Morris, Christopher G.

e16555 Background: The ProtecT trial underscores the importance of treatment in men with prostate cancer and life expectancies > 10 years and the validity of radiation therapy (RT). RT can be given with photons or protons (PT). To address the controversy of which is better, clinical outcomes of photon-based intensity modulated RT (IMRT) and PT cohorts from 2 institutions were directly compared. Methods: Under respective IRB approvals, data from 2 cohorts were analyzed. The first was 301 men treated with ultrasound image guided IMRT from 2000-05 to 75.6 Gy in 42 fractions. The second was 1214 men treated with fiducial image guided PT from 2006-10 to 78 CGE in 39 fractions. Median age and followup were 74 y and 7.2 y for IMRT and 66 y and 5.6 y for PT. Hormone therapy (ADT) was used with IMRT and PT, respectively, in 3% and 7% of low-risk patients, 25% and 9.9% of intermediate-risk, and 91% and 57.8% of high-risk. Comparative endpoints were age-stratified 5-year (5Y) survival (OS), ≥ grade 3 gastrointestinal (GI) and urologic (GU) toxicity, and 5Y freedom from biochemical progression (FFBP). Results: There was a lower prevalence of GI (1.3% vs 0.1%, p = 0.0065) and GU (4.3% vs 0.1%, p < 0.0001) toxicity at last follow-up in the PT group. In the IMRT and PT cohorts, OS rates were 90.8% and 88.7% in men ≥75 (p = 0.4083). In men < 75, OS rates were 91.6% and 97.5% in the IMRT and PT low-risk patients (p = 0.003), 92.1% and 95.5% in the IMRT and PT intermediate-risk (p = 0.0535), and 92.0% and 90.0% (p = 0.4975) in the IMRT and PT high-risk. In the IMRT and PT cohorts, respectively, FFBP rates were 92.2% and 98.9% for low-risk patients (p < 0.0001), 87.3% and 94.5% for intermediate-risk patients(p = 0.0226), and 80.3% and 74.4% for high-risk patients (p = 0.5154). Conclusions: In this retrospective comparison of outcomes in cohorts of men treated with IMRT and PT for prostate cancer, FFBP rates were better with PT for men with low- and intermediate-risk disease and similar in men with high-risk disease despite longer and more frequent use of ADT in the IMRT cohort. This study underscores the difficulty of comparing retrospective series, with differences noted in age, RT dose, and ADT use between cohorts. However, the magnitude of improvement with PT is intriguing and warrants prospective testing.

326 Background: Review initial outcomes for patients enrolled on the University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute PC01 protocol for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Methods: The protocol received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval in 7/2007. The first patient was enrolled in 4/2010. The accrual target was 66 patients to test if the Serious Adverse Event (SAE) ratecould be reduced from 15% (expected) to less than 5%. Protocol therapy consisted of proton therapy to a planning target volume (PTV) dose of 59.4 Cobalt Gray Equivalent (CGE) at 1.8CGE per fraction with concomitant oral Capecitabine (1000mg PO BID 5 days/week on radiation treatment days). Only gross disease was targeted. Results: 12 patients were enrolled. 1 patient died of a gunshot wound 5 days after starting treatment so only 11 patients are reported. Median follow up from start of treatment: 13 months (range 2 to 21 months). Median age: 68 (range 51 to 86) years. Gender: Males 5, Females 6. Race/Ethnicity: 9 White, 2 Hispanic. Overall survival: 90% at 6 months and 60% at 12 months. Freedom from progression: 80% at 6 months and 53% at one year. Local control: 100% at 6 months and 86% at 12 months. Freedom from metastasis: 80% at 6 months and 67% at 12 months.No patient experienced any grade 3 or greater toxicity during treatment or the follow up period. Grade 2 toxicity was limited to a single patient experiencing grade 2 fatigue. Median weight loss over the course of treatment was 1.7 (range: loss of 5.7 to gain of 4.9) Kg. 4 patients were deemed to have had an adequate radiographic response to radiotherapy so as to justify surgical exploration. Conclusions: Proton therapy to 59.4 CGE with concomitant Capecitabine was well tolerated with no grade 2 or greater gastrointestinal toxicities. 4 of 11 patients achieved a radiographic response allowing for attempted surgical resection. The study was closed to accrual on 9/1/2013 due to recognition that slow accrual made achievement of the primary study endpoint unlikely. At the same time, the lack of any meaningful gastrointestinal toxicity suggests significant opportunities for treatment intensification when proton therapy is used in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT00685763.