Dataset Information

Prostate-Specific Antigen 5 Years following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: An Ablative Procedure?

ABSTRACT: Our previous work on early PSA kinetics following prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) demonstrated that an initial rapid and then slow PSA decline may result in very low PSA nadirs. This retrospective study sought to evaluate the PSA nadir 5 years following SBRT for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa).65 low- and 80 intermediate-risk PCa patients were treated definitively with SBRT to 35-37.5 Gy in 5 fractions at Georgetown University Hospital between January 2008 and October 2011. Patients who received androgen deprivation therapy were excluded from this study. Biochemical relapse was defined as a PSA rise >2 ng/ml above the nadir and analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The PSA nadir was defined as the lowest PSA value prior to biochemical relapse or as the lowest value recorded during follow-up. Prostate ablation was defined as a PSA nadir <0.2 ng/ml. Univariate logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate relevant variables on the likelihood of achieving a PSA nadir <0.2 ng/ml.The median age at the start of SBRT was 72 years. These patients had a median prostate volume of 36 cc with a median 25% of total cores involved. At a median follow-up of 5.6 years, 86 and 37% of patients achieved a PSA nadir ≤0.5 and <0.2 ng/ml, respectively. The median time to PSA nadir was 36 months. Two low and seven intermediate risk patients experienced a biochemical relapse. Regardless of the PSA outcome, the median PSA nadir for all patients was 0.2 ng/ml. The 5-year biochemical relapse free survival (bRFS) rate for low- and intermediate-risk patients was 98.5 and 95%, respectively. Initial PSA (p = 0.024) and a lower testosterone at the time of the PSA nadir (p = 0.049) were found to be significant predictors of achieving a PSA nadir <0.2 ng/ml.SBRT for low- and intermediate-risk PCa is a convenient treatment option with low PSA nadirs and a high rate of early bRFS. Fewer than 40% of patients, however, achieved an ablative PSA nadir. Thus, the role of further dose escalation is an area of active investigation.

SUBMITTER: Kataria S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5522851 | biostudies-other | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Prostate is the most common non-cutaneous cancer diagnosed among men in North America. Fortunately most prostate cancers are screen detected and non-metastatic on diagnosis. Treatment options for men with localized prostate cancer include surgery ± postoperative radiation or radiation ± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Brachytherapy ± external beam radiation treatment (EBRT) appears to have superior long-term disease control over EBRT alone likely because of higher biologic effective dose delivered. Stereotactic ablative body radiation (SABR) is a novel, non-invasive, high-precision EBRT technique that allows safe delivery of biologic doses similar to brachytherapy with similar or lower side effects [measured using toxicity or quality of life (QOL) scales]. Efficacy for SABR appears to be similar to brachytherapy including positive biopsy rates 2-3 years post treatment, biochemical failure (BF) rates out to 10-year and incidence of metastases. SABR dose escalation reduces biopsy positivity and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadirs but increases genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity-no effect on BF has been realized yet. The overall treatment time (OTT) varies in many protocols. Phase 2 randomized data shows that QOL is better in the acute setting with a weekly course of treatment compared to an every other day treatment regimen with no difference in late setting. Follow-up data are immature and likely underpowered to determine efficacy differences. SABR is cheaper and uses less resource than any other radiation technique. Given the healthcare resource challenges (including financial resources), SABR would be a welcomed addition if studies show non-inferiority to other radiation techniques. For patients with de novo or metastatic disease on relapse, there is much enthusiasm regarding the use of SABR in the setting of oligometastatic prostate cancer. SABR appears to be feasible to deliver, well tolerated and may delay the next line of therapy. However, until adequately powered randomized studies confirm a benefit, such an approach cannot be considered standard of care treatment at this time. Enrollment of eligible prostate cancer patients onto SABR clinical trials should be encouraged.

Project description:PurposeTo establish the safety and efficacy of gantry-mounted linear accelerator-based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.MethodsWe pooled 921 patients enrolled on 7 single-institution prospective phase II trials of gantry-based SBRT from 2006 to 2017. The cumulative incidences of biochemical recurrence (defined by the Phoenix definition) and physician-scored genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities (defined per the original trials using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were estimated using a competing risk framework. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between late toxicity and prespecified covariates: biologically effective dose, every other day versus weekly fractionation, intrafractional motion monitoring, and acute toxicity.ResultsMedian follow-up was 3.1 years (range, 0.5-10.8 years). In addition, 505 (54.8%) patients had low-risk disease, 236 (25.6%) had favorable intermediate-risk disease, and 180 (19.5%) had unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Intrafractional motion monitoring was performed in 78.0% of patients. The 3-year cumulative incidence of biochemical recurrence was 0.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-1.7%), 2.2% (95% CI, 0-4.3%), and 5.1% (95% CI, 1.0-9.2%) for low-, favorable intermediate-, and unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Acute grade ≥2 GU and GI toxicity occurred in 14.5% and 4.6% of patients, respectively. Three-year cumulative incidence estimates of late grade 2 GU and GI toxicity were 4.1% (95% CI, 2.6-5.5%) and 1.3% (95% CI, 0.5-2.1%), respectively, with late grade ≥3 GU and GI toxicity estimates of 0.7% (95% CI, 0.1-1.3%) and 0.4% (95% CI, 0-0.8%), respectively. The only identified significant predictors of late grade ≥2 toxicity were acute grade ≥2 toxicity (P < .001) and weekly fractionation (P < .01), although only 12.4% of patients were treated weekly.ConclusionsGantry-based SBRT for prostate cancer is associated with a favorable safety and efficacy profile, despite variable intrafractional motion management techniques. These findings suggest that multiple treatment platforms can be used to safely deliver prostate SBRT.

Project description:To investigate boosting dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs) in the context of stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) and to examine the impact on tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP).Ten prostate datasets were selected. DILs were defined using T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Four plans were produced for each dataset: (1) no boost to DILs; (2) boost to DILs, no seminal vesicles in prescription; (3) boost to DILs, proximal seminal vesicles (proxSV) prescribed intermediate dose; and (4) boost to DILs, proxSV prescribed higher dose. The prostate planning target volume (PTV) prescription was 42.7 Gy in 7 fractions. DILs were initially prescribed 115% of the PTV(Prostate) prescription, and PTV(DIL) prescriptions were increased in 5% increments until organ-at-risk constraints were reached. TCP and NTCP calculations used the LQ-Poisson Marsden, and Lyman-Kutcher-Burman models respectively.When treating the prostate alone, the median PTV(DIL) prescription was 125% (range: 110%-140%) of the PTV(Prostate) prescription. Median PTV(DIL) D50% was 55.1 Gy (range: 49.6-62.6 Gy). The same PTV(DIL) prescriptions and similar PTV(DIL) median doses were possible when including the proxSV within the prescription. TCP depended on prostate ?/? ratio and was highest with an ?/? ratio = 1.5 Gy, where the additional TCP benefit of DIL boosting was least. Rectal NTCP increased with DIL boosting and was considered unacceptably high in 5 cases, which, when replanned with an emphasis on reducing maximum dose to 0.5 cm(3) of rectum (Dmax(0.5cc)), as well as meeting existing constraints, resulted in considerable rectal NTCP reductions.Boosting DILs in the context of SABR is technically feasible but should be approached with caution. If this therapy is adopted, strict rectal constraints are required including Dmax(0.5cc). If the ?/? ratio of prostate cancer is 1.5 Gy or less, then high TCP and low NTCP can be achieved by prescribing SABR to the whole prostate, without the need for DIL boosting.

Dataset Information

Prostate-Specific Antigen 5 Years following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: An Ablative Procedure?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets