Role of 18F-Choline PET/CT in the Initial Staging of High Risk Prostate Cancer and Comparison with Conventional Imaging Techniques.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-Choline PET/CT in the initial staging of high-risk prostate cancer (PC), and to compare it with conventional imaging techniques and to assess the changes in therapeutic attitude derived from its results. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: To assess the concordance between 18F-Choline PET/CT and conventional study and to find related prognostic factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study of 78 patients with high-risk PC undergoing 18F-Choline PET/CT after conventional initial staging (CT + BS). Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of 18F-Choline PET/CT and CT + BS were calculated. The golden standard was histological result or follow-up. Tumor characteristics were collected and univariate and multivariate analyzes were performed. RESULTS: The median age was 67 years old and mean PSA was 42.39 ng/mL. The sensitivity, specificity and NPV in global initial staging for PET/CT 18F-Choline and conventional imaging were: 92.9% vs 38.5%, 83.3% vs 42.3%, and 90.9% vs 40.7%, respectively. Lymph node staging: sensitivity 96.3% vs 61.5% and specificity 80% vs 76%, respectively. Bone staging: sensitivity 91.7% vs 21.4% and specificity 97.4% vs 83.8%, respectively. There was agreement in 25 patients (32%) (p = 0.004), Kappa index 0.134 (p = 0.011). The treatment was modified in 47.4% patients. PSA, PSADT% positive cores and cT were related to PET results. PSA level <8.9 ng/mL was considered an independent protective factor for positive PET (OR 0.03) (95% CI: 0.002-0.435, p 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: 18F-Choline PET/CT seems to be superior to CT + BS for initial staging in high-risk PC. It could be considered because its results can change the treatment decision in almost half of the patients.

Role of 18F-Choline PET/CT in the Initial Staging of High Risk Prostate Cancer and Comparison with Conventional Imaging Techniques

Objective: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-Choline PET/CT in the initial staging of high-risk prostate cancer (PC), and to compare it with conventional imaging techniques and to assess the changes in therapeutic attitude derived from its results. Secondary Objectives: To assess the concordance between 18F-Choline PET/CT and conventional study and to find related prognostic factors. Material and Methods: Retrospective observational study of 78 patients with high-risk PC undergoing 18F-Choline PET/CT after conventional initial staging (CT + BS). Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of 18F-Choline PET/CT and CT + BS were calculated. The golden standard was histological result or follow-up. Tumor characteristics were collected and univariate and multivariate analyzes were performed. Results: The median age was 67 years old and mean PSA was 42.39 ng/mL. The sensitivity, specificity and NPV in global initial staging for PET/CT 18F-Choline and conventional imaging were: 92.9% vs 38.5%, 83.3% vs 42.3%, and 90.9% vs 40.7%, respectively. Lymph node staging: sensitivity 96.3% vs 61.5% and specificity 80% vs 76%, respectively. Bone staging: sensitivity 91.7% vs 21.4% and specificity 97.4% vs 83.8%, respectively. There was agreement in 25 patients (32%) (p = 0.004), Kappa index 0.134 (p = 0.011). The treatment was modified in 47.4% patients. PSA, PSADT% positive cores and cT were related to PET results. PSA level <8.9 ng/mL was considered an independent protective factor for positive PET (OR 0.03) (95% CI: 0.002-0.435, p 0.010). Conclusions: 18F-Choline PET/CT seems to be superior to CT + BS for initial staging in high-risk PC. It could be considered because its results can change the treatment decision in almost half of the patients (AU)

Detection and dynamics of circulating tumor cells in patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy and hormones: a prospective phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are an established prognostic marker in castration-resistant prostate cancer but have received little attention in localized high-risk disease. We studied the detection rate of CTCs in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before and after androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy to assess its value as a prognostic and monitoring marker. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective analysis of CTCs in the peripheral blood of 65 treatment-naïve patients with high-risk prostate cancer. EpCAM-positive CTCs were enumerated using the CELLSEARCH system at 4 timepoints. A cut off of 0 vs ≥ 1 CTC/7.5 ml blood was defined as a threshold for negative versus positive CTCs status. RESULTS: CTCs were detected in 5/65 patients (7.5%) at diagnosis, 8/62 (12.9%) following neoadjuvant androgen deprivation and 11/59 (18.6%) at the end of radiotherapy, with a median CTC count/7.5 ml of 1 (range, 1-136). Only 1 patient presented a positive CTC result 9 months after radiotherapy. Positive CTC status (at any timepoint) was not significantly associated with any clinical or pathologic factors. However, when we analyzed variations in CTC patterns following treatment, we observed a significant association between conversion of CTCs and stages T3 (P = 0.044) and N1 (P = 0.002). Detection of CTCs was not significantly associated with overall survival (P > 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed a low detection rate for CTCs in patients with locally advanced high-risk prostate cancer. The finding of a de novo positive CTC count after androgen deprivation therapy is probably due to a passive mechanism associated with the destruction of the tumor. Further studies with larger samples and based on more accurate detection of CTCs are needed to determine the potential prognostic and therapeutic value of this approach in non-metastatic prostate cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01800058.

Salvage brachytherapy for locally-recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy: A comparison of efficacy and toxicity outcomes with high-dose rate and low-dose rate brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND: Brachytherapy (BT) is widely used for salvage therapy in patients with biochemical failure (BF) after radiotherapy for prostate cancer (PCa). Although low-dose-rate (LDR) and high-dose-rate (HDR) BT are both used for salvage therapy, it is not clear whether there are any differences between these two approaches in terms of efficacy or toxicity in this setting. Therefore, we review the institutional experience of the members of the Urological Tumour Working Group (URONCOR) of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) to compare these two techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 2001 and 2016, 119 patients with biopsy-proven, locally-recurrent PCa underwent salvage BT (LDR, n = 44; HDR, n = 75) after primary radiotherapy. Relapse-free survival (RFS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) after salvage therapy were analyzed. Toxicity was assessed according to the RTOG scale. RESULTS: Median follow-up after salvage BT was 52 months. Overall, the 5-year prostate-specific antigen (PSA) RFS rate was 71% (95% CI, 65.9%-75.9%). No significant between-group differences in RFS were observed (p = 0.063). Five-year CSS for the LDR- and HDR-BT groups were 96.5% and 93%, respectively. Overall, 38 patients (32%) developed biochemical progression (Phoenix definition) after salvage BT: 14 patients (32%) in the LDR group and 24 (32.5%) in the HDR group. On the multivariate analysis, the following variables were significantly associated with progression, time to BF from primary radiotherapy <30 months (p = 0.014); and post-salvage nadir PSA (p = 0.000). There were no significant between-group differences in toxicity. Overall, there were 13 cases of urethral stricture, 22 cases of urinary incontinence, and 13 cases of haematuria. Toxicity ≥grade 3 was observed in 23.5% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that both HDR-BT and LDR-BT yield comparable efficacy and toxicity outcomes in patients undergoing salvage treatment for locally-recurrent prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy. Predictors of worse outcomes after salvage BT were post-salvage nadir PSA and time to BF from initial radiotherapy.

Late Radiation and Cardiovascular Adverse Effects After Androgen Deprivation and High-Dose Radiation Therapy in Prostate Cancer: Results From the DART 01/05 Randomized Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: To present data on the late toxicity endpoints of a randomized trial (DART 01/05) conducted to determine whether long-term androgen deprivation (LTAD) was superior to short-term AD (STAD) when combined with high-dose radiation therapy (HDRT) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between November 2005 and December 2010, 355 eligible men with cT1c-T3aN0M0 PCa and intermediate-risk and high-risk factors (2005 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria) were randomized to 4 months of AD combined with HDRT (median dose, 78 Gy) (STAD) or the same treatment followed by 24 months of AD (LTAD). Treatment-related complications were assessed using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 scoring schemes. Multivariate analyses for late toxicity were done using the Fine-Gray method. RESULTS: The 5-year incidence of grade ≥2 rectal and urinary toxicity was 11.1% and 8.2% for LTAD and 7.6% and 7.3% for STAD, respectively. Compared with STAD, LTAD was not significantly associated with a higher risk of late grade ≥2 rectal toxicity (hazard ratio [HR] 1.360, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.660-2.790, P=.410) or urinary toxicity (HR 1.028, 95% CI 0.495-2.130, P=.940). The multivariate analysis showed that a baseline history of intestinal comorbidity (HR 3.510, 95% CI 1.560-7.930, P=.025) and the rectal volume receiving >60 Gy (Vr60) (HR 1.030, 95% CI 1.001-1.060, P=.043) were the only factors significantly correlated with the risk of late grade ≥2 rectal complications. A history of previous surgical prostate manipulations was significantly associated with a higher risk of grade ≥2 urinary complications (HR 2.427, 95% CI 1.051-5.600, P=.038). Long-term AD (HR 2.090; 95% CI 1.170-3.720, P=.012) and a history of myocardial infarction (HR 2.080; 95% CI 1.130-3.810, P=.018) were significantly correlated with a higher probability of cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: Long-term AD did not significantly impact urinary or rectal radiation-induced toxicity, although it was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events. Longer follow-up is needed to measure the impact of AD on late morbidity and non-PCa mortality.

High-dose radiotherapy with short-term or long-term androgen deprivation in localised prostate cancer (DART01/05 GICOR): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimum duration of androgen deprivation combined with high-dose radiotherapy in prostate cancer remains undefined. We aimed to determine whether long-term androgen deprivation was superior to short-term androgen deprivation when combined with high-dose radiotherapy. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial, patients were recruited from ten university hospitals throughout Spain. Eligible patients had clinical stage T1c-T3b N0M0 prostate adenocarcinoma with intermediate-risk and high-risk factors according to 2005 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive either 4 months of androgen deprivation combined with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy at a minimum dose of 76 Gy (range 76-82 Gy; short-term androgen deprivation group) or the same treatment followed by 24 months of adjuvant androgen deprivation (long-term androgen deprivation group), stratified by prostate cancer risk group (intermediate risk vs high risk) and participating centre. Patients assigned to the short-term androgen deprivation group received 4 months of neoadjuvant and concomitant androgen deprivation with subcutaneous goserelin (2 months before and 2 months combined with high-dose radiotherapy). Anti-androgen therapy (flutamide 750 mg per day or bicalutamide 50 mg per day) was added during the first 2 months of treatment. Patients assigned to long-term suppression continued with the same luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue every 3 months for another 24 months. The primary endpoint was biochemical disease-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02175212. FINDINGS: Between Nov 7, 2005, and Dec 20, 2010, 178 patients were randomly assigned to receive short-term androgen deprivation and 177 to receive long-term androgen deprivation. After a median follow-up of 63 months (IQR 50-82), 5-year biochemical disease-free survival was significantly better among patients receiving long-term androgen deprivation than among those receiving short-term treatment (90% [95% CI 87-92] vs 81% [78-85]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·88 [95% CI 1·12-3·15]; p=0·01). 5-year overall survival (95% [95% CI 93-97] vs 86% [83-89]; HR 2·48 [95% CI 1·31-4·68]; p=0·009) and 5-year metastasis-free survival (94% [95% CI 92-96] vs 83% [80-86]; HR 2·31 [95% CI 1·23-3·85]; p=0·01) were also significantly better in the long-term androgen deprivation group than in the short-term androgen deprivation group. The effect of long-term androgen deprivation on biochemical disease-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival was more evident in patients with high-risk disease than in those with low-risk disease. Grade 3 late rectal toxicity was noted in three (2%) of 177 patients in the long-term androgen deprivation group and two (1%) of 178 in the short-term androgen deprivation group; grade 3-4 late urinary toxicity was noted in five (3%) patients in each group. No deaths related to treatment were reported. INTERPRETATION: Compared with short-term androgen deprivation, 2 years of adjuvant androgen deprivation combined with high-dose radiotherapy improved biochemical control and overall survival in patients with prostate cancer, particularly those with high-risk disease, with no increase in late radiation toxicity. Longer follow-up is needed to determine whether men with intermediate-risk disease benefit from more than 4 months of androgen deprivation. FUNDING: Spanish National Health Investigation Fund, AstraZeneca.