Very Long-Term Complete Remission Can Be Achieved in Men With High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer and a Very High PSA Value: An Analysis of the GETUG 12 Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) is a well-known prognostic parameter in men with prostate cancer. The treatment of men with very high PSA values and apparently no detectable metastases is not fully established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ancillary analysis from the GETUG 12 phase 3 trial. Patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer by bone and computerized tomography (CT) scan were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel plus estramustine or ADT alone. Relapse-free survival (RFS), clinical RFS, metastases-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method for different levels of PSA (50 ng/mL, 75 ng/mL, and 100 ng/mL). The relationship between PSA and outcomes was studied using residual-based approaches and spline functions. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 12 years (range: 0-15.3). Baseline PSA (<50 ng/mL, n = 328; ≥50ng/mL, n = 85) was associated with improved RFS (P = .0005), cRFS (P = .0024), and MFS (P = .0068). The 12-year RFS rate was 46.33% (CI 40.59-51.86), 33.59% (CI 22.55-44.97), and 11.76% (1.96-31.20) in men with PSA values <50 ng/mL (n = 328), 50-100 ng/mL (n = 68), and ≥100 ng/mL (n = 17), respectively. Exploratory analyses revealed no deviation from the linear relationship assumption between PSA and the log hazard of events. CONCLUSIONS: Men with apparently localized prostate cancer and a high baseline PSA value have a reasonable chance of being long-term disease-free when treated with curative intent combining systemic and local therapy.

The Prognostic Value of Eight Comorbidity Indices in Older Patients with Cancer: The ELCAPA Cohort Study.

Background: A prognostic assessment is crucial for making cancer treatment decisions in older patients. We assessed the prognostic performance (relative to one-year mortality) of eight comorbidity indices in a cohort of older patients with cancer. Methods: We studied patients with cancer aged ≥70 included in the Elderly Cancer Patient (ELCAPA) cohort between 2007 and 2010. We assessed seven nonspecific indices (Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), three modified versions of the CCI, the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, the Gagne index, and the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G)) and the National Cancer Institute Comorbidity Index. Results: Overall, 510 patients were included. Among patients with nonmetastatic cancer, all the comorbidity indices were independently associated with 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of 1.44 to 2.51 for one standard deviation increment; p < 0.05 for all) and had very good discriminant ability (Harrell's C > 0.8 for the eight indices), but were poorly calibrated. Among patients with metastatic cancer, only the CIRS-G was independently associated with 1-year mortality (aHR (95% confidence interval): 1.26 [1.06−1.50]). Discriminant ability was moderate (0.61 to 0.70) for the subsets of patients with metastatic cancer and colorectal cancer. Conclusion: Comorbidity indices had strong prognostic value and discriminative ability for one-year mortality in older patients with nonmetastatic cancer, although calibration was poor. In older patients with metastatic cancer, only the CIRS-G was predictive of one-year mortality.

Predicting Frailty and Geriatric Interventions in Older Cancer Patients: Performance of Two Screening Tools for Seven Frailty Definitions-ELCAPA Cohort.

Screening tools have been developed to identify patients warranting a complete geriatric assessment (GA). However, GA lacks standardization and does not capture important aspects of geriatric oncology practice. We measured and compared the diagnostic performance of screening tools G8 and modified G8 according to multiple clinically relevant reference standards. We included 1136 cancer patients ≥ 70 years old referred for GA (ELCAPA cohort; median age, 80 years; males, 52%; main locations: digestive (36.3%), breast (16%), and urinary tract (14.8%); metastases, 43.5%). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) estimates were compared between both tools against: (1) the detection of ≥1 or (2) ≥2 GA impairments, (3) the prescription of ≥1 geriatric intervention and the identification of an unfit profile according to (4) a latent class typology, expert-based classifications from (5) Balducci, (6) the International Society of Geriatric Oncology task force (SIOG), or using (7) a GA frailty index according to the Rockwood accumulation of deficits principle. AUROC values were ≥0.80 for both tools under all tested definitions. They were statistically significantly higher for the modified G8 for six reference standards: ≥1 GA impairment (0.93 vs. 0.89), ≥2 GA impairments (0.90 vs. 0.87), ≥1 geriatric intervention (0.85 vs. 0.81), unfit according to Balducci (0.86 vs. 0.80) and SIOG classifications (0.88 vs. 0.83), and according to the GA frailty index (0.86 vs. 0.84). Our findings demonstrate the robustness of both screening tools against different reference standards, with evidence of better diagnostic performance of the modified G8.

OLIGOPELVIS GETUG P07, a Multicenter Phase II Trial of Combined High-dose Salvage Radiotherapy and Hormone Therapy in Oligorecurrent Pelvic Node Relapses in Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oligorecurrent pelvic nodal relapse in prostatic cancer is a challenge for regional salvage treatments. Androgen depriving therapies (ADTs) are a mainstay in metastatic prostate cancer, and salvage pelvic radiotherapy may offer long ADT-free intervals for patients harboring regional nodal relapses. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of the combination of ADT and salvage radiotherapy in men with oligorecurrent pelvic node relapses of prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed an open-label, phase II trial of combined high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy and ADT (6 mo) in oligorecurrent (five or fewer) pelvic node relapses in prostate cancer, detected by fluorocholine positron-emission tomography computed tomography imaging. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was 2-yr progression-free survival defined as two consecutive prostate-specific antigen levels above the level at inclusion and/or clinical evidence of progression as per RECIST 1.1 and/or death from any cause. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between August 2014 and July 2016, 67 patients were recruited in 15 centers. Half of the patients had received prior prostatic irradiation. The median age was 67.7 yr. After a median follow-up of 49.4 mo, 2- and 3-yr progression-free survival rates were 81% and 58%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 45.3 mo. The median biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) was 25.9 mo. At 2 and 3 yr, the BRFS rates were 58% and 46%, respectively. Grade 2 + 2-yr genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 10% and 2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Combined high-dose salvage pelvic radiotherapy and ADT appeared to prolong tumor control in oligorecurrent pelvic node relapses in prostate cancer with limited toxicity. After 3 yr, nearly half of patients were in complete remission. Our study showed initial evidence of benefit, but a randomized trial is required to confirm this result. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes of combined high-dose salvage pelvic radiotherapy and 6-mo-long hormone therapy in oligorecurrent pelvic nodal relapse in prostatic cancer. We found that 46% of patients presenting with oligorecurrent pelvic node relapses in prostate cancer were in complete remission after 3 yr following combined treatment at the cost of limited toxicity.

Short-term androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy as salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 16): a 112-month follow-up of a phase 3, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is the standard salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy. To date, the role of androgen deprivation therapy has not been formally shown. In this follow-up study, we aimed to update the results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial, which assessed the efficacy of radiotherapy plus androgen suppression versus radiotherapy alone. METHODS: GETUG-AFU 16 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial that enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen suppression or pelvic radiotherapy), stage pT2, T3, or T4a (bladder neck involvement only) and pN0 or pNx according to the tumour, node, metastasis (TNM) staging system, whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration increased from 0·1 ng/mL to between 0·2 ng/mL and 2·0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were assigned through central randomisation (1:1) to short-term androgen suppression (subcutaneous injection of 10·8 mg goserelin on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later) plus radiotherapy (3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy of 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy alone. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method (block sizes of two and four) according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This post-hoc one-shot data collection done 4 years after last data cutoff included patients who were alive at the time of the primary analysis and updated long-term patient status by including dates for first local progression, metastatic disease diagnosis, or death (if any of these had occurred) or the date of the last tumour evaluation or last PSA measurement. Survival at 120 months was reported. Late serious adverse effects were assessed. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00423475. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. At the time of data cutoff (March 12, 2019), the median follow-up was 112 months (IQR 102-123). The 120-month progression-free survival was 64% (95% CI 58-69) for patients treated with radiotherapy plus goserelin and 49% (43-54) for patients treated with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0·54, 0·43-0·68; stratified log-rank test p<0·0001). Two cases of secondary cancer occurred since the primary analysis, but were not considered to be treatment related. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: The 120-month progression-free survival confirmed the results from the primary analysis. Salvage radiotherapy combined with short-term androgen suppression significantly reduced risk of biochemical or clinical progression and death compared with salvage radiotherapy alone. The results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial confirm the efficacy of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy as salvage treatment in patients with increasing PSA concentration after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. FUNDING: The French Health ministry, AstraZeneca, la Ligue Contre le Cancer, and La Ligue de Haute-Savoie.

Effect of Adding Docetaxel to Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer With Rising Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels After Primary Local Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel is the standard of care in hormone-naive metastatic prostate cancer but is of uncertain benefit in a nonmetastatic, high-risk prostate cancer setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefit of ADT plus docetaxel in patients presenting with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after primary local therapy and high-risk factors but no evidence of metastatic disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, phase 3, randomized superiority trial comparing ADT plus docetaxel vs ADT alone enrolled patients from 28 centers in France between June 4, 2003, and September 25, 2007; final follow-up was conducted April 12, 2017, and analysis was performed May 2 to July 31, 2017. Patients had undergone primary local therapy for prostate cancer, were experiencing rising PSA levels, and were considered to be at high risk of metastatic disease. Stratification was by prior local therapy and PSA-level doubling time (≤6 vs >6 months), and intention-to-treat analysis was used. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ADT (1 year) plus docetaxel, 70 mg/m2 (every 3 weeks [6 cycles]), or ADT alone (1 year). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS). Secondary end points were PSA response, radiologic PFS, overall survival, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Overall, 254 patients were randomized (1:1) to the trial; median age, 64 years in the ADT plus docetaxel arm, 66 years in the ADT alone arm. At a median follow-up of 30.0 months, the median PSA-PFS was 20.3 (95% CI, 19.0-21.6) months in the ADT plus docetaxel arm vs 19.3 (95% CI, 18.2-20.8) months in the ADT alone arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.16; P = .31). At a median follow-up of 10.5 years, there was no significant between-arm difference in radiologic PFS (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.43; P = .88). Overall survival data were not mature. The most common grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxic effects in the ADT plus docetaxel arm were neutropenia (60 of 125 patients [48.0%]), febrile neutropenia (10 [8.0%]), and thrombocytopenia (4 [3.0%]). There was no significant between-arm difference in overall quality of life. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Compared with ADT alone, combined ADT plus docetaxel therapy with curative intent did not significantly improve PSA-PFS in patients with high-risk prostate cancer and rising PSA levels and no evidence of metastatic disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: French Health Products Safety Agency identifier: 030591; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00764166.

Early Toxicity of a Phase 2 Trial of Combined Salvage Radiation Therapy and Hormone Therapy in Oligometastatic Pelvic Node Relapses of Prostate Cancer (OLIGOPELVIS GETUG P07).

PURPOSE: Limited pelvic nodal relapse of prostatic cancer is a paramount challenge for locoregional salvage treatments. Salvage whole pelvis radiation therapy as considered in the BLINDED trial is an attractive option, but there are concerns about its toxicity. This article describes early toxicity with the technique. METHODS AND MATERIALS: BLINDED was a prospective multicenter phase 2 trial investigating high-dose salvage pelvic irradiation with an additional dose to the fluorocholine-based positron emission tomography-positive pelvic lymph nodes, combined with 6-month androgen blockade. The prescribed dose was 54 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions with up to 66 Gy in 2.2 Gy fractions to the pathologic pelvic lymph nodes. Early toxicity was defined as toxicity until 1 year after radiation therapy. Patients quality of life was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaires (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25). RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were recruited in 15 French radiation oncology departments between August 2014 and July 2016. Seven were excluded before treatment because of violation of the inclusion criteria. The intention-to-treat analysis therefore included 67 patients. Half had received prior prostatic irradiation. Median age was 67.7 ± 6.5 years. Grade 2 acute urinary toxicity was observed in 9 of 67 patients (13.4%), and grade 2 1-year toxicity occurred in 4 of 67 patients (6%). Three patients (4.4%) had grade 3 urinary toxicity. Grade 2 acute digestive toxicity was observed in 10 of 67 patients (14.9%), and grade 2 1-year toxicity occurred in 4 of 67 patients (6%). Patients with prior prostate bed irradiation did not exhibit increased urinary or digestive toxicity. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaire scores at 1 year did not worsen significantly. CONCLUSIONS: The acute and 1-year toxicity of the BLINDED protocol was satisfactory, even in patients with a history of prostatic irradiation.

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.

Stereotactic radiation therapy in the strategy of treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A study of the Getug group.

BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is usually considered radioresistant, but stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) may increase local disease control. This study aimed to assess the benefit of SRT in the management of metastatic RCC patients. METHODS: Data of all RCC patients who received SRT between 2008 and 2015 with curative intent were retrospectively collected in six French referral centres. Local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), time to systemic therapy (TTS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-eight patients treated with SRT for 252 RCC metastases (brain [n = 120]; spine [n = 75]; and others [n = 57]) were recensed. SRT was performed for oligoprogressive disease (101 patients), oligometastatic disease (80 patients) or residual tumour after a partial response to systemic treatment (7 patients). The median biologically effective dose was 78 Gy. For the whole population, local control rates at 6, 12 and 24 months were 87.5%, 82.9% and 77.6%, respectively; median PFS, LRFS, TTS and OS were 8.5, 23.2, 13.2 and 29.2 months, respectively. Among patients treated for oligoprogressive/oligometastatic disease, the median PFS, TTS, and OS were 8.6/7.6, 10.5/14.2 and 23.2/33.9 months, respectively. Among the 7 patients treated with SRT after partial response to systemic treatment, no relapse occurred for 3 of them after a median follow-up of 22 months. Acute and late severe toxicities were noted in 5 (2.6%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: SRT is effective and safe for oligometastatic and oligoprogressive RCC patients and may delay introduction or change of systemic therapy.

Impact of adjuvant hormonotherapy on radiation-induced breast fibrosis according to the individual radiosensitivity: results of a multicenter prospective French trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate risk of severe breast fibrosis occurrence in patients treated by breast-conserving surgery, adjuvant radiotherapy and hormonotherapy (HT) according to individual radiosensitivity (RILA assay). RESULTS: HT- and RILAhigh were the two independent factors associated with improved breast-fibrosis free survival (BFFS). BFFS rate at 36 months was lower in patients with RILAlow and HT+ than in patients with RILAhigh and HT- (75.8% and 100%, respectively; p = 0.004, hazard ratio 5.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-19.1]). Conversely, BFFS at 36 months was comparable in patients with RILAhigh and HT+ and in patients with RILAlow and HT- (89.8% and 93.5%, respectively; p = 0.39, hazard ratio 1.7 [95% CI 0.51-5.65]), showing that these two parameters influenced independently the occurrence of severe breast fibrosis. BFFS rate was not affected by the HT type (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor) and timing (concomitant or sequential with radiotherapy). CONCLUSIONS: HT and RILA score independently influenced BFFS rate at 36 months. Patients with RILAhigh and HT- presented an excellent BFFS at 36 months (100%). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Breast Fibrosis-Free Survival (BFFS) rate was assessed relative to RILA categories and to adjuvant HT use (HT+ and HT-, respectively) in a prospective multicentre study (NCT00893035) which enrolled 502 breast cancer patients (456 evaluable patients). Breast fibrosis was recorded according to CTCAE v3.0 grading scale; RILA score was defined according to two categories (<12%: RILAlow; ≥12%: RILAhigh).

Performance of Four Frailty Classifications in Older Patients With Cancer: Prospective Elderly Cancer Patients Cohort Study.

Purpose Frailty classifications of older patients with cancer have been developed to assist physicians in selecting cancer treatments and geriatric interventions. They have not been compared, and their performance in predicting outcomes has not been assessed. Our objectives were to assess agreement among four classifications and to compare their predictive performance in a large cohort of in- and outpatients with various cancers. Patients and Methods We prospectively included 1,021 patients age 70 years or older who had solid or hematologic malignancies and underwent a geriatric assessment in one of two French teaching hospitals between 2007 and 2012. Among them, 763 were assessed using four classifications: Balducci, International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) 1, SIOG2, and a latent class typology. Agreement was assessed using the κ statistic. Outcomes were 1-year mortality and 6-month unscheduled admissions. Results All four classifications had good discrimination for 1-year mortality (C-index ≥ 0.70); discrimination was best with SIOG1. For 6-month unscheduled admissions, discrimination was good with all four classifications (C-index ≥ 0.70). For classification into three (fit, vulnerable, or frail) or two categories (fit v vulnerable or frail and fit or vulnerable v frail), agreement among the four classifications ranged from very poor (κ ≤ 0.20) to good (0.60 < κ ≤ 0.80). Agreement was best between SIOG1 and the latent class typology and between SIOG1 and Balducci. Conclusion These four frailty classifications have good prognostic performance among older in- and outpatients with various cancers. They may prove useful in decision making about cancer treatments and geriatric interventions and/or in stratifying older patients with cancer in clinical trials.

Is There a Role for Pelvic Irradiation in Localized Prostate Adenocarcinoma? Update of the Long-Term Survival Results of the GETUG-01 Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: To report the long-term results of the French Genitourinary Study Group (GETUG)-01 study in terms of event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) and assess the potential interaction between hormonotherapy and pelvic nodes irradiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 1998 and June 2004, 446 patients with T1b-T3, N0pNx, M0 prostate carcinoma were randomly assigned to either pelvic nodes and prostate or prostate-only radiation therapy. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: "low risk" (T1-T2 and Gleason score 6 and prostate-specific antigen <3× the upper normal limit of the laboratory) (92 patients) versus "high risk" (T3 or Gleason score >6 or prostate-specific antigen >3× the upper normal limit of the laboratory). Short-term 6-month neoadjuvant and concomitant hormonal therapy was allowed only for high-risk patients. Radiation therapy was delivered with a 3-dimensional conformal technique, using a 4-field technique for the pelvic volume (46 Gy). The total dose recommended to the prostate moved from 66 Gy to 70 Gy during the course of the study. Criteria for EFS included biologic prostate-specific antigen recurrences and/or a local or metastatic progression. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 11.4 years, the 10-year OS and EFS were similar in the 2 treatment arms. A higher but nonsignificant EFS was observed in the low-risk subgroup in favor of pelvic nodes radiation therapy (77.2% vs 62.5%; P=.18). A post hoc subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit of pelvic irradiation when the risk of lymph node involvement was <15% (Roach formula). This benefit seemed to be limited to patients who did not receive hormonal therapy. CONCLUSION: Pelvic nodes irradiation did not statistically improve EFS or OS in the whole population but may be beneficial in selected low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with exclusive radiation therapy.

Salvage radiotherapy with or without short-term hormone therapy for rising prostate-specific antigen concentration after radical prostatectomy (GETUG-AFU 16): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: How best to treat rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration after radical prostatectomy is an urgent clinical question. Salvage radiotherapy delays the need for more aggressive treatment such as long-term androgen suppression, but fewer than half of patients benefit from it. We aimed to establish the effect of adding short-term androgen suppression at the time of salvage radiotherapy on biochemical outcome and overall survival in men with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, was done in 43 French study centres. We enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) who had received previous treatment for a histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen deprivation therapy or pelvic radiotherapy), and who had stage pT2, pT3, or pT4a (bladder neck involvement only) in patients who had rising PSA of 0·2 to less than 2·0 µg/L following radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally via an interactive web response system to standard salvage radiotherapy (three-dimensional [3D] conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy, of 66 Gy in 33 fractions 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy plus short-term androgen suppression using 10·8 mg goserelin by subcutaneous injection on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423475. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. Patients assigned to radiotherapy plus goserelin were significantly more likely than patients in the radiotherapy alone group to be free of biochemical progression or clinical progression at 5 years (80% [95% CI 75-84] vs 62% [57-67]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). No additional late adverse events occurred in patients receiving short-term androgen suppression compared with those who received radiotherapy alone. The most frequently occuring acute adverse events related to goserelin were hot flushes, sweating, or both (30 [8%] of 366 patients had a grade 2 or worse event; 30 patients [8%] had hot flushes and five patients [1%] had sweating in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group vs none of 372 patients in the radiotherapy alone group). Three (8%) of 366 patients had grade 3 or worse hot flushes and one patient had grade 3 or worse sweating in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group versus none of 372 patients in the radiotherapy alone group. The most common late adverse events of grade 3 or worse were genitourinary events (29 [8%] in the radiotherapy alone group vs 26 [7%] in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group) and sexual disorders (20 [5%] vs 30 [8%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Adding short-term androgen suppression to salvage radiotherapy benefits men who have had radical prostatectomy and whose PSA rises after a postsurgical period when it is undetectable. Radiotherapy combined with short-term androgen suppression could be considered as a reasonable option in this population. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health, AstraZeneca, and La Ligue Contre le Cancer.

Four Distinct Health Profiles in Older Patients With Cancer: Latent Class Analysis of the Prospective ELCAPA Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have evaluated the independent prognostic value of impairments in single geriatric-assessment (GA) components in elderly cancer patients. None identified homogeneous subgroups. Our aims were to identify such subgroups based on combinations of GA components and to assess their associations with treatment decisions, admission, and death. METHODS: We prospectively included 1,021 patients aged ≥70 years who had solid or hematologic malignancies and who underwent a GA in one of two French teaching hospitals. Two geriatricians independently selected candidate GA parameters for latent class analysis, which was then performed on the 821 cases without missing data. Age, gender, tumor site, metastatic status, and inpatient versus outpatient status were used as active covariates and predictors of class membership. Outcomes were cancer treatment decisions, overall 1-year mortality, and 6-month unscheduled admissions. Sensitivity analyses were performed on the overall population of 1,021 patients and on 375 newly enrolled patients. RESULTS: We identified four classes: relatively healthy (LC1, 28%), malnourished (LC2, 36%), cognitive and mood impaired (LC3, 15%), and globally impaired (LC4, 21%). Tumor site, metastatic status, age, and in/outpatient status independently predicted class membership (p < .001). In adjusted pairwise comparisons, compared to LC1, the three other LCs were associated with higher risks of palliative treatment, death, and unscheduled admission (p ≤ .05). LC4 was associated with 1-year mortality and palliative treatment compared to LC2 and LC3 (p ≤ .05). CONCLUSION: We identified four health profiles that may help physicians select cancer treatments and geriatric interventions. Researchers may find these profiles useful for stratifying patients in clinical trials.

Geriatric assessment findings independently associated with clinical depression in 1092 older patients with cancer: the ELCAPA Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess the prevalence and associated factors of clinical depression in older patients with cancer. METHODS: We studied a prospective cohort of cancer patients aged ≥ 70 years and referred to geriatric oncology clinics between 2007 and 2012. A multidimensional geriatric assessment was performed before choosing the cancer-treatment strategy. Clinical depression was diagnosed by senior geriatricians by a semi-structured interview. It encompassed criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (fourth edition) and of the International Classification of Diseases (10th edition). Multivariate logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: Of 1121 consecutive patients, 1092 had available data (mean age, 80.4 years; women, 48.8%; metastases, 51.3%; cancer location: colorectal 21.1%, breast 16.8%, kidney, bladder or urinary tract 14.0%, and prostate 11.4%). The overall prevalence of clinical depression was 28.4% (95% confidence interval, 25.7-31.2). Factors independently associated with clinical depression by multivariate analysis adjusting for all following factors plus gender, and metastasis were impaired mobility (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.35; 1.59-3.46), impaired functional status defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status ≥ 2 (aOR, 2.39; 1.66-3.43) or as activities of daily living < 6 (aOR, 2.43; 1.73-3.41), inpatient status (aOR, 1.68; 1.20-2.37), inadequate social support (aOR, 1.66; 1.16-2.37), cognitive impairment (aOR, 1.76; 1.24-2.49), polypharmacy defined as five or more non-antidepressant drugs (aOR, 1.65; 1.14-2.38), multimorbidity (aOR additional CIRS-G point , 1.08; 1.04-1.12), and cancer-related pain (aOR, 1.76; 1.26-2.46). CONCLUSION: In older patients with as-yet untreated cancer at various sites and stages, clinical depression was highly prevalent. Clinical depression was independently associated with several geriatric assessment findings (impaired mobility and function, inadequate social support, cognitive impairment, polypharmacy, and multimorbidity) independently from gender, tumor site, and metastatic status.

Definition of lymph node areas for radiotherapy of prostate cancer: A critical literature review by the French Genito-Urinary Group and the French Association of Urology (GETUG-AFU).

PURPOSE: Recommendations for pelvic lymph node (LN) contouring rely on relatively dated studies that defined the Clinical Target Volume (CTV) of interest proposed for radiotherapy. The aim of this article was to review these recommendations with a critical analysis of published data on prostate cancer drainage. METHODS: We performed a review of data on LN drainage in prostate cancer, based on anatomy texts and studies on lymphography, pelvic LN dissections, sentinel LN techniques, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and functional imaging. We also present the GETUG experts' opinion, based on a survey on nodal CTV definition. RESULTS: For lymphatic drainage of prostate cancers, pelvic LN areas classically considered are: distal common iliac, external iliac, internal iliac and obturator regions. Recently published data allow a mapping of sites at risk of pathological LN invasion. In 10-70% of cases, these sites are not included in the pelvic LN CTVs defined in consensuses. In accordance with other cooperative groups, the GETUG experts' survey showed that proximal common iliac, para-aortic, para-rectal and pre-sacral regions could include sites at risk of invasion in extended LN CTV, but were not considered in CTV contouring common practice. New recommendations are needed for nodal CTV in radiotherapy of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of the efficacy and safety of LN radiotherapy is still the subject of several randomised studies. Whether or not meaningful results are obtained depends directly on the quality and homogeneity of the data analysed. A new consensus for delineation of LN regions appears necessary.

Androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel and estramustine versus androgen deprivation therapy alone for high-risk localised prostate cancer (GETUG 12): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Early risk-stratified chemotherapy is a standard treatment for breast, colorectal, and lung cancers, but not for high-risk localised prostate cancer. Combined docetaxel and estramustine improves survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. We assessed the effects of combined docetaxel and estramustine on relapse in patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer. METHODS: We did this randomised phase 3 trial at 26 hospitals in France. We enrolled patients with treatment-naive prostate cancer and at least one risk factor (ie, stage T3-T4 disease, Gleason score of ≥8, prostate-specific antigen concentration >20 ng/mL, or pathological node-positive). All patients underwent a staging pelvic lymph node dissection. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; goserelin 10·8 mg every 3 months for 3 years) plus four cycles of docetaxel on day 2 at a dose of 70 mg/m(2) and estramustine 10 mg/kg per day on days 1-5, every 3 weeks, or ADT only. The randomisation was done centrally by computer, stratified by risk factor. Local treatment was administered at 3 months. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Follow-up for other endpoints is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00055731. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 207 patients to the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group and 206 to the ADT only group. Median follow-up was 8·8 years (IQR 8·1-9·7). 88 (43%) of 207 patients in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group had an event (relapse or death) versus 111 (54%) of 206 in the ADT only group. 8-year relapse-free survival was 62% (95% CI 55-69) in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group versus 50% (44-57) in the ADT only group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·54-0·94, p=0·017). Of patients who were treated with radiotherapy and had data available, 31 (21%) of 151 in the ADT plus docetaxel and estramustine group versus 26 (18%) of 143 in the ADT only group reported a grade 2 or higher long-term side-effect (p=0·61). We recorded no excess second cancers (26 [13%] of 207 vs 22 [11%] of 206; p=0·57), and there were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Docetaxel-based chemotherapy improves relapse-free survival in patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to assess whether this benefit translates into improved metastasis-free survival and overall survival. FUNDING: Ligue Contre le Cancer, Sanofi-Aventis, AstraZeneca, Institut National du Cancer.

Predictors of 1-Year Mortality in a Prospective Cohort of Elderly Patients With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mortality prediction is crucial to select the optimal treatment in elderly cancer patients. Our objective was to identify cancer-related factors and Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) findings associated with 1-year mortality in elderly inpatients and outpatients with cancer. METHODS: We prospectively included patients aged ≥70 years who had solid or hematologic malignancies and in whom the CGA was performed by geriatricians in two French teaching hospitals. We identified independent predictors of 1-year mortality after study inclusion, using multivariate Cox models stratified on inpatient/outpatient status. We built three multivariate Cox models, since strong correlations linked activities of daily living (ADL), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), and timed get-up-and-go test (GUG) results; and since physicians' preferences for these three assessments vary. A sensitivity analysis was performed using multiple imputation. RESULTS: Of the 993 patients (mean age, 80.2 years; 51.2% men), 58.2% were outpatients and 46% had metastatic disease. Colorectal cancer was the most common malignancy (21.4%). Mortality rates after 6 and 12 months were 30.1% and 41.2%, respectively. In all models, tumor site and metastatic status (p < .001), age >80 years (p < .05), higher number of severe comorbidities (p < .05), and malnutrition (p < .001) were associated with death independently from impaired ECOG-PS (p < .001), ADL (p < .001), and GUG (p < .001). The adverse effect of metastatic status differed significantly across tumor sites, being greatest for breast and prostate cancer (p < .001). Multiple imputation produced similar results. CONCLUSION: The predictors of 1-year mortality identified in our study may help physicians select the optimal cancer-treatment strategy in elderly patients.

Radiation-induced CD8 T-lymphocyte Apoptosis as a Predictor of Breast Fibrosis After Radiotherapy: Results of the Prospective Multicenter French Trial.

BACKGROUND: Monocentric cohorts suggested that radiation-induced CD8 T-lymphocyte apoptosis (RILA) can predict late toxicity after curative intent radiotherapy (RT). We assessed the role of RILA as a predictor of breast fibrosis (bf +) after adjuvant breast RT in a prospective multicenter trial. METHODS: A total of 502 breast-cancer patients (pts) treated by conservative surgery and adjuvant RT were recruited at ten centers. RILA was assessed before RT by flow cytometry. Impact of RILA on bf + (primary endpoint) or relapse was assessed using a competing risk method. Receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were also performed in intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00893035 and final analyses are presented here. FINDINGS: Four hundred and fifty-six pts (90.8%) were included in the final analysis. One hundred and eight pts (23.7%) received whole breast and node irradiation. A boost dose of 10-16 Gy was delivered in 449 pts (98.5%). Adjuvant hormonotherapy was administered to 349 pts (76.5%). With a median follow-up of 38.6 months, grade ≥ 2 bf + was observed in 64 pts (14%). A decreased incidence of grade ≥ 2 bf + was observed for increasing values of RILA (p = 0.012). No grade 3 bf + was observed for patients with RILA ≥ 12%. The area under the ROC curve was 0.62. For cut-off values of RILA ≥ 20% and < 12%, sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 34%, 56% and 67%, respectively. Negative predictive value for grade ≥ 2 bf + was equal to 91% for RILA ≥ 20% and positive predictive value was equal to 22% for RILA < 12% where the overall prevalence of grade ≥ 2 bf + was estimated at 14%. A significant decrease in the risk of grade ≥ 2 bf + was found if patients had no adjuvant hormonotherapy (sHR = 0.31, p = 0.007) and presented a RILA ≥ 12% (sHR = 0.45, p = 0.002). INTERPRETATION: RILA significantly predicts the risk of breast fibrosis. This study validates the use of RILA as a rapid screening test before RT delivery and will change definitely our daily clinical practice in radiation oncology. FUNDING: The French National Cancer Institute (INCa) through the "Program Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (PHRC)".