Effect of Prior Local Therapy on Response to First-line Androgen Receptor Axis Targeted Therapy in Metastatic Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the COU-AA-302 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Men with localized prostate cancer are often treated with local therapy (LT). However, a proportion of these patients will eventually develop recurrence and progression requiring systemic therapy. Whether primary LT affects the response to this subsequent systemic treatment is unclear. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether the receipt of prior prostate-directed LT influenced the response to first-line systemic therapy and survival in docetaxel-naïve metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This is an exploratory analysis of the COU-AA-302 trial, a multicentric double-blinded phase 3 randomized controlled trial in which mCRPC patients with no to mild symptoms were randomized to receive abiraterone plus prednisone or placebo plus prednisone. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We compared the time-varying effects of first-line abiraterone in patients with and without prior LT using a Cox proportional hazard model. The cut points were chosen using grid search, and were 6 and 36 mo for radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively. We also investigated whether there was any difference in treatment effect on score change (relative to baseline) in various patient-reported outcomes (measured by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate [FACT-P]) over time depending on the receipt of prior LT. The adjusted association of prior LT with survival was determined using weighted Cox regression models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 1053 eligible patients, 64% (n = 669) received prior LT. We did not find any statistically significant heterogeneity of time-dependent treatment effect from abiraterone on rPFS in patients with (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36 [95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.49] at ≤6 mo; 0.64 [0.49-0.83] at >6 mo) or without (HR: 0.37 [0.26-0.55] at ≤6 mo; 0.72 [0.50-1.03] at >6 mo) prior LT. Similarly, there was no significant heterogeneity in time-dependent treatment effect on OS with (HR: 0.88 [0.71-1.10] at ≤36 mo; 0.76 [0.52-1.11] at >36 mo) or without (0.78 [0.60-1.01] at ≤36 mo; 0.55 [0.30-0.99] at >36 mo) prior LT. We did not find sufficient evidence of a difference in treatment effect from abiraterone on score change over time in prostate cancer subscale (interaction p = 0.4), trial outcome index (interaction p = 0.8), and FACT-P total score (interaction p = 0.6) depending on the receipt of prior LT. Receipt of prior LT was associated with a significant improvement in OS (average HR: 0.72 [0.59-0.89]). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the efficacy of first-line abiraterone and prednisone in docetaxel-naïve mCRPC do not vary significantly based on the receipt of prior prostate-directed LT. Further studies are needed to explore the plausible mechanisms of the association of prior LT with superior OS. PATIENT SUMMARY: This secondary analysis of the COU-AA-302 trial suggests that survival benefits and temporal changes in quality of life with first-line abiraterone in docetaxel-naïve mCRPC do not differ significantly among patients who received versus those who did not receive prior prostate-directed local therapy.

Can We Identify Predictors of Success in Contouring Education for Radiation Oncology Trainees? An Analysis of the Anatomy and Radiology Contouring Bootcamp.

PURPOSE: Although several different contouring instructional programs are available to radiation oncologists and trainees, very little is known about which methods and resources benefit learners most, and whether some learners may need alternate forms of instruction. This study aimed to determine the factors that were predictors of learners' success in anatomy, radiology, and contouring education. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Participants in the online and face-to-face Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp completed pre- and postintervention evaluations that assessed anatomy/radiology knowledge, contouring skills, self-confidence, and spatial ability. Baseline factors were assessed as predictors of outcomes across multiple educational domains. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty (face-to-face: n = 40; online: n = 140) participants enrolled in the ARC Bootcamp, and 57 (face-to-face: n = 30; online: n = 27) participants completed both evaluations. Of the participants enrolled, 37% were female, and most were radiation oncology residents (62%). In the anatomy/radiology knowledge testing, all quartiles (based on baseline performance) improved numerically; however, the largest improvements occurred in learners with the lowest baseline scores (P < .001). At the end of the Bootcamp, learners with lower-performing scores did not reach the level of learners with the highest baseline scores (Bonferroni-corrected P < .001). Regarding the contouring assessment, improvements were only evident for the participants with lower-performing baseline scores (P < .05). Spatial anatomy skills, as measured by the spatial anatomy task, were correlated to contouring ability. Overall, the greatest improvements were seen for learners in postgraduate year 1 to 3, those with no previous rotation experience in a given discipline, and those who attended from other programs (ie, medical physics residents and medical students). CONCLUSIONS: The ARC Bootcamp improved all levels of performers' anatomy and radiology knowledge but only lower-performers' contouring ability. The course alone does not help lower-performing learners reach the abilities of higher-performers. The ARC Bootcamp tends to be most beneficial for participants with less radiation oncology experience. Curriculum modifications can be made to help support ARC Bootcamp participants with lower performing scores.

Is Remote Learning as Effective as In-Person Learning for Contouring Education? A Prospective Comparison of Face-to-Face versus Online Delivery of the Anatomy and Radiology Contouring Bootcamp.

PURPOSE: The Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp was a face-to-face (F2F) intervention providing integrated education for radiation oncology (RO) residents and medical physicists. To increase access, we launched an online offering in 2019. We evaluated the effect of the online course on participants' knowledge acquisition, contouring skills, and self-confidence by comparing it with the F2F course. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using modules, the online course offers content similar to that of the F2F comparator. Participants from the 2019 F2F and the 2019-2020 online course completed pre- and postevaluations assessing anatomy and radiology knowledge, contouring skills, self-confidence, and course satisfaction. RESULTS: There were 180 individuals enrolled (F2F: n = 40; online: n = 140); 57 participants (F2F: n = 30; online: n = 27) completed both evaluations. The online course had a wider geographic participation (19 countries) than F2F (4 countries). F2F had primarily RO resident participation (80%), compared with online (41%). Both cohorts demonstrated similar improvements in self-confidence pertaining to anatomy and radiology knowledge, contouring skills, and interpreting radiology images (all P < .001). Both the online (mean ± SD improvement: 6.6 ± 6.7 on a 40-point scale; P < .001) and F2F (3.7 ± 5.7; P = .002) groups showed anatomy and radiology knowledge improvement. Only the F2F group demonstrated improvement with the contouring assessment (F2F: 0.10 ± 0.17 on a 1-point Dice scale; P = .004; online: 0.07 ± 0.16; P = .076). Both cohorts perceived the course as a positive experience (F2F: 4.8 ± 0.4 on a 5-point scale; online: 4.5 ± 0.6), stated it would improve their professional practice (F2F: 4.6 ± 0.5; online: 4.2 ± 0.8), and said they would recommend it to others (F2F: 4.8 ± 0.4; online: 4.4 ± 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The online ARC Bootcamp demonstrated improved self-confidence, knowledge scores, and high satisfaction levels among participants. The offering had lower completion rates but was more accessible to geographic regions, provided a flexible learning experience, and allowed for ongoing education during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Association of Short-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes With Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes in Localized Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Radiation Therapy and Androgen Deprivation Therapy in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Both oncologic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes are pivotal in prostate cancer (PCa). However, it remains unknown if there is any association between these 2 outcomes. In this secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial, we investigated the association of short-term changes in patient-reported outcome with long-term event-free survival (EFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) in localized PCa. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Localized PCa patients with a Gleason score ≤7, clinical stage T1b to T3a, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <30 ng/mL were randomized to neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for 6 months starting 4 months before prostate radiation therapy or concurrent and adjuvant ADT for 6 months starting simultaneously with radiation therapy. Patient-reported symptom burden was evaluated using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (QLQ)-PR.25. Clinically meaningful deterioration (CMD) was defined as a ≥10-point worsening at any time within 10 months postrandomization regardless of subsequent improvement. Landmark analyses were performed to determine the association of CMD of urinary and bowel symptoms separately with EFS and MFS in patients who responded to the baseline questionnaire, were alive, and were event free at 10 months. RESULTS: Overall, 393 patients had responded to the baseline QLQ. One patient died, and 1 patient had failure within 10 months. Therefore, 391 patients were eligible for the landmark analyses. After adjusting for age, Gleason score, PSA, performance status, and treatment group, CMD of urinary symptoms was associated with worse EFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-2.65) and MFS (HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.11-2.57). Considering deaths as competing events, CMD of urinary symptoms was associated with a significant increase in the relative incidence of progression (subdistribution HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.12-5.20). However, no association was found between CMD of bowel symptoms and EFS or MFS. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, short-term CMD of urinary symptoms was associated with significantly inferior EFS and MFS and an increase in the relative incidence of progression. Further investigations are needed to explore the biological rationale of such association in the context of ADT and radiation therapy.

Implementation and evaluation of an online anatomy, radiology and contouring bootcamp for radiation therapists.

BACKGROUND: As new treatments and technologies have been introduced in radiation oncology, the clinical roles of radiation therapists (RTs) have expanded. However, there are few formal learning opportunities for RTs. An online, anatomy, radiology and contouring bootcamp (ARC Bootcamp) originally designed for medical residents was identified as a prospective educational tool for RTs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an RT edition of the ARC Bootcamp on knowledge, contouring, and confidence, as well as to identify areas for future modification. METHODS: Fifty licensed RTs were enrolled in an eight-week, multidisciplinary, online RT ARC Bootcamp. Contouring practice was available throughout the course using an online contouring platform. Outcomes were evaluated using a pre-course and post-course multiple-choice quiz (MCQ), contouring evaluation and qualitative self-efficacy and satisfaction survey. RESULTS: Of the fifty enrolled RTs, 30 completed the course, and 26 completed at least one of the post-tests. Nineteen contouring dice similarity coefficient (DSC) scores were available for paired pre- and post-course analysis. RTs demonstrated a statistically significant increase in mean DSC scoring pooled across all contouring structures (mean ± SD improvement: 0.09 ± 0.18 on a scale from 0 to 1, p=0.020). For individual contouring structures, 3/15 reached significance in contouring improvement. MCQ scores were available for 26 participants and increased after RT ARC Bootcamp participation with a mean ± SD pre-test score of 18.6 ± 4.2 (46.5%); on a 40-point scale vs. post-test score of 24.5 ± 4.3 (61.4%) (p < 0.001). RT confidence in contouring, anatomy knowledge and radiographic identification improved after course completion (p < 0.001). Feedback from RTs recommended more contouring instruction, less in-depth anatomy review and more time to complete the course. CONCLUSIONS: The RT ARC Bootcamp was an effective tool for improving anatomy and radiographic knowledge among RTs. The course demonstrated improvements in contouring and overall confidence. However, only approximately half of the enrolled RTs completed the course, limiting statistical power. Future modifications will aim to increase relevance to RTs and improve completion rates.

Development, Implementation, and Initial Participant Feedback of an Online Anatomy and Radiology Contouring Bootcamp in Radiation Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp was a face-to-face (F2F) course designed to ensure radiation oncology residents were equipped with the knowledge and skillset to use radiation therapy techniques properly. The ARC Bootcamp was proven to be a useful educational intervention for improving learners' knowledge of anatomy and radiology and contouring ability. An online version of the course was created to increase accessibility to the ARC Bootcamp and provide a flexible, self-paced learning environment. This study aimed to describe the instructional design model used to create the online offering and report participants' motivation to enroll in the course and the online ARC Bootcamp's strengths and improvement areas. METHODS: The creation of the online course followed the analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE) framework. The course was structured in a linear progression of locked modules consisting of radiology and contouring lectures, anatomy labs, and integrated evaluations. RESULTS: The online course launched on the platform Teachable in November 2019, and by January 2021, 140 participants had enrolled in the course, with 27 participants completing all course components. The course had broad geographic participation with learners from 19 different countries. Of the participants enrolled, 34% were female, and most were radiation oncology residents (56%), followed by other programs (24%), such as medical physics residents or medical students. The primary motivator for participants to enroll was to improve their subject knowledge/skill (44%). The most common strength identified by participants was the course's quality (41%), and the most common improvement area was to incorporate more course content (41%). CONCLUSIONS: The creation of the online ARC Bootcamp using the ADDIE framework was feasible. The course is accessible to diverse geographic regions and programs and provides a flexible learning environment; however, the course completion rate was low. Participants' feedback regarding their experiences will inform future offerings of the online course.