Back to Authors

Stish, B.J.

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 11

Biochemical Recurrence Irradiation or Observation ( BRIO ) in patients with prostate cancer: protocol for a randomised control trial
Wei, Nancy, Phillips, Ryan M., Kwon, Eugene, Stish, B.J., Ehman, Eric C. , Lucien, Fabrice, O'Byrne, Jamie, Bobek, Olivia , Andrews, Jack R. , Boorjian, S., Orme, Jacob J., Sharma, Vidit, Wei, Nancy , Wei, Nancy , Stish, Brad J, Lucien, Fabrice , Bobek, Olivia , Lucien, Fabrice , Shi, Qian , Park, Sean S. , Orme, Jacob J. , Sharma, Vidit

BJU International | May 12, 2026 | Volume: 138 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 403-408

10.1111/bju.70305 Get It

Background The optimal management of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) remains controversial, particularly in the absence of clinical or radiographic evidence of disease. Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) remains standard of care, but it is unclear whether SRT benefits patients when modern imaging with a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and prostate‐specific membrane antigen‐positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA‐PET/CT) are negative for local recurrence. Retrospective data comparing SRT to observation for such patients is fraught with selection bias, underscoring the need for a prospective randomised controlled trial. Study Design and Methods The Biochemical Recurrence Irradiation or Observation (BRIO) is a randomised study under the DIVINE trial framework (NCT06378866) enrolling men with BCR (prostate‐specific antigen [PSA] level ≥0.2, up to 1.5 ng/mL) after RP with no radiographic evidence of recurrence on mpMRI and PSMA‐PET/CT. Major inclusion criteria include age ≥18 years, biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after RP with a PSA level between 0.2 and 1.5 ng/mL, and no local or metastatic recurrence on imaging. A total of 312 patients will be enrolled. Participants are randomised 1:1 to standard‐of‐care SRT followed by surveillance (Group A), or initial observation with subsequent image‐guided therapy at radiographic progression (Group B). Based on historical analysis, a total of 30 metastasis events provides 80% power to detect a significant improvement (hazard ratio 0.5 corresponding to a 5‐year metastasis‐free proportion of 80.7% in the control group and 89.8% in the experimental group with one‐sided type I error rate of 0.15). All participants undergo baseline blood collection to measure prostate cancer‐extracellular vesicles and cell‐free DNA for biomarker development. Participants are followed in a 16‐week cycle with serial PSA measurements, repeat imaging if PSA doubles, safety assessment, and patient‐reported outcomes. Endpoints The primary endpoint is distant recurrence‐free survival at 5‐years using a 12‐month landmark to mitigate bias arising from differing assessment schedules for patients receiving optional 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy. Key secondary outcomes include time to hormone therapy, quality of life measures, adverse effects, and novel blood and urine biomarkers. Conclusion The BRIO study will clarify the clinical benefit of immediate SRT vs observation with image‐guided intervention in mpMRI and PET‐negative BCR after RP.
Quantifying the benefit of salvage radiation versus surveillance for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.
Boorjian, Stephen A. , Schulte, Phillip J. , O'Byrne, Jamie T, Tollefson, Matthew K. , Frank, Igor, Khanna, Abhinav, Phillips, Ryan , Stish, B.J., Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Sharma, Vidit , Basourakos, Spyridon P. , Henning, Grant , O'Byrne, Jamie T

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 18, 2025 | Volume: 43 | Issue: 5_suppl | Pages: 382-382

10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.382 Get It

382 Background: The natural history of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is heterogeneous, with most patients not progressing to metastasis. Determining the impact and optimal timing of salvage radiation therapy (SRT) remains challenging, particularly in the absence of prospective randomized trials with a surveillance control arm. Our objective isto quantify the oncologic benefit of SRT among men with BCR after RP. Methods: Patients who underwent RP at Mayo Clinic between 1990 and 2017 and developed BCR (PSA≥0.20ng/mL) were included. Patients treated with SRT were compared to those managed with surveillance using risk-set matching with time-dependent propensity scores, accounting for covariates at BCR and post-BCR. The primary outcome was metastases, analyzed via Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models. The number needed to treat (NNT) with SRT to prevent progression was calculated using regression outputs at 5 and 15 years post-BCR. Interaction analyses identified factors modifying SRT’s effect on metastasis. Results: Of 6,881 patients with BCR, 2,109 received SRT. At a median follow-up of 10.2 years, 1,147 patients with BCR developed metastases. After 1:1 matching, SRT was associated with lower metastasis risk than surveillance at 5 years (12.7% vs 19.3%, p<0.0001) and 15 years (28.6% vs. 31.5%, p<0.001). SRT was independently associated with decreased metastasis risk (HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.63–0.90, p=0.002) on multivariable analysis, translating to NNT of 23 and 15 at 5 and 15 years, respectively (Table). Additionally, we noted a significant interaction between PSA at SRT and the association of SRT with metastasis (p-interaction=0.02), such that the reduction in metastatic progression with SRT vs. surveillance was restricted to the cohort of patients who received SRT for PSA>0.40ng/mL (HR 0.66, 95%CI 0.54–0.80, p<0.001). Conclusions: Most patients with BCR post-RP do not develop metastases. Indeed, the NNT with SRT to reduce metastasis versus surveillance indicates a generally indolent disease course. Further, the lack of a significant association of SRT with reduction of metastases in patients with a PSA≤0.40ng/mL underscores the importance of careful patient selection when considering early SRT. Our data establish the rationale for a randomized trial comparing early SRT versus surveillance for appropriately selected patients with BCR after RP. Hazard ratios of SRT after matching by propensity scores, and number needed to treat for systemic progression, prostate cancer specific mortality and overall mortality. DiseaseOutcome Hazard Ratio(95% CI) P value Number Needed to Treat* (95% CI) 5 years 15 years Systemic progression 0.75(0.63 – 0.90) 0.002 23(17 – 41) 15(11 – 27) Prostate cancer mortality 0.81 (0.64 – 1.03) 0.086 103(62 – 494) 26(15 – 124) Overall mortality 0.79 (0.70 – 0.89) 0.0001 38(29 – 62) 12(9 – 20) *Number needed to treat (NNT) calculated using regression based absolute differences in event free survival between salvage radiation therapy (SRT) and observation.
Safety evaluation of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) during lutetium-177-PSMA-617 (177Lu-PSMA-617) treatment for patients with metastatic prostate cancer.
Kessel, Adam , Muniz, Miguel, O'Byrne, J, Phillips, Ryan , Park, Sean Sunghun, Stish, B.J., Choo, Chunhee Richard, Merrell, Kenneth W. , Kwon, Eugene D., Orme, Jacob J. , Wilson, Jessica , O'Byrne, Jamie T, Davis, Brian J. , Johnson, Geoffrey B. , Quevedo, Fernando , Childs, Daniel S.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 18, 2025 | Volume: 43 | Issue: 5_suppl | Pages: 129-129

10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.129 Get It

129 Background: Few studies have explored the use of focal therapies to address select sites of resistant disease in men receiving 177-Lu-PSMA-617 for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Our institutional practice is to offer SBRT for patients with up to 5 sites of oligoprogression or non-responding lesions while undergoing 177Lu-PSMA-617 (every 6 weeks for 6 cycles total). This is determined by PSMA or choline PET imaging during the course of 177Lu-PSMA-617. Herein, we evaluated the safety of adding target SBRT during treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617. Methods: This retrospective single institution analysis was conducted via systematic chart review to evaluate for adverse events during or after treatment. Grading of treatment-related adverse events was conducted using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5.0 (CTCAE v5). Results: Thirty-one patients receiving 177Lu-PSMA-617 with 51 sites of oligoprogressive or non-responding metastatic disease were treated with SBRT. The median number of sites treated was 1 (range 1-4). Most patients received SBRT immediately after cycle 6 (32%) or after cycle 3 or 4 (42%). Bone was the most commonly treated site of disease (90%) with the majority (54%) of bone sites being spine or sacrum, followed by lymph nodes (10%). Ultimately, 84% of patients completed all 6 cycles of 177Lu-PSMA-617 (range 4-6). The median follow-up time was 19.1 months (IQR 15.5-22.4) after 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy start. A total of 2 patients experienced a pathologic fracture within the SBRT treatment field that could possibly be related to radiotherapy. One patient experienced a grade 2 neuropathy which may have been related to radiation therapy. Other potential adverse events are listed (Table). Conclusions: Our data demonstrates a low rate of significant toxicity with the use SBRT during treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617. Further study is indicated to determine the oncologic efficacy and potential late side effects of this treatment strategy. Adverse events. Event All Grades Grade > 3 Any Adverse Event 104 2 Anemia 29 (94%) 0 Low Platelets 11 (35.5%) 1 (3.2%) Any Pathologic Fracture 7 (22.5%) 1 (3.2%) Possible SBRT-related Pathologic Fracture 2 (6.5%) 1 (3.2%) Bone Pain Flare 3 (9.6%) 0 Neuropathy 1 (3.2%) 0
PSA dynamics: Enhancing predictive models in prostate cancer follow-up.
Ekama, Lydia, Osorio, Mariana Borras, Bogan, Aaron, Comstock, Bryce, Talom, Benjamin K., Weiskittel, Taylor M. , Griner, Dalton , Stish, B.J., Choo, Chunhee Richard, Phillips, Ryan, Pisansky, Thomas M. , Waddle, Mark R. , Namazi, Mohammad Javad , Davis, Brian J. , Ebner, Daniel, Routman, David M.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 18, 2025 | Volume: 43 | Issue: 5_suppl | Pages: 424-424

10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.424 Get It

424 Background: Advances in prostate cancer (PC) care have led to a 98% 10-year survival rate. Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) is the primary method of follow-up after definitive radiotherapy (RT), with benign PSA ‘bounce’ occurring in up to 30% of patients, causing uncertainty and anxiety. Distinguishing between PSA bounce and biochemical recurrence (BCR) remains challenging. The Phoenix Criteria is the standard definition of BCR since 2006, defined as PSA nadir + 2 ng/dl, but does not consider patient specific information. Our study aims to explore factors associated with bounce and BCR and develop a predictive tool to differentiate between these two events. Methods: PC patients who received RT at our institution between 2006 and 2022 were identified, including only patients with a PSA increase during follow-up. Exclusion criteria included palliative RT, prostatectomy, or insufficient follow-up information. Patients’ clinical data was collected, and PSA increase was classified as bounce or BCR. Variables were compared using Kruskal Wallis or Chi-square. Multivariate logistic regression was performed in the subset of patients with absolute PSA value >2 (n= 581). Results: Of 1783 patients reviewed due to PSA rise after treatment, 694 met the inclusion criteria. There were 213 (30.7%) with PSA bounce and 481 (69.3%) with recurrence. Prior to meeting the Phoenix Criteria, 20 (4.2%) had biopsy-proven recurrence and 18 (3.7%) imaging-proven recurrence. The median delta PSA was 0.8 ng/mL for bounce vs 5 ng/mL for recurrence (p<0.001). The median time from treatment to event was 14.4 months for bounce vs 45.3 months for BCR (p<0.001). Recurrence was significantly associated (p<0.001) with older age at diagnosis, N1 stage, higher risk category, Gleason score, and higher baseline PSA. In the subgroup of patients without ADT, recurrence was associated with a lower median first PSA post-RT (1.9 vs. 2.4, p=0.046) and a lower median nadir before event (0.6 vs. 1.8, p<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression achieved an accuracy of 0.94, with a sensitivity of 0.83, specificity of 0.98, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.97. Conclusions: Our results highlight significant differences in clinical factors between bounce and recurrence in post-RT patients. The multivariate logistic regression differentiated the events with 94% accuracy for patients with a rising PSA value >2 subgroup. We highlight the possible improvement that could be accomplished by personalizing a PSA threshold for recurrence versus the Phoenix definition. This tool offers patients and providers a highly specific tool to differentiate between PSA recurrence and bounce, and may reduce stress and unnecessary testing, or help diagnosis recurrence faster. Next steps include prospective validation of the model to assess the impact on clinical practice costs, patient experience, and cancer outcomes.
Alliance A222001: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled phase II study of oxybutynin versus placebo for the treatment of hot flashes in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy.
Stish, B.J., Mazza, Gina L. , Nauseef, Jones T. , Humeniuk, Michael, Tofthagen, Cindy , Pardo, D.A. Diaz, Chay, Christopher H., Huang, Andrew Jonathan, Naha, Kushal , Chow, Selina , Adams‐Campbell, Lucile L. , Novotny, Paul J. , Loprinzi, Charles L. , Tofthagen, Cindy S , Mazza, Gina L , Smith, Thomas J. , Tagawa, Scott T.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 5, 2024 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 17_suppl | Pages: LBA12004-LBA12004

10.1200/jco.2024.42.17_suppl.lba12004 Get It

LBA12004 Background: Hot flashes are among the most common adverse events impacting quality of life reported by patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. Oxybutynin is an effective therapy for reducing frequency and severity of hot flashes in women. Pilot information supports that this drug may also benefit men with hot flashes related to ADT. Methods: Patients with prostate cancer receiving a stable regimen of ADT with at least 28 hot flashes per week were randomized to receive either oral oxybutynin 2.5 mg twice a day, oxybutynin 5 mg twice a day, or matching placebo doses for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in patient-reported hot flash scores (determined by multiplying the number of hot flashes by the mean hot flash severity [grade 0: none, 1: mild, 2: moderate, 3: severe, and 4: very severe]) from baseline to 6 weeks, as measured by a daily hot flash diary. A total of 87 patients provided 76% power to reject the null hypothesis of no between-arm mean difference in hot flash score reduction from baseline to 6 weeks, when comparing each oxybutynin arm to the combined placebo arms. This was based on a two-sided contrast estimated from a generalized linear mixed model, α= 0.10, intraclass correlation of 0.50, population standardized mean difference of 0.50, and 10% missing data rate. Results: 88 patients were accrued between 10/28/21 and 12/02/23. Six patients cancelled before starting treatment and one was ineligible, leaving 81 analyzed patients with a median age of 68. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms with patients reporting an average of 10.15 (SD = 5.55) hot flashes per day and an average daily hot flash score of 18.23 (SD = 13.48) at enrollment. On average, patients on the placebo arm, low dose oxybutynin arm, and high dose oxybutynin arm had reductions of 2.15, 4.77, and 6.89 hot flashes/day, respectively. Compared to placebo arm patients, high dose oxybutynin arm patients had a greater reduction in hot flashes/day (p < 0.001), as did low dose oxybutynin arm patients (p = 0.02). Daily hot flash scores for the same three protocol arms reduced by an average of 4.85, 9.94, and 13.95 points, respectively. Compared to placebo arm patients, high dose oxybutynin arm patients had a greater reduction in daily hot flash scores (p = 0.002), as did low dose oxybutynin arm patients (p = 0.07). No treatment-related grade 3+ adverse events occurred. The most commonly reported oxybutynin-related grade 2 adverse event was dry mouth. Conclusions: Oxybutynin is superior to a placebo for the management of hot flashes in men associated with androgen deprivation therapy and appears to be well tolerated. Support: UG1CA189823; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT04600336 .
In-field recurrences in relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) bridged with radiation prior to CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CART).
Breen, William G. , Rule, William G., Stish, B.J., Bennani, Nabila Nora, Khurana, Arushi , Johnston, Patrick B. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Kharfan‐Dabaja, Mohamed A. , Peterson, Jennifer , Saifi, Omran , Lester, Scott C. , Rosenthal, Allison , Muñoz, Javier , Lin, Yi , Paludo, Jonas , Villasboas, José C. , Iqbal, Madiha , Moustafa, Muhamad Alhaj , Murthy, Hemant S. , Hoppe, Bradford S.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 6, 2022 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 7556-7556

10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.7556 Get It

7556 Background: The majority of R/R NHL progressions after CART involve pre-existing sites, suggesting a promising role for bridging radiotherapy (bRT). We assessed the local control rate of disease sites bridged with radiotherapy prior to CART and identified predictors of in-field recurrence. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 35 patients with aggressive B-cell NHL who received bRT between leukapheresis and CART infusion between 2018 and 2021 at a multi-site single institution. bRT local control rate (LC), calculated based on the total number of irradiated sites, was defined from bRT end date. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS) were defined from the date of CART infusion. In-field recurrence was defined as disease relapse occurring within the radiation planning target volume. Kaplan-Meier plots and cox regression modeling were used to estimate the desired output. Results: Median age of the cohort at time of CART infusion was 59 (range 19-73). The median equivalent 2 Gy dose (EQD2) administered was 23.3 Gy (range 4-41 Gy). The median time from end of bRT to CART infusion was 14 days (range 6-42). Five (14%) patients also received bridging chemotherapy with bRT. Among the 34 evaluable patients, 30 (88%) achieved an objective response (59% complete response and 29% partial response). At a median follow-up of 12 months, 1-year PFS was 48% and 1-year OS was 72%. No progression occurred beyond 240 days. On review of treatment plans and pre-treatment PET/CT scans, 59 sites were identified that received bRT prior to CART infusion. The median size and SUVmax of the irradiated sites were 8.7cm (range 1.5-22) and 13 (range 4-46), respectively. Of the 59 irradiated sites, 8 sites (13.6%) in 7 patients had in-field local recurrence, translating to 1-year LC of 84%. No in-field recurrence occurred beyond 180 days. Moreover, no local recurrence occurred in patients who received radiation to all known sites of active disease to EQD2> 30 Gy (n = 4 patients); these patients remained in remission except for 1 who experienced progression outside the bRT field. On univariate analysis, triple hit lymphoma (THL) (OR 22.8, 95% CI: 3.8-138.3; p < 0.001), tumor size (OR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.1-1.4; p < 0.001), specifically ≥ 9cm (OR 9.4, CI: 1.2-77.3; p = 0.036) and SUVmax (OR 1.1, CI: 1.02-1.15; p = 0.008), specifically ≥ 20 (OR 5.6, CI: 1.3-23.7; p = 0.018), were significantly associated with increased risk of in-field recurrence. On multivariate analysis, THL (OR 32.9, CI: 3.2-336.0; p = 0.03) and tumor size (OR 1.3, CI: 1.1-1.6; p = 0.01) retained significant association with in-field recurrence. Conclusions: Bridging radiotherapy prior to CART provides excellent and durable in-field local control for R/R B-cell NHL. Patients with triple hit histology and bulky disease are likely at higher risk of in-field recurrence and may benefit from higher doses of bRT.
A phase II trial of hypofractionated radiation therapy over five treatments for prostate cancer with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy: MC1754.
Vargas, Carlos , Daniels, T.B., Golafshar, Michael A. , Keole, Sameer R., Wong, William W. , Rwigema, Jean Claude, Stish, B.J., Choo, Richard , Golafshar, Michael , Rwigema, Jean‐Claude M. , Davis, Brian J. , DeWees, T.A. , Lester, Scott C.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 16, 2022 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 6_suppl | Pages: 248-248

10.1200/jco.2022.40.6_suppl.248 Get It

248 Background: Hypofractionated prostate cancer radiation has showed similar results in several prior phase III studies (PCG GU 003, PACE-B, and Hypo PC RT). However, prospective phase II-III clinical trial data testing 5 tx after prostatectomy is scarce. Methods: Between 2018 and 2019, 41 patients were treated after postprostatectomy for high risk features. 5 patients were treated adjuvantly, 36 for salvage including 8 with oligometastatic disease. Indications for adjuvant RT included a PSA < 0.2 and +margins, SVI, or EPE. Salvage RT was offered for PSA ≥0.2. Oligometastatic RT for patients with ≤5 RT targets. Staging included C11 PET for all cases. Total dose to the prostate bed was 30-32 Gy in 5tx QOD with IMRT, conebeam IGRT, and MRI registration. All salvage patients received ADT for 6 months and oligometastatic patients for 18 months. Dose to the metastatic sites was 30 in 5tx QOD. Of the 41 patients 8 also received SBRT to the sites of oligometastatic disease. We looked at clinical outcomes defining biochemical failure as a PSA > 0.2 after treatment, baseline adjusted CTC AE V5.0, baseline adjusted patient reported toxicities (PRO CTC AE), QOL (EPIC, PROMIS), and AUA was used for all cases. Results: Median follow up was 23 months (range 10-37). Pre-RT T stage was T2-T3b, with 47% being T3a-b; Pre RT Median PSA of 0.4 (range < 0.1-1.9); Median GS 8 (6-9); and (+) margins in 48.8%. Sites of oligometastatic disease radiated included the LN and bone. Treatment related AE were grade 0-1 in all cases, except for one patient with G2 GU incontinence. Overall QOL remained high during follow including Promis 10 overall, mental, and physical scores; urinary bother, irritative/obstructive, and AUA scores; bowel overall, bowel bother, and bowel function scores; and overall sexual, sexual function, and sexual bother scores remained at baseline levels during follow up. Only hormonal overall, hormonal function, and hormonal bother had lower scores at 3 months that recovered by 12 months in patients treated with ADT for 6 months and by 24 months in patients treated with ADT for 18 months. A total of 3 clinical failure have been seen; 2 patients with regional failures alone; and one with axial skeleton bony failures for 93% clinical control at median follow up of 23 months. All 3 patients with clinical failure were salvaged successfully with SBRT and all patients remain disease free at last follow up. A total 5 patients with raising PSAs alone have been seen. All patients have been re-staged with C11 PET. No failures in the prostate bed or previously radiated sites have been seen. Conclusions: Toxicity for RT over 5tx is lower than expected with only one case of grade 2 urinary incontinence. QOL scores remained high during follow up, minor changes in hormonal scores were seen during ADT, but recovered after. 30-32 Gy over 5 tx provided 100% control in radiated targets and metastatic sites. Clinical trial information: NCT03570827.
An artificial intelligence-enabled analysis of ECG changes after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer.
Breen, William G. , Herrmann, Joerg , Friedman, Paul D., Attia, Zachi Itzhak, Stish, B.J., Carter, Rickey E. , Johnson, Patrick W. , Routman, David M. , Noseworthy, Peter A. , Friedman, Paul, López-Jiménez, Francisco , Attia, Zachi I. , Kapa, Suraj

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 25, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e17535-e17535

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.e17535 Get It

e17535 Background: Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) is commonly used to treat prostate cancer (PC), but has been associated with cardiac morbidity and mortality. The exact mechanisms of this association are unclear. We sought to use an artificial intelligence (AI) enabled algorithm to identify ECG changes in PC patients who received ADT compared to PC patients who did not receive ADT. Methods: From 1,000,000 ECGs performed on 210,414 patients between 1993 and 2017 at our institution, a convolutional neural network was developed to detect predictive signatures for cardiac pathologies. During this process, the ability to predict “estimated sex” of the patient was developed, with output values ranging from 0 (female) to 1 (male). We applied this algorithm to 8,619 ECGs performed on 1,057 men age 75 or younger treated with radiation for high-risk or recurrent PC at our institution, and compared estimated sex after receiving ADT (n = 1,065) to ADT-naive ECGs (n = 7,554). We correlated ECG-identified estimated sex with serum testosterone levels using Spearman rank correlation. Results: Patients who had received ADT had a mean (SD) estimated sex value of 0.81 (0.26) compared to 0.92 (0.17) for those who did not (p < 0.001). Difference between estimated sex in post-ADT ECGs and ADT-naive ECGs remained significant across age groups (Table). Decreased serum total testosterone correlated with decreased estimated sex values in men receiving ADT (R = .57, p < 0.001). Conclusions: ADT for prostate cancer is associated with changes in AI-identified ECG parameters, including lower estimated male sex after receiving ADT. Lower ECG male sex estimate was associated with decreased serum testosterone. In this study, we provide preliminary proof of concept for a potential non-invasive means of monitoring treatment effect and physiologic change using ECGs. [Table: see text]
Thoracic radiotherapy for renal cell carcinoma metastases.
Stewart, Glenn , Breen, William G. , Stish, B.J., Park, Sean Sunghun, Olivier, Kenneth R. , Costello, Brian A.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 19, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 6_suppl | Pages: 409-409

10.1200/jco.2020.38.6_suppl.409 Get It

409 Background: For patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), metastasis-directed local therapies can delay progression and need to initiate/switch systemic therapy. We examined our experience treating lung or mediastinal metastases from RCC with radiotherapy (RT). Methods: We reviewed patients with lung or mediastinal metastases from RCC treated with RT. Overall survival (OS) and local control (LC) was measured from the start of RT using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Seventy-one patients were treated with RT for 89 lung or mediastinal metastases. Median follow-up was 2.0 years (range 0.02-11.4 years) after RT for surviving patients. Most patients were male (n=53, 74.6%). Median age was 58.4 years at initial diagnosis. Histology was most frequently clear cell carcinoma (n=62, 89.9%). At the time of treatment, 18 patients (25.4%) had 1-3 metastases, and the remainder (74.6%) had 4 or more metastases. Forty-one patients (57.5%) received systemic therapy prior to thoracic radiation. Initial systemic therapy was most commonly sunitinib (45%) or pazopanib (32.5%). Median time from starting systemic therapy to initiation of radiation was 2.0 years. Fifty-eight lung metastases and 31 mediastinal metastases were treated with a median 5 fractions (range 1-40), to a median total dose of 4800 cGy (range 400-7000), with a median fraction size of 500 cGy (range 150-2000). Thirty-three lesions were treated with concurrent systemic therapy, which was most commonly nivolumab (n=16). Of 89 treated lesions, 11 (12%) had local tumor recurrence, at a median of 1.6 years (range 0.4-2.9 years) after initiation of radiation. 1, 3, and 5 year MC (metastasis control) were 96.6%, 83.5% and 67.9%, respectively. Nine patients were treated with radiation in order to delay initiation of systemic therapy. Of these, 3 eventually received systemic therapy, initiated at a median 2.5 years after radiation. At last follow-up, 41 patients (57.7%) had died. Median OS was 2.6 years. Survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 65.2%, 48.5%, and 38%, respectively. Conclusions: Radiation achieves high metastasis control rates for lung and mediastinal metastases from RCC, potentially delaying the need for systemic therapy.
Impact of initial treatment selection on clinical outcomes after biochemical failure in radiorecurrent high-risk prostate cancer.
Levin-Epstein, Rebecca , Romero, Tahmineh , Wong, J.K. , Demanes, D. Jeffrey, Stish, B.J., Krauss, Daniel , Wedde, Trude B. , Lilleby, Wolfgang , Stock, Richard G. , Steinberg, Michael L. , Horwitz, Eric M. , Tendulkar, Rahul D. , Kishan, Amar U. , Cook, Kiri A. , Dess, Robert T. , Spratt, Daniel E. , Moran, Brian Joseph , Merrick, Gregory Stephen , Tran, Phuoc T , Tward, Jonathan D.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 19, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 6_suppl | Pages: 208-208

10.1200/jco.2020.38.6_suppl.208 Get It

208 Background: Treatment of high risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus brachytherapy (BT) boost (EBRT+BT) has been prospectively associated with lower rates of BCR, albeit potentially with increased toxicity, and retrospectively linked to decreased distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) compared to EBRT alone. However, it is unclear whether patients who develop BCR following either approach have similar downstream oncologic outcomes. Methods: We identified 706 out of 3820 men with HRPCa treated at 13 institutions from 1998-2015 with EBRT (n=468/2134) or EBRT+BT (n=238/1686) who developed BCR. We compared rates of DM, PCSM, and all-cause mortality (ACM) after BCR between treatment groups using Fine-Gray competing risk regression. Models were adjusted for age, Gleason grade group, initial PSA (iPSA), clinical T stage, time-dependent use of systemic salvage, and interval to BCR using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Results: Median follow-up was 9.9 years from RT and 4.8 years from BCR. Groups were similar in age, iPSA, presence of ≥2 HR features, and median interval to BCR (3.3 years). Most men received neoadjuvant/concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), 92.5% and 91.0% for EBRT and EBRT+BT, respectively, though for a longer duration with EBRT (median 14.7 vs. 9.0 months, p=0.0012). Local and systemic salvage rates were 2.3% and 36.3% after EBRT, and 2.6% and 43.6% after EBRT+BT, respectively. Initial EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower rates of DM after BCR (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.64, p<0.001). Rates of PCSM and ACM did not significantly differ (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.67-1.30, p=0.93, and HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.1, p=0.11, respectively). Conclusions: In this large retrospective series of radiorecurrent HRPCa, initial treatment with EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower rates of DM after BCR compared with EBRT, despite shorter ADT use and a similar median interval to BCR. Local salvage was widely underutilized in both groups. In the absence of salvage for local failure after EBRT, upfront treatment intensification with BT may reduce DM, though not PCSM or ACM, even after development of BCR.