A Phase 3 Trial of 2 Years of Androgen Suppression and Radiation Therapy With or Without Adjuvant Chemotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Final Results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Phase 3 Randomized Trial NRG Oncology RTOG 9902.

PURPOSE: Long-term (LT) androgen suppression (AS) with radiation therapy (RT) is a standard treatment of high-risk, localized prostate cancer (PCa). Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9902 was a randomized trial testing the hypothesis that adjuvant combination chemotherapy (CT) with paclitaxel, estramustine, and oral etoposide plus LT AS plus RT would improve overall survival (OS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with high-risk PCa (prostate-specific antigen 20-100 ng/mL and Gleason score [GS] ≥ 7 or clinical stage ≥ T2 and GS ≥ 8) were randomized to RT and AS (AS + RT) alone or with adjuvant CT (AS + RT + CT). CT was given as four 21-day cycles, delivered beginning 28 days after 70.2 Gy of RT. AS was given as luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone for 24 months, beginning 2 months before RT plus an oral antiandrogen for 4 months before and during RT. The study was designed based on a 6% improvement in OS from 79% to 85% at 5 years, with 90% power and a 2-sided alpha of 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 397 patients (380 eligible) were randomized. The patients had high-risk PCa, 68% with GS 8 to 10 and 34% T3 to T4 tumors, and median prostate-specific antigen of 22.6 ng/mL. The median follow-up period was 9.2 years. The trial closed early because of excess thromboembolic toxicity in the CT arm. The 10-year results for all randomized patients revealed no significant difference between the AS + RT and AS + RT + CT arms in OS (65% vs 63%; P=.81), biochemical failure (58% vs 54%; P=.82), local progression (11% vs 7%; P=.09), distant metastases (16% vs 14%; P=.42), or disease-free survival (22% vs 26%; P=.61). CONCLUSIONS: NRG Oncology RTOG 9902 showed no significant differences in OS, biochemical failure, local progression, distant metastases, or disease-free survival with the addition of adjuvant CT to LT AS + RT. The trial results provide valuable data regarding the natural history of high-risk PCa treated with LT AS + RT and have implications for the feasibility of clinical trial accrual and tolerability using CT for PCa.

The role of overall treatment time in the outcome of radiotherapy of prostate cancer: an analysis of biochemical failure in 4839 men treated between 1987 and 1995.

PURPOSE: Assess the importance of overall time (OT) and dose for biochemical failure (BF) after external-beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer in a retrospective analysis of a nine-institution database with 4839 patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Relevant baseline factors (T stage, Gleason score, initial PSA) were available for 4338 men. Cox models were used to estimate the effects of dose and OT corrected for baseline factors, treatment year, institution and interactions, and differences in post-treatment PSA-measurement intervals. After exclusion of very short and long intervals, patient numbers were 1445 events/3426 at risk (endpoint all BFs), and 1177 events/3354 at risk (endpoint exclusion of BFs that were likely distant failures). Separate analyses were carried out by risk group for men who received <70 Gy and > or = 70 Gy. RESULTS: Neither dose nor OT was significant when the analysis was restricted to doses <70 Gy, while for patients treated to 70 Gy or higher there were significant influences of both dose and OT on outcome in low- and intermediate-risk patients. These effects were quantified as a relative increase after 5 years followup of 6% in BFs for a 1-week increase in OT, a relative decrease of 15% in BFs for a 6-Gy increase in dose, and a dose equivalent of proliferation of 0.24 Gy/day. As the dose per fraction was nearly constant, the data contain no information on the alpha/beta ratio. CONCLUSION: The results show that OT and dose are significant determinants of outcome of radiotherapy in low- and intermediate-risk patients treated to 70 Gy or higher, and suggest that meaningful improvements in outcome may be targeted by modest increases in total dose and decreases in OT.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for inoperable early stage lung cancer.

CONTEXT: Patients with early stage but medically inoperable lung cancer have a poor rate of primary tumor control (30%-40%) and a high rate of mortality (3-year survival, 20%-35%) with current management. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy in a high-risk population of patients with early stage but medically inoperable lung cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Phase 2 North American multicenter study of patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven peripheral T1-T2N0M0 non-small cell tumors (measuring <5 cm in diameter) and medical conditions precluding surgical treatment. The prescription dose was 18 Gy per fraction x 3 fractions (54 Gy total) with entire treatment lasting between 1(1/2) and 2 weeks. The study opened May 26, 2004, and closed October 13, 2006; data were analyzed through August 31, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was 2-year actuarial primary tumor control; secondary end points were disease-free survival (ie, primary tumor, involved lobe, regional, and disseminated recurrence), treatment-related toxicity, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients accrued, of which 55 were evaluable (44 patients with T1 tumors and 11 patients with T2 tumors) with a median follow-up of 34.4 months (range, 4.8-49.9 months). Only 1 patient had a primary tumor failure; the estimated 3-year primary tumor control rate was 97.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.3%-99.7%). Three patients had recurrence within the involved lobe; the 3-year primary tumor and involved lobe (local) control rate was 90.6% (95% CI, 76.0%-96.5%). Two patients experienced regional failure; the local-regional control rate was 87.2% (95% CI, 71.0%-94.7%). Eleven patients experienced disseminated recurrence; the 3-year rate of disseminated failure was 22.1% (95% CI, 12.3%-37.8%). The rates for disease-free survival and overall survival at 3 years were 48.3% (95% CI, 34.4%-60.8%) and 55.8% (95% CI, 41.6%-67.9%), respectively. The median overall survival was 48.1 months (95% CI, 29.6 months to not reached). Protocol-specified treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were reported in 7 patients (12.7%; 95% CI, 9.6%-15.8%); grade 4 adverse events were reported in 2 patients (3.6%; 95% CI, 2.7%-4.5%). No grade 5 adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer who received stereotactic body radiation therapy had a survival rate of 55.8% at 3 years, high rates of local tumor control, and moderate treatment-related morbidity.

Health related quality of life and cognitive status in patients with glioblastoma multiforme receiving escalating doses of conformal three dimensional radiation on RTOG 98-03.

The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) embarked on a phase I/II study of patients suffering from glioblastoma multiforme (protocol 98-03) to assess the impact of dose escalation with 3-D conformal techniques. The primary endpoints were feasibility and survival. This report describes the outcome of secondary endpoints (quality of life and neurocognitive function). Patients with supratentorial GBM were treated with a combination of carmustine (BCNU) and conformal irradiation (dose levels: 66, 72, 78, 84 Gy, respectively). Quality of Life was assessed with the Spitzer Quality of Life Index. Neurocognitive function was determined by the Mini Mental Status Examination. The latter tests were administered at the start of irradiation, at the end of irradiation and then at 4 month intervals. Relatively high compliance was achieved with both of the tools (SQLI; MMSE). Overall rates of survival between baseline SQLI scores <7 and 7-10 were statistically significantly different [HR = 1.72, 95% CI (1.22, 2.4), P = 0.0015]. The significant impact of high SQLI score on survival was preserved in multivariate analysis. The component of this index which made the greatest contribution was the patient's independence. There was continual deterioration of neurocognitive function within the populations studied. No correlation was seen between dose escalation and the secondary endpoints studied. Radiation dose escalation and assessment of its impact on life quality and neurocognition can be carried out in a large international trial. Baseline SQLI is a statistically significant determinant of survival. Those who maintain independence have superior survival to those who are reliant on others.

Biochemical and clinical significance of the posttreatment prostate-specific antigen bounce for prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiation therapy alone: a multiinstitutional pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: The posttreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) bounce phenomenon has been recognized in at least 20% of all patients treated with radiation. The purpose of the current report was to determine if there was a difference in biochemical and clinical control between the bounce and nonbounce (NB) patients using pooled data on 4839 patients with T1-2 prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy (RT) alone at 9 institutions between 1986 and 1995. METHODS: The median follow-up was 6.3 years. A posttreatment PSA bounce was defined by a minimal rise of 0.4 ng/mL over a 6-month follow-up period, followed by a drop in PSA level of any magnitude. Endpoints included no biochemical evidence of disease (bNED) failure (BF) (ASTRO definition), distant failure (DF), cause-specific failure (CSF), and overall survival (OS). Patients were stratified by pretreatment PSA, Gleason score, T stage, age, dose, and risk group. RESULTS: In all, 978 (20%) patients experienced at least 1 posttreatment PSA bounce. Within 3 subgroups (risk group, pretreatment PSA, and age), statistically significant differences of remaining bounce-free were observed on univariate analysis. Patients < 70 years had a 72% chance of remaining bounce-free at 5 years compared with 75% for older patients (P = .04). The NB patients had 72% bNED control at 10 years compared with 58% for the bounce patients. The effect of a bounce remained statistically significant on multivariate analysis (P < .0001). No statistically significant difference in DF, CSF, or OS was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with external beam radiation therapy alone who experience a posttreatment PSA bounce have increased risk of BF. However, this did not translate into a difference in clinical failure with the available follow-up in the current study.

Definitions of biochemical failure that best predict clinical failure in patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation alone: a multi-institutional pooled analysis.

PURPOSE: Pooled data on 4,839 patients with T1-2 prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy (RT) alone at 9 institutions have previously provided long-term biochemical failure (BF) and clinical outcomes using the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) definition. In this report we determined the sensitivity and specificity of several BF definitions using distant failure (DF) alone or clinical failure (CF), defined as local failure (LF) and/or DF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The pooled cohort was treated between 1986 and 1995 with external beam RT (60 Gy or greater) without pre-RT androgen suppression or planned post-RT adjuvant androgen suppression. Median followup was 6.3 years. The sensitivity and specificity of 102 definitions of BF relative to DF and LF were assessed. RESULTS: The BF definitions with higher sensitivity and specificity than the ASTRO definition for DF only and CF are reported. The sensitivity and specificity of the ASTRO definition to predict DF alone was 55% and 68%, respectively. Three definitions had higher sensitivity and specificity, namely prostate specific antigen (PSA) greater than current nadir (lowest PSA prior to current measurement) plus 3 ng/ml (sensitivity 76% and specificity 72%), dated at the call (failure date as the date when the criterion was met), PSA greater than absolute nadir plus 2 ng/ml (sensitivity 72% and specificity 70%), dated at the call, or 2 consecutive increases of at least 0.5 ng/ml, back dated (sensitivity 69% and specificity 73%). The sensitivity and specificity of the ASTRO definition to predict CF was 60% and 72%, respectively. Three definitions had higher sensitivity and specificity, namely PSA greater than current nadir plus 3 ng/ml (sensitivity 66% and specificity 77%), dated at the call, PSA greater than absolute nadir plus 2 ng/ml (sensitivity 64% and specificity 74%), dated at the call, or 2 consecutive increases of at least 0.5 ng/ml, back dated (sensitivity 67% and specificity 78%). CONCLUSIONS: Using what is to our knowledge the largest data set of patients with prostate cancer treated with RT alone we correlated multiple definitions of BF with the strict clinical end points of DF alone and CF (DF or local failure). Defining BF as PSA greater than absolute nadir plus 2 ng/ml, dated at the call, PSA greater than current nadir plus 3 ng/ml, dated at the call, or 2 consecutive increases of at least 0.5 ng/ml, back dated, had higher sensitivity and specificity for DF alone or CF compared with the ASTRO definition. This information should contribute to the discussion regarding suggested modifications to the ASTRO definition of biochemical failure.

Penile bulb dose and impotence after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer on RTOG 9406: findings from a prospective, multi-institutional, phase I/II dose-escalation study.

PURPOSE: To assess the relationship between the dose to the bulb of the penis and the risk of impotence in men treated on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9406. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Men enrolled on a Phase I/II dose-escalation study, RTOG 9406, who were reported to be potent at entry and evaluable (n = 158) were selected for inclusion. Follow-up evaluations were scheduled every 3, 4, and 6 months for the first, second, and the third through fifth years, then annually. At each follow-up visit an assessment of potency status was made. Penile structures were defined by a single observer blinded to the potency status, using Web-based, on-line software. The dosimetry for penile structures was calculated at the Quality Assurance Center at Washington University and provided to RTOG Statistical Headquarters to determine whether there was a relationship between dose and impotence. RESULTS: Patients whose median penile dose was > or = 52.5 Gy had a greater risk of impotence compared with those receiving <52.5 Gy (p = 0.039). In a multivariate analysis neither age, the dose to the prostate, nor the use of hormonal therapy correlated with the risk of impotence. CONCLUSIONS: Dose to the bulb of the penis seems to be associated with the risk of radiation-induced impotence.

Comparison of alternative biochemical failure definitions based on clinical outcome in 4839 prostate cancer patients treated by external beam radiotherapy between 1986 and 1995.

PURPOSE: To assess the merit of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) definition of biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer by testing alternative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure definitions against the "gold standard" of clinical failure and to study the effect of backdating the time of failure. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Nine participating institutions agreed to submit follow-up results for all patients with clinically localized prostatic cancer (Stage T1b, T1c, T2, N0M0) treated between 1986 and 1995 by external beam radiotherapy only, to doses of >or=60 Gy, with no androgen deprivation before treatment. A total of 4839 men met the study criteria, with a median follow-up time of 6.3 years. The prediction of clinical failure by 102 definitions of biochemical failure was assessed using various quantitative measures. RESULTS: Four definitions were superior as measured by the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and hazard of clinical failure after biochemical failure: two rises of at least 0.5 ng/mL backdated, PSA level at or greater than the absolute nadir plus 2 ng/mL at the call date, and PSA level at or greater than the current nadir plus 2 or 3 ng/mL at the call date. The absolute nadir was the lowest measured PSA level during all of follow-up, and the current nadir was the lowest PSA measured previous to a particular PSA measurement during follow-up. With the possible exception of patients in the low-risk group, the likelihood of ultimate clinical failure decreased as the time of biochemical failure increased. Failure definitions based on PSA levels >0.2 or 0.5 ng/mL were inferior to other definitions. Backdating the failure time introduced bias into the estimate of freedom from biochemical failure, which was increasingly overestimated at shorter median follow-up times. This bias can be circumvented either by using a failure definition based on the call date or by backdating the censoring times of patients with one or two rises who could potentially have failure at a future (unobserved) time. A short follow-up time as such does not result in bias unless the failures are backdated; in the absence of backdating, it is the precision of failure-free survival that is increasingly compromised as the follow-up time is reduced. CONCLUSION: The ASTRO failure definition ended the confusion resulting from different failure definitions that had been in use, and it did so accurately enough that it is probably not necessary to recalculate previously published results. Nevertheless, for the current pooled analysis of outcome in 4839 men with a 6.3-year median follow-up, other definitions of biochemical failure were superior as assessed by various quantitative measures of concordance of biochemical and ultimate clinical failure. An additional disadvantage of the ASTRO definition is the bias introduced by backdating failures, as well as the necessarily retrospective nature of its application. Some "current" definitions, but not those based on the PSA level rising above a fixed threshold, have significantly higher sensitivity and specificity, do not lead to biased estimations of biochemical disease-free survival, and are directly applicable during patient counseling. These are all issues that would play a role in replacing the ASTRO consensus definition.