Davis, Brian J.

AbstractBackgroundThe objective of this study was to report acute changes in patient‐reported quality of life (PRQOL) using the 26‐item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC‐26) questionnaire in a prospective study using hypofractionated intensity‐modulated proton beam therapy (H‐IMPT) targeting the prostate and the pelvic lymph nodes for high‐risk or unfavorable intermediate‐risk prostate cancer.MethodsFifty‐five patients were enrolled. H‐IMPT consisted of 45 GyE to the pelvic lymph nodes and 67.5 GyE to the prostate and seminal vesicles in 25 fractions. PRQOL was assessed with the urinary incontinence (UI), urinary irritative/obstructive symptoms (UO), and bowel function (BF) domains of EPIC‐26 questionnaire. Mean changes in domain scores were analyzed from pretreatment to the end of treatment and 3 months posttreatment. A clinically meaningful change (or minimum important change) was defined as a score change > 50% of the baseline standard deviation.ResultsThe mean scores of UO, UI, and BF at baseline were 84.6, 91.1, and 95.3, respectively. At the end of treatment, there were statistically significant and clinically meaningful declines in UO and BF scores (−13.5 and −2.3, respectively), while the decline in UI score was statistically significant but not clinically meaningful (−13.7). A clinically meaningful decline in UO, UI, and BF scores occurred in 53.5%, 22.7%, and 73.2% of the patients, respectively. At 3 months posttreatment, all three mean scores showed an improvement, with fewer patients having a clinically meaningful decline in UO, UI, and BF scores (18.4%, 20.5%, and 45.0%, respectively). There was no significant reduction in the mean UO and UI scores compared to baseline, although the mean BF score remained lower than baseline and the difference was clinically meaningful.ConclusionsUO, UI, and BF scores of PRQOL declined at the end of H‐IMPT. UO and UI scores showed improvement at 3 months posttreatment and were similar to the baseline scores. However, BF score remained lower at 3 months posttreatment with a clinically meaningful decline.

Aim/Objectives/Background: The American College of Radiology (ACR), American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) have jointly developed the following practice parameter for transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer. Transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer is the interstitial implantation of low-dose rate radioactive seeds into the prostate gland for the purpose of treating localized prostate cancer. Methods: This practice parameter was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters—Radiation Oncology of the Commission on Radiation Oncology, in collaboration with ABS and ASTRO. Results: This practice parameter provides a framework for the appropriate use of low-dose rate brachytherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer either as monotherapy or as part of a treatment regimen combined with external-beam radiation therapy. The practice parameter defines the qualifications and responsibilities of all involved radiation oncology personnel, including the radiation oncologist, medical physicist, dosimetrist, radiation therapist, and nursing staff. Patient selection criteria and the utilization of supplemental therapies such as external-beam radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy are discussed. The logistics of the implant procedure, postimplant dosimetry assessment, and best practices with regard to safety and quality control are presented. Conclusions: Adherence to established standards can help to ensure that permanent prostate brachytherapy is delivered in a safe and efficacious manner.

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.

Abstract Purpose: Outcomes for resistant metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) are poor. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) induces antitumor immunity in clinical and preclinical studies, but immunologic biomarkers are lacking. Patients and Methods: Eighty-nine patients with oligometastatic CRPC were identified by 11C-Choline-PET (Choline-PET) from August 2016 to December 2019 and treated with SABR. Prespecified coprimary endpoints were 2-year overall survival (OS) and PSA progression. Secondary endpoints included 2-year SABR-treated local failure and 6-month adverse events. Correlative studies included peripheral blood T-cell subpopulations before and after SABR. Results: 128 lesions in 89 patients were included in this analysis. Median OS was 29.3 months, and 1- and 2-year OS were 96% and 80%, respectively. PSA PFS was 40% at 1 year and 21% at 2 years. Local PFS was 84.4% and 75.3% at 1 and 2 years, respectively, and no grade ≥3 AEs were observed. Baseline high levels of tumor-reactive T cells (TTR; CD8+CD11ahigh) predicted superior local, PSA, and distant PFS. Baseline high levels of effector memory T cells (TEM; CCR7−CD45RA−) were associated with improved PSA PFS. An increase in TTR at day 14 from baseline was associated with superior OS. Conclusions: This is the first comprehensive effector T-cell immunophenotype analysis in a phase II trial before and after SABR in CRPC. Results are favorable and support the incorporation of immune-based markers in the design of future randomized trials in patients with oligometastatic CRPC treated with SABR.

Purpose of review Metastases directed therapy (MDT) is an increasingly utilized modality in patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC) recurrence. The purpose of our review is to discuss the recent literature on the safety and oncologic outcomes of this treatment approach. Recent findings Metastases directed therapy, in particular, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and salvage lymph node dissection (sLND), has shown promising efficacy in patients with OMPC. Many case series report favorable outcomes with MDT as compared to hormonal deprivation therapy alone or surveillance. Of the few case series investigating the use of MDT as part of a multimodality approach in castrate-resistant OMPC, more favorable outcomes in comparison to the use of systemic treatment alone are reported. Summary With the recent advances in imaging techniques, particularly molecular imaging, management of OMPC has progressed rapidly in the last few years. The feasibility and benefits of MDT in OMPC have been demonstrated in prospective and retrospective series. Further prospective studies investigating the role of MDT to define optimal patient subgroups and management strategies are warranted.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer address staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and include management options for localized, regional, and metastatic disease. Recommendations for disease monitoring and treatment of recurrent disease are also included. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel meets annually to reevaluate and update their recommendations based on new clinical data and input from within NCCN Member Institutions and from external entities. This article summarizes the panel’s discussions for the 2021 update of the guidelines with regard to systemic therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

AbstractPurposeTo prospectively assess acute differences in patient‐reported outcomes in bowel and urinary domains between intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) for prostate cancer.Methods and MaterialsBowel function (BF), urinary irritative/obstructive symptoms (UO), and urinary incontinence (UI) domains of EPIC‐26 were collected in patients with T1‐T2 prostate cancer receiving IMRT or PBT at a tertiary cancer center (2015‐2018). Mean changes in domain scores were analyzed from pretreatment to the end of and 3 months post‐radiotherapy for each modality. A clinically meaningful change was defined as a score change >50% of the baseline standard deviation.ResultsA total of 157 patients receiving IMRT and 105 receiving PBT were included. There were no baseline differences in domain scores between cohorts. At the end of radiotherapy, there was significant and clinically meaningful worsening of BF and UO scores for patients receiving either modality. In the BF domain, the IMRT cohort experienced greater decrement (−13.0 vs −6.7, P < .01), and had a higher proportion of patients with clinically meaningful reduction (58.4% vs 39.5%, P = .01), compared to PBT. At 3 months post‐radiotherapy, the IMRT group had significant and clinically meaningful worsening of BF (−9.3, P < .001), whereas the change in BF score of the PBT cohort was no longer significant or clinically meaningful (−1.2, P = .25). There were no significant or clinically meaningful changes in UO or UI 3 months post‐radiotherapy.ConclusionsPBT had less acute decrement in BF than IMRT following radiotherapy. There was no difference between the two modalities in UO and UI.