for a minimum of 2 years. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients (4 low-, 45 intermediate-, and 59 high-risk) with median age of 74 years completed treatment, with median follow-up of 4.4 years. Sixty-four percent of the patients received androgen deprivation therapy prior to the initiation of RT. The 3-year actuarial biochemical control rates were 100 and 89.8% for intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively. At the initiation of RT, 9 and 5% of men felt their urinary and bowel function was a moderate to big problem, respectively. Mean EPIC urinary and bowel function and bother scores exhibited transient declines, with subsequent return to near baseline. At 2 years posttreatment, 13.7 and 5% of men felt their urinary and bowel function was a moderate to big problem, respectively. CONCLUSION: At 3-year follow-up, biochemical control was favorable. Acute urinary and bowel symptoms were comparable to conventionally fractionated IMRT and brachytherapy. Patients recovered to near their baseline urinary and bowel function by 2 years posttreatment. A combination of IMRT with SBRT boost is well tolerated with minimal impact on prostate cancer-specific QOL.

Urethrogram-Directed Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer in Patients with Contraindications to Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-directed stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been established as a safe and effective treatment for prostate cancer. For patients with contraindications to MRI, CT-urethrogram is an alternative imaging approach to identify the location of the prostatic apex to guide treatment. This study sought to evaluate the safety of urethrogram-directed SBRT for prostate cancer. METHODS: Between February 2009 and January 2014, 31 men with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated definitively with urethrogram-directed SBRT with or without supplemental intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) at Georgetown University Hospital. SBRT was delivered either as a primary treatment of 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions or as a boost of 19.5 Gy in three fractions followed by supplemental conventionally fractionated IMRT (45-50.4 Gy). Toxicities were recorded and scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v.4.0). RESULTS: The median patient age was 70 years with a median prostate volume of 38 cc. The median follow-up was 3.7 years. The patients were elderly (Median age = 70), and comorbidities were common (Carlson comorbidity index ≥2 in 36%). Seventy-one percent of patients utilized alpha agonists prior to treatment, and 9.7% had prior procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The 3-year actuarial incidence rates of ≥Grade 3 GU toxicity and ≥Grade 2 GI toxicity were 3.2 and 9.7%, respectively, and there were no Grade 4 or 5 toxicities. CONCLUSION: Magnetic resonance imaging is the preferred imaging modality to guide prostate SBRT treatment. However, urethrogram-directed SBRT is a safe alternative for the treatment of patients with prostate cancer who are unable to undergo MRI.

Dysuria Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dysuria following prostate radiation therapy is a common toxicity that adversely affects patients' quality of life and may be difficult to manage. METHODS: Two hundred four patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) from 2007 to 2010 for localized prostate carcinoma with a minimum follow-up of 3 years were included in this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. All patients were treated to 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions delivered with robotic SBRT with real time fiducial tracking. Dysuria and other lower urinary tract symptoms were assessed via Question 4b (Pain or burning on urination) of the expanded prostate index composite-26 and the American Urological Association (AUA) Symptom Score at baseline and at routine follow-up. RESULTS: Two hundred four patients (82 low-, 105 intermediate-, and 17 high-risk according to the D'Amico classification) at a median age of 69 years (range 48-91) received SBRT for their localized prostate cancer with a median follow-up of 47 months. Bother associated with dysuria significantly increased from a baseline of 12% to a maximum of 43% at 1 month (p < 0.0001). There were two distinct peaks of moderate to severe dysuria bother at 1 month and at 6-12 months, with 9% of patients experiencing a late transient dysuria flare. While a low level of dysuria was seen through the first 2 years of follow-up, it returned to below baseline by 2 years (p = 0.91). The median baseline AUA score of 7.5 significantly increased to 11 at 1 month (p < 0.0001) and returned to 7 at 3 months (p = 0.54). Patients with dysuria had a statistically higher AUA score at baseline and at all follow-ups up to 30 months. Dysuria significantly correlated with dose and AUA score on multivariate analysis. Frequency and strain significantly correlated with dysuria on stepwise multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The rate and severity of dysuria following SBRT is comparable to patients treated with other radiation modalities.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: What is the Appropriate Patient-Reported Outcome for Clinical Trial Design?

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly utilized as primary treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer. Consensus regarding the appropriate patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints for clinical trials evaluating radiation modalities for early stage prostate cancer is lacking. To aid in clinical trial design, this study presents PROs over a 36-month period following SBRT for clinically localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Between February 2008 and September 2010, 174 hormone-naïve patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with 35-36.25 Gy SBRT (CyberKnife, Accuray) delivered in 5 fractions. Patients completed the validated Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC)-26 questionnaire at baseline and all follow-ups. The proportion of patients developing a clinically significant decline in each EPIC domain score was determined. The minimally important difference (MID) was defined as a change of one-half the standard deviation from the baseline. Per Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0938, we also examined the patients who experienced a decline in EPIC urinary domain summary score of >2 points (unacceptable toxicity defined as ≥60% of all patients reporting this degree of decline) and EPIC bowel domain summary score of >5 points (unacceptable toxicity defined as >55% of all patients reporting this degree of decline) from baseline to 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 174 patients at a median age of 69 years received SBRT with a minimum follow-up of 36 months. The proportion of patients reporting a clinically significant decline (MID for urinary/bowel are 5.5/4.4) in EPIC urinary/bowel domain scores was 34%/30% at 6 months, 40%/32.2% at 12 months, and 32.8%/21.5% at 36 months. The patients reporting a decrease in the EPIC urinary domain summary score of >2 points was 43.2% (CI: 33.7%, 54.6%) at 6 months, 51.6% (CI: 43.4%, 59.7%) at 12 months, and 41.8% (CI: 33.3%, 50.6%) at 36 months. The patients reporting a decrease in the EPIC bowel domain summary score of >5 points was 29.6% (CI: 21.9%, 39.3%) at 6 months, 29% (CI: 22%, 36.8%) at 12 months, and 22.4% (CI: 15.7%, 30.4%) at 36 months. CONCLUSION: Following prostate SBRT, clinically significant urinary symptoms are more common than bowel symptoms. Our prostate SBRT treatment protocol meets the RTOG 0938 criteria for moving forward to a Phase III trial comparing it to conventionally fractionated radiation therapy. Notably, between 12 and 36 months, the proportion of patients reporting a significant decrease in both EPIC urinary and bowel domain scores declined, suggesting a late improvement in these symptom domains. Further investigation is needed to elucidate (1) which EPIC domains bear the greatest influence on post-treatment quality of life and (2) at what time point PRO endpoint(s) should be assessed.

Improved irritative voiding symptoms 3 years after stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Irritative voiding symptoms are common in elderly men and following prostate radiotherapy. There is limited clinical data on the impact of hypofractionated treatment on irritative voiding symptoms. This study sought to evaluate urgency, frequency, and nocturia following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients treated with SBRT monotherapy for localized prostate cancer from August 2007 to July 2011 at Georgetown University Hospital were included in this study. Treatment was delivered using the CyberKnife(®) with doses of 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions. Patient-reported urinary symptoms were assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) before treatment and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-treatment and every 6 months thereafter. RESULTS: Two hundred four patients at a median age of 69 years received SBRT with a median follow-up of 4.8 years. Prior to treatment, 50.0% of patients reported moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and 17.7% felt that urinary frequency was a moderate to big problem. The mean prostate volume was 39 cc and 8% had prior procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia. A mean baseline IPSS-irritative (IPSS-I) score of 4.8 significantly increased to 6.5 at 1 month (p < 0.0001), however returned to baseline at 3 months (p = 0.73). The IPSS-I score returned to baseline in 91% of patients by 6 months and 96% of patients by 2 years. Transient increases in irritative voiding symptoms were common at 1 year. The mean baseline IPSS-I score decreased to 4.4 at 24 months (p = 0.03) and 3.7 at 36 months (p < 0.0001). In men with moderate to severe LUTS (IPSS ≥ 8) at baseline, the mean IPSS-I decreased from a baseline score of 6.8-4.9 at 3 years post-SBRT. This decrease was both statistically (p < 0.0001) and clinically significant (minimally important difference = 1.45). Only 14.6% of patients felt that urinary frequency was a moderate to big problem at 3 years post-SBRT (p = 0.23). CONCLUSION: Treatment of prostate cancer with SBRT resulted in an acute increase in irritative urinary symptoms that peaked within the first month post-treatment. Irritative voiding symptoms returned to baseline in the majority of patients by 3 months post-SBRT and were actually improved from baseline at 3 years post-SBRT.

Obstructive voiding symptoms following stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive voiding symptoms (OVS) are common following prostate cancer treatment with radiation therapy. The risk of urinary retention (UR) following hypofractionated radiotherapy has yet to be fully elucidated. This study sought to evaluate OVS and UR requiring catheterization following SBRT for prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients treated with SBRT for localized prostate cancer from February 2008 to July 2011 at Georgetown University were included in this study. Treatment was delivered using the CyberKnife® with doses of 35 Gy-36.25 Gy in 5 fractions. UR was prospectively scored using the CTCAE v.3. Patient-reported OVS were assessed using the IPSS-obstructive subdomain at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months. Associated bother was evaluated via the EPIC-26. RESULTS: 269 patients at a median age of 69 years received SBRT with a median follow-up of 3 years. The mean prostate volume was 39 cc. Prior to treatment, 50.6% of patients reported moderate to severe lower urinary track symptoms per the IPSS and 6.7% felt that weak urine stream and/or incomplete emptying were a moderate to big problem. The 2-year actuarial incidence rates of acute and late UR ≥ grade 2 were 39.5% and 41.4%. Alpha-antagonist utilization rose at one month (58%) and 18 months (48%) post-treatment. However, Grade 3 UR was low with only 4 men (1.5%) requiring catheterization and/or TURP. A mean baseline IPSS-obstructive score of 3.6 significantly increased to 5.0 at 1 month (p < 0.0001); however, it returned to baseline in 92.6% within a median time of 3 months. Late increases in OVS were common, but transient. Only 7.1% of patients felt that weak urine stream and/or incomplete emptying was a moderate to big problem at two years post-SBRT (p = 0.6854). CONCLUSIONS: SBRT treatment caused an acute increase in OVS which peaked within the first month post-treatment, though acute UR requiring catheterization was rare. OVS returned to baseline in > 90% of patients within a median time of three months. Transient Late increases in OVS were common. However, less than 10% of patients felt that OVS were a moderate to big problem at two years post-SBRT.

Patient-reported urinary incontinence following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for clinically localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Urinary incontinence (UI) following prostate radiotherapy is a rare toxicity that adversely affects a patient's quality of life. This study sought to evaluate the incidence of UI following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: Between February, 2008 and October, 2010, 204 men with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated definitively with SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital. Patients were treated to 35-36.25 Gray (Gy) in 5 fractions delivered with the CyberKnife (Accuray). UI was assessed via the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26. RESULTS: Baseline UI was common with 4.4%, 1.0% and 3.4% of patients reporting leaking > 1 time per day, frequent dribbling and pad usage, respectively. Three year post treatment, 5.7%, 6.4% and 10.8% of patients reported UI based on leaking > 1 time per day, frequent dribbling and pad usage, respectively. Average EPIC UI summary scores showed an acute transient decline at one month post-SBRT then a second a gradual decline over the next three years. The proportion of men feeling that their UI was a moderate to big problem increased from 1% at baseline to 6.4% at three years post-SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate SBRT was well tolerated with UI rates comparable to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and brachytherapy. More than 90% of men who were pad-free prior to treatment remained pad-free three years following treatment. Less than 10% of men felt post-treatment UI was a moderate to big problem at any time point following treatment. Longer term follow-up is needed to confirm late effects.

Potency preservation following stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Erectile dysfunction after prostate radiation therapy remains an ongoing challenge and critical quality of life issue. Given the higher dose of radiation per fraction using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) there is concern that post-SBRT impotency would be higher than conventional radiation therapy approaches. This study sought to evaluate potency preservation and sexual function following SBRT for prostate cancer. METHODS: Between February 2008 and March 2011, 216 men with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated definitively with SBRT monotherapy at Georgetown University Hospital. Potency was defined as the ability to have an erection firm enough for intercourse with or without sexual aids while sexual activity was defined as the ability to have an erection firm enough for masturbation and foreplay. Patients who received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were excluded from this study. Ninety-seven hormone-naïve men were identified as being potent at the initiation of therapy and were included in this review. All patients were treated to 35-36.25 Gy in 5 fractions delivered with the CyberKnife Radiosurgical System (Accuray). Prostate specific antigen (PSA) and total testosterone levels were obtained pre-treatment, every 3 months for the first year and every 6 months for the subsequent year. Sexual function was assessed with the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM), the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26 and Utilization of Sexual Medication/Device questionnaires at baseline and all follow-up visits. RESULTS: Ninety-seven men (43 low-, 50 intermediate- and 4 high-risk) at a median age of 68 years (range, 48-82 years) received SBRT. The median pre-treatment PSA was 5.9 ng/ml and the minimum follow-up was 24 months. The median pre-treatment total serum testosterone level was 11.4 nmol/L (range, 4.4-27.9 nmol/L). The median baseline SHIM was 22 and 36% of patients utilized sexual aids prior to treatment. Although potency rates declined following treatment: 100% (baseline); 68% (6 months); 62% (12 months); 57% (18 months) and 54.4% (24 months), 78% of previously potent patients had erections sufficient for sexual activity at 24 months post-treatment. Overall sexual aid utilization increased from 36% at baseline to 49% at 24 months. Average EPIC sexual scores showed a slow decline over the first two years following treatment: 77.6 (baseline); 68.7 (6 months); 63.2 (12 months); 61.9 (18 months); 59.3 (24 months). All sexual functions including orgasm declined with time. Prior to treatment, 13.4% of men felt their sexual function was a moderate to big problem which increased to 26.7% two years post treatment. Post-treatment testosterone levels gradually decreased with a median value at two year follow-up of 10.7 nmol/L. However, the average EPIC hormonal scores did not illustrate a statistically significant difference two years post-treatment. Review of the radiation doses to the penile bulb in this study, a potential marker of post-treatment sexual function, revealed that the dose was relatively low and at these low doses the percentage of the penile bulb receiving 29.5 Gy did not correlate with the development of ED. CONCLUSIONS: Men undergoing SBRT monotherapy for prostate cancer report sexual outcomes comparable to those reported for conventional radiation modalities within the first 24 months after treatment. Longer follow-up is required to confirm the durability of these findings.

Translation-dependent mechanisms lead to PML upregulation and mediate oncogenic K-RAS-induced cellular senescence.

Expression of oncogenic K-RAS in primary cells elicits oncogene-induced cellular senescence (OIS), a form of growth arrest that potently opposes tumourigenesis. This effect has been largely attributed to transcriptional mechanisms that depend on the p53 tumour suppressor protein. The PML tumour suppressor was initially identified as a component of the PML-RARα oncoprotein of acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL). PML, a critical OIS mediator, is upregulated by oncogenic K-RAS in vivo and in vitro. We demonstrate here that oncogenic K-RAS induces PML protein upregulation by activating the RAS/MEK1/mTOR/eIF4E pathway even in the absence of p53. Under these circumstances, PML mRNA is selectively associated to polysomes. Importantly, we find that the PML 5' untranslated mRNA region plays a key role in mediating PML protein upregulation and that its presence is essential for an efficient OIS response. These findings demonstrate that upregulation of PML translation plays a central role in oncogenic K-RAS-induced OIS. Thus, selective translation initiation plays a critical role in tumour suppression with important therapeutic implications for the treatment of solid tumours and APL.

Treatment with 5-azacytidine accelerates acute promyelocytic leukemia leukemogenesis in a transgenic mouse model.

A key oncogenic force in acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) is the ability of the promyelocytic leukemia-retinoic acid receptor α (PML-RARA) oncoprotein to recruit transcriptional repressors and DNA methyltransferases at retinoic acid-responsive elements. Pharmacological doses of retinoic acid relieve transcriptional repression inducing terminal differentiation/apoptosis of the leukemic blasts. APL blasts often harbor additional recurrent chromosomal abnormalities, and significantly, APL prevalence is increased in Latino populations. These observations suggest that multiple genetic and environmental/dietary factors are likely implicated in APL. We tested whether dietary or targeted chemopreventive strategies relieving PML-RARA transcriptional repression would be effective in a transgenic mouse model. Surprisingly, we found that 1) treatment with a demethylating agent, 5-azacytidine, results in a striking acceleration of APL; 2) a high fat, low folate/choline-containing diet resulted in a substantial but nonsignificant APL acceleration; and 3) all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) is ineffective in preventing leukemia and results in ATRA-resistant APL. Our findings have important clinical implications because ATRA is a drug of choice for APL treatment and indicate that global demethylation, whether through dietary manipulations or through the use of a pharmacologic agent such as 5-azacytidine, may have unintended and detrimental consequences in chemopreventive regimens.

The mechanisms of PML-nuclear body formation.

PML nuclear bodies (NBs) are nuclear structures that have been implicated in processes such as transcriptional regulation, genome stability, response to viral infection, apoptosis, and tumor suppression. PML has been found to be essential for the formation of the NBs, as these structures do not form in Pml null cells, although PML add back fully rescues their formation. However, the basis for such a structural role of PML is unknown. We demonstrate that PML contains a SUMO binding motif that is independent of its SUMOylation sites and is surprisingly necessary for PML-NB formation. We demonstrate that the PML RING domain is critical for PML SUMOylation and PML-NB formation. We propose a model for PML-NB formation whereby PML SUMOylation and noncovalent binding of PML to SUMOylated PML through the SUMO binding motif constitutes the nucleation event for subsequent recruitment of SUMOylated proteins and/or proteins containing SUMO binding motifs to the PML NBs.

A CK2-dependent mechanism for degradation of the PML tumor suppressor.

The PML tumor suppressor controls key pathways for growth suppression, induction of apoptosis, and cellular senescence. PML loss occurs frequently in human tumors through unknown posttranslational mechanisms. Casein kinase 2 (CK2) is oncogenic and frequently upregulated in human tumors. Here we show that CK2 regulates PML protein levels by promoting its ubiquitin-mediated degradation dependent on direct phosphorylation at Ser517. Consequently, PML mutants that are resistant to CK2 phosphorylation display increased tumor-suppressive functions. In a faithful mouse model of lung cancer, we demonstrate that Pml inactivation leads to increased tumorigenesis. Furthermore, CK2 pharmacological inhibition enhances the PML tumor-suppressive property in vivo. Importantly, we found an inverse correlation between CK2 kinase activity and PML protein levels in human lung cancer-derived cell lines and primary specimens. These data identify a key posttranslational mechanism that controls PML protein levels and provide therapeutic means toward PML restoration through CK2 inhibition.