The dosimetric error due to uncorrected tumor rotation during real-time adaptive prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: During prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), prostate tumor translational motion may deteriorate the planned dose distribution. Most of the major advances in motion management to date have focused on correcting this one aspect of the tumor motion, translation. However, large prostate rotation up to 30° has been measured. As the technological innovation evolves toward delivering increasingly precise radiotherapy, it is important to quantify the clinical benefit of translational and rotational motion correction over translational motion correction alone. PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to quantify the dosimetric impact of intrafractional dynamic rotation of the prostate measured with a six degrees-of-freedom tumor motion monitoring technology. METHODS: The delivered dose was reconstructed including (a) translational and rotational motion and (b) only translational motion of the tumor for 32 prostate cancer patients recruited on a 5-fraction prostate SBRT clinical trial. Patients on the trial received 7.25 Gy in a treatment fraction. A 5 mm clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin was applied in all directions except the posterior direction where a 3 mm expansion was used. Prostate intrafractional translational motion was managed using a gating strategy, and any translation above the gating threshold was corrected by applying an equivalent couch shift. The residual translational motion is denoted as T r e s $T_{res}$ . Prostate intrafractional rotational motion R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ was recorded but not corrected. The dose differences from the planned dose due to T r e s $T_{res}$ + R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ , ΔD( T r e s $T_{res}$ + R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ ) and due to T r e s $T_{res}$ alone, ΔD( T r e s $T_{res}$ ), were then determined for CTV D98, PTV D95, bladder V6Gy, and rectum V6Gy. The residual dose error due to uncorrected rotation, R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ was then quantified: Δ D R e s i d u a l $\Delta D_{Residual}$ = ΔD( T r e s $T_{res}$ + R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ ) - ΔD( T res ${T}_{\textit{res}}$ ). RESULTS: Fractional data analysis shows that the dose differences from the plan (both ΔD( T r e s $T_{res}$ + R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ ) and ΔD( T r e s $T_{res}$ )) for CTV D98 was less than 5% in all treatment fractions. ΔD( T r e s $T_{res}$ + R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ ) was larger than 5% in one fraction for PTV D95, in one fraction for bladder V6Gy, and in five fractions for rectum V6Gy. Uncorrected rotation, R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ induced residual dose error, Δ D R e s i d u a l $\Delta D_{Residual}$ , resulted in less dose to CTV and PTV in 43% and 59% treatment fractions, respectively, and more dose to bladder and rectum in 51% and 53% treatment fractions, respectively. The cumulative dose over five fractions, ∑D( T r e s $T_{res}$ + R u n c o r r $R_{uncorr}$ ) and ∑D( T r e s $T_{res}$ ), was always within 5% of the planned dose for all four structures for every patient. CONCLUSIONS: The dosimetric impact of tumor rotation on a large prostate cancer patient cohort was quantified in this study. These results suggest that the standard 3-5 mm CTV-PTV margin was sufficient to account for the intrafraction prostate rotation observed for this cohort of patients, provided an appropriate gating threshold was applied to correct for translational motion. Residual dose errors due to uncorrected prostate rotation were small in magnitude, which may be corrected using different treatment adaptation strategies to further improve the dosimetric accuracy.

Two decades of FDG-PET/CT in seminoma: exploring its role in diagnosis, surveillance and follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of testicular cancer may experience long-term morbidity following treatment. There is an unmet need to investigate techniques that can differentiate individuals who need additional therapy from those who do not. 2-18fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) with computerised tomography (CT) may be helpful in select settings and may be used outside of current evidence-based recommendations in real-world practice. METHODS: A institutional FDG-PET/CT database of scans performed between 2000 and 2020 for adults with testicular seminoma was interrogated. Endpoints of interest included the positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive value of FDG-PET/CT for identifying active seminoma (defined by progressive radiology, response to treatment or biopsy); or no active seminoma within 24-months for patients with stage 1 and advanced seminoma. An exploratory analysis examining predictive role of SUVmax was also performed. RESULTS: 249 patients met eligibility criteria for the analysis, including 184 patients with stage 1 and 77 patients with advanced testicular seminoma. Of 193 FDG-PET/CT performed in stage 1 seminoma with available follow-up data, 79 were performed during active surveillance. 18 (23%) of these were positive, all of which had confirmed recurrent seminoma (PPV 100%). Of 45 negative FDG-PET/CT during active surveillance, 4 recurrences developed corresponding to a NPV 91%. When clinical suspicion precipitated FDG-PET/CT (n = 36): PPV 100%, NPV 86%. Of 145 FDG-PET/CT in advanced seminoma with available follow-up data, 25 (17%) were performed at baseline (within 2 months of diagnosis), 70 (48%) post-treatment for evaluation of treatment response and 50 (34%) during follow-up following prior curative treatment. 10 (14%) post-treatment FDG-PET/CT were positive corresponding to a PPV 60%. Of 46 negative FDG-PET/CT, 5 recurrences occurred (NPV 89%). During follow-up after prior curative treatment, 24 (50%) FDG-PET/CT were positive corresponding to a PPV 83%; of 20 negative FDG-PET/CT, 1 recurrence occurred, NPV 95%. When clinical suspicion indicated FDG-PET/CT (n = 36): PPV 100%, NPV 94%. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET/CT offers high PPV for identifying seminoma and accurately predicts non-recurrence across a clinically relevant 24-months. Notably, FDG-PET/CT may prevent unnecessary treatment in 45% of patients undergoing investigation for clinical suspicion of recurrence during follow-up of advanced seminoma. The use of FDG-PET/CT in selected patients now, may help prevent unnecessary treatment of people with testicular seminoma.

A retrospective review of the long-term outcomes of online adaptive radiation therapy and conventional radiation therapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To report long-term outcomes of online image-guided (IG) adaptive radiation therapy (aRT) versus conventional IG radiation therapy (cRT) for bladder preservation in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with histologically proven MIBC who were prescribed radical intent radiation therapy (RT) following trans-urethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) was conducted. There were three groups based on their RT treatment modality: conventional RT (cRT), margin 5 mm adaptive RT (aRT5mm) and margin 7 mm adaptive RT (aRT7mm). RESULTS: 171 patients were included in this study, with median age of 79.4 years (41-90). Approximately half of all patients received concurrent chemotherapy. N = 57 underwent cRT, n = 39 underwent aRT5mm, and n = 75 underwent aRT7mm. Response evaluable patients in all three groups (n = 133) had high rates of complete response (CR, 83%) on first post-RT cystoscopy with no significant differences between the groups. At a median follow-up of 54 months, the 5-year freedom from muscle-invasive failure survival (FFMIFS) in the cRT, aRT5mm, and aRT7mm groups were 75%, 59%, and 98%, respectively. The estimated cancer specific survival (CSS) at 5 years were 60%, 30%, and 59%, respectively. The estimated overall survival (OS) at 5 years were 43%, 26%, and 38%, respectively. The incidence of late grade 3 or 4 toxicity was n = 5 in aRT5mm, n = 2 in cRT group, and n = 1 in aRT7mm. CONCLUSION: IG aRT with 7 mm expansion for MIBC provides higher rates of FFMIFS, similar 5-year CSS and OS, as well as toxicity outcomes when compared to cRT. aRT with 5 mm expansion with this RT protocol is not recommended for treatment.

Is multileaf collimator tracking or gating a better intrafraction motion adaptation strategy? An analysis of the TROG 15.01 stereotactic prostate ablative radiotherapy with KIM (SPARK) trial.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) has recently emerged as a favourable treatment option for prostate cancer patients. With higher doses delivered over fewer fractions, motion adaptation is a requirement for accurate delivery of SABR. This study compared the efficacy of multileaf collimator (MLC) tracking vs. gating as a real-time motion adaptation strategy for prostate SABR patients enrolled in a clinical trial. METHODS: Forty-four prostate cancer patients treated over five fractions in the TROG 15.01 SPARK trial were analysed in this study. Forty-nine fractions were treated using MLC tracking and 166 fractions were treated using beam gating and couch shifts. A time-resolved motion-encoded dose reconstruction method was used to evaluate the dose delivered using each motion adaptation strategy and compared to an estimation of what would have been delivered with no motion adaptation strategy implemented. RESULTS: MLC tracking and gating both delivered doses closer to the plan compared to when no motion adaptation strategy was used. Differences between MLC tracking and gating were small with differences in the mean discrepancy from the plan of -0.3% (CTV D98%), 1.4% (CTV D2%), 0.4% (PTV D95%), 0.2% (rectum V30Gy) and 0.0% (bladder V30Gy). On average, 0.5 couch shifts were required per gated fractions with a mean interruption duration of 1.8 ± 2.6 min per fraction treated using gating. CONCLUSION: Both MLC tracking and gating were effective strategies at improving the accuracy of the dose delivered to the target and organs at risk. While dosimetric performance was comparable, gating resulted in interruptions to treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02397317.

Real-Time Image Guided Ablative Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy: Results From the TROG 15.01 SPARK Trial.

PURPOSE: Kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring (KIM) is a novel software platform implemented on standard radiation therapy systems and enabling real-time image guided radiation therapy (IGRT). In a multi-institutional prospective trial, we investigated whether real-time IGRT improved the accuracy of the dose patients with prostate cancer received during radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty-eight patients with prostate cancer were treated with KIM-guided SABR with 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions. During KIM-guided treatment, the prostate motion was corrected for by either beam gating with couch shifts or multileaf collimator tracking. A dose reconstruction method was used to evaluate the dose delivered to the target and organs at risk with and without real-time IGRT. Primary outcome was the effect of real-time IGRT on dose distributions. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes and toxicity. RESULTS: Motion correction occurred in ≥1 treatment for 88% of patients (42 of 48) and 51% of treatments (121 of 235). With real-time IGRT, no treatments had prostate clinical target volume (CTV) D98% dose 5% less than planned. Without real-time IGRT, 13 treatments (5.5%) had prostate CTV D98% doses 5% less than planned. The prostate CTV D98% dose with real-time IGRT was closer to the plan by an average of 1.0% (range, -2.8% to 20.3%). Patient outcomes showed no change in the 12-month patient-reported outcomes compared with baseline and no grade ≥3 genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time IGRT is clinically effective for prostate cancer SABR.

Radiation Dose Escalation or Longer Androgen Suppression to Prevent Distant Progression in Men With Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: 10-Year Data From the TROG 03.04 RADAR Trial.

PURPOSE: To clarify the relative effects of duration of androgen suppression (AS) and radiation dose escalation (RDE) on distant progression (DP) in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Participants with locally advanced prostate cancer in the TROG 03.04 RADAR trial were randomized to 6 or 18 months AS ± 18 months zoledronic acid (Z). The trial incorporated a RDE program by stratification at randomization and dosing options were 66, 70, or 74 Gy external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), or 46 Gy EBRT plus high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost (HDRB). The primary endpoint for this study was distant progression (DP). Secondary endpoints included local progression, bone progression, prostate cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Effect estimates for AS duration and RDE were derived using Fine and Gray competing risk models adjusting for use of Z, age, tumor stage, Gleason grade group, prostate-specific antigen, and treatment center. Cumulative incidence at 10 years was estimated for each RDE group. RESULTS: A total of 1051 out of 1071 randomized subjects were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Compared with 6 months AS, 18 months AS significantly reduced DP independently of radiation dose (subhazard ratio 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.87; P = .002). No statistically significant interaction between effect of AS duration and RT dose was observed (Wald test P = .76). In subgroup analyses, DP was significantly reduced by the longer duration of AS in the 70 Gy and HDRB groups but not in the 66 Gy and 74 Gy. Compared with 70 Gy, HDRB significantly reduced DP (subhazard ratio 0.68 [95% CI, 0.57-0.80]; P < .0001) independently of AS duration. At 10 years, adjusted cumulative incidences were 26.1% (95% CI, 18.9%-33.2%), 26.7% (22.9%-30.6%), 24.9% (20.0%-29.8%) and 19.7% (15.5%-23.8%) for DPs in the respective radiation dose groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 6 months AS, 18 months AS reduced DP independently of radiation dose. Men treated with HDRB gained a significant benefit from a longer duration of AS. Evidence of improved oncologic outcomes for HDRB compared with dose-escalated EBRT needs to be confirmed in a randomized trial.

TROG 18.01 phase III randomised clinical trial of the Novel Integration of New prostate radiation schedules with adJuvant Androgen deprivation: NINJA study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a non-invasive alternative to surgery for the treatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer (PC). The objectives of the Novel Integration of New prostate radiation schedules with adJuvant Androgen deprivation (NINJA) clinical trial are to compare two emerging SBRT regimens for efficacy with technical substudies focussing on MRI only planning and the use of knowledge-based planning (KBP) to assess radiotherapy plan quality. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Eligible patients must have biopsy-proven unfavourable intermediate or favourable high-risk PC, have an Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1 and provide written informed consent. All patients will receive 6 months in total of androgen deprivation therapy. Patients will be randomised to one of two SBRT regimens. The first will be 40 Gy in five fractions given on alternating days (SBRT monotherapy). The second will be 20 Gy in two fractions given 1 week apart followed 2 weeks later by 36 Gy in 12 fractions given five times per week (virtual high-dose rate boost (HDRB)). The primary efficacy outcome will be biochemical clinical control at 5 years. Secondary endpoints for the initial portion of NINJA look at the transition of centres towards MRI only planning and the impact of KBP on real-time (RT) plan assessment. The first 150 men will demonstrate accrual feasibility as well as addressing the KBP and MRI planning aims, prior to proceeding with total accrual to 472 patients as a phase III randomised controlled trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: NINJA is a multicentre cooperative clinical trial comparing two SBRT regimens for men with PC. It builds on promising results from several single-armed studies, and explores radiation dose escalation in the Virtual HDRB arm. The initial component includes novel technical elements, and will form an important platform set for a definitive phase III study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTN 12615000223538.

The accuracy and precision of the KIM motion monitoring system used in the multi-institutional TROG 15.01 Stereotactic Prostate Ablative Radiotherapy with KIM (SPARK) trial.

PURPOSE: Kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring (KIM) allows for real-time image guidance for tracking tumor motion in six-degrees-of-freedom (6DoF) on a standard linear accelerator. This study assessed the geometric accuracy and precision of KIM used to guide patient treatments in the TROG 15.01 multi-institutional Stereotactic Prostate Ablative Radiotherapy with KIM trial and investigated factors affecting accuracy and precision. METHODS: Fractions from 44 patients with prostate cancer treated using KIM-guided SBRT were analyzed across four institutions, on two different linear accelerator models and two different beam models (6 MV and 10 MV FFF). The geometric accuracy and precision of KIM was assessed from over 33 000 images (translation) and over 9000 images (rotation) by comparing the real-time measured motion to retrospective kV/MV triangulation. Factors potentially affecting accuracy, including contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of kV images and incorrect marker segmentation, were also investigated. RESULTS: The geometric accuracy and precision did not depend on treatment institution, beam model or motion magnitude, but was correlated with gantry angle. The centroid geometric accuracy and precision of the KIM system for SABR prostate treatments was 0.0 ± 0.5, 0.0 ± 0.4 and 0.1 ± 0.3 mm for translation, and -0.1 ± 0.6°, -0.1 ± 1.4° and -0.1 ± 1.0° for rotation in the AP, LR and SI directions respectively. Centroid geometric error exceeded 2 mm for 0.05% of this dataset. No significant relationship was found between large geometric error and CNR or marker segmentation correlation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the ability of KIM to locate the prostate with accuracy below other uncertainties in radiotherapy treatments, and the feasibility for KIM to be implemented across multiple institutions.

Short-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy versus intermediate-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy, with or without zoledronic acid, in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (TROG 03.04 RADAR): 10-year results from a randomised, phase 3, factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of androgen suppression for men with locally advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy with curative intent is yet to be defined. Zoledronic acid is effective in preventing androgen suppression-induced bone loss, but its role in preventing castration-sensitive bone metastases in locally advanced prostate cancer is unclear. The RADAR trial assessed whether the addition of 12 months of adjuvant androgen suppression, 18 months of zoledronic acid, or both, can improve outcomes in men with locally advanced prostate cancer who receive 6 months of androgen suppression and prostatic radiotherapy. This report presents 10-year outcomes from this trial. METHODS: For this randomised, phase 3, 2 × 2 factorial trial, eligible men were 18 years or older with locally advanced prostate cancer (either T2b-4, N0 M0 tumours or T2a, N0 M0 tumours provided Gleason score was ≥7 and baseline prostate-specific antigen [PSA] concentration was ≥10 µg/L). We randomly allocated participants in a 2 × 2 factorial design by computer-generated randomisation (using the minimisation technique, and stratified by centre, baseline PSA concentration, clinical tumour stage, Gleason score, and use of a brachytherapy boost) in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to four treatment groups. Patients in the control group received 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen suppression with leuprorelin (22·5 mg every 3 months, intramuscularly) and radiotherapy alone (short-term androgen suppression [STAS]); this treatment was either followed by another 12 months of adjuvant androgen suppression with leuprorelin (22·5 mg every 3 months, intramuscularly; intermediate-term androgen suppression [ITAS]), or accompanied by 18 months of zoledronic acid (4 mg every 3 months, intravenously) starting at randomisation (STAS plus zoledronic acid), or both (ITAS plus zoledronic acid). All patients received radiotherapy to the prostate and seminal vesicles, starting from the end of the fifth month of androgen suppression; dosing options were 66, 70, and 74 Gy in 2-Gy fractions per day, or 46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions followed by a high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost dose of 19·5 Gy in 6·5-Gy fractions. Treatment allocation was open label. The primary endpoint was prostate cancer-specific mortality and was analysed according to intention-to-treat using competing-risks methods. The trial is closed to follow-up and this is the final report of the main endpoints. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00193856. FINDINGS: Between Oct 20, 2003, and Aug 15, 2007, 1071 men were enrolled and randomly assigned to STAS (n=268), ITAS (n=268), STAS plus zoledronic acid (n=268), and ITAS plus zoledronic acid (n=267). Median follow-up was 10·4 years (IQR 7·9-11·7). At this 10-year follow-up, no interactions were observed between androgen suppression and zoledronic acid so the treatment groups were collapsed to compare treatments according to duration of androgen suppression: 6 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy (6AS+RT) versus 18 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy (18AS+RT) and to compare treatments according to whether or not patients received zoledronic acid. The total number of deaths was 375 (200 men receiving 6AS+RT and 175 men receiving 18AS+RT), of which 143 (38%) were attributable to prostate cancer (81 men receiving 6AS+RT and 62 men receiving 18AS+RT). When analysed by duration of androgen suppression, the adjusted cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 13·3% (95% CI 10·3-16·0) for 6AS+RT versus 9·7% (7·3-12·0) for 18AS+RT, representing an absolute difference of 3·7% (95% CI 0·3-7·1; sub-hazard ratio [sHR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·50-0·98], adjusted p=0·035). The addition of zoledronic acid did not affect prostate cancer-specific mortality; the adjusted cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 11·2% (95% CI 8·7-13·7) with zoledronic acid vs 11·7% (9·2-14·1) without, representing an absolute difference of -0·5% (95% CI -3·8 to 2·9; sHR 0·95 [95% CI 0·69-1·32], adjusted p=0·78). Although safety analysis was not prespecified for this 10-year analysis, one new serious adverse event (osteonecrosis of the mandible, in a patient who received 18 months of androgen suppression plus zoledronic acid) occurred since our previous report, bringing the total number of cases of this serious adverse event to three (<1% out of 530 patients who received zoledronic acid evaluated for safety) and the total number of drug-related serious adverse events to 12 (1% out of all 1065 patients evaluable for safety). No treatment-related deaths occurred during the study. INTERPRETATION: 18 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy is a more effective treatment option for locally advanced prostate cancer than 6 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy, but the addition of zoledronic acid to this treatment regimen is not beneficial. Evidence from the RADAR and French Canadian Prostate Cancer Study IV trials suggests that 18 months of androgen suppression with moderate radiation dose escalation is an effective but more tolerable option than longer durations of androgen suppression for men with locally advanced prostate cancer including intermediate and high risk elements. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals Australia, New Zealand Health Research Council, New Zealand Cancer Society, Cancer Standards Institute New Zealand, University of Newcastle (Australia), Hunter Medical Research Institute, Calvary Mater Newcastle Radiation Oncology Fund, and Maitland Cancer Appeal.

Stereotactic Abative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is an emerging treatment option for oligometastatic prostate cancer. However, limited prospective evidence is available. OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and feasibility of single fraction SABR for patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer. Secondary endpoints were local and distant progression-free survival (LPFS and DPFS), toxicity, quality of life (QoL), and prostate-specific antigen response. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a prospective clinical trial, patients were screened with computed tomography, bone scan, and sodium fluoride positron emission tomography scan and had one to three oligometastases. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to determine LPFS and DPFS. Toxicity was graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event version 4.0. QoL was assessed using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BM22 at 1, 3,12, and 24 mo. INTERVENTION: A single fraction of 20-Gy SABR to each lesion. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between 2013 and 2014, 33 consecutive patients received SABR to a total of 50 oligometastases and were followed for 2 yr. The median age was 70 yr. The Gleason score was ≥8 in 15 patients (45%). Twenty patients had bone only, 12 had node only, and one had mixed disease. SABR was feasible and delivered as planned in 97% of cases. There was one grade 3 adverse event (3.0%, vertebral fracture). No patient died. The 1 and 2-yr LPFS was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91-100) and 93% (95% CI: 84-100), and DPFS was 58% (95% CI: 43-77) and 39% (95% CI: 25-60), respectively. In those not on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; n=22), the 2-yr freedom from ADT was 48%. There was no significant difference from baseline QoL observed. Limitations include small sample size, limited duration of follow-up, and lack of a control arm. CONCLUSIONS: A single SABR session was feasible and associated with low morbidity in this cohort. Over one-third of patients did not progress and were free from ADT at 2-yr. QoL measures were maintained with this treatment strategy. PATIENT SUMMARY: This clinical trial investigated single treatment stereotactic radiotherapy for low volume advanced prostate cancer. The approach was found to be safe with avoidance of hormone therapy in almost half of the participants at 2 yr.

Moderate hypofractionation for prostate cancer: A user's guide.

Three large randomised controlled trials have been published in the last year demonstrating the non-inferiority of moderate hypofractionation compared to conventional fractionation for localised prostate cancer with respect to both disease control and late toxicity at 5 years. Furthermore, no clinically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes have emerged. More mature follow-up data are now also available from phase 2 studies confirming that moderate hypofractionation is associated with low rates of significant toxicity at 10 years. Moving forward it is likely that appropriate patient selection, integration of androgen deprivation and attention to optimising technique will play a more important role than modest differences in dose-fractionation schedules. Here we briefly review the evidence, discuss issues of patient selection and provide an approach to implementing moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for prostate cancer in clinical practice.

Health-related quality of life for immediate versus delayed androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with asymptomatic, non-curable prostate cancer (TROG 03.06 and VCOG PR 01-03 [TOAD]): a randomised, multicentre, non-blinded, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer who have relapsed with rising prostate-specific antigen concentration only (PSA-only relapse), or with non-curable but asymptomatic disease at diagnosis, could adversely affect quality of life at a time when the disease itself does not. We aimed to compare the effect of immediate versus delayed androgen-deprivation therapy on health-related quality of life over 5 years in men enrolled in the TOAD (Timing of Androgen Deprivation) trial. METHODS: This randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial done in 29 public and private cancer centres across Australia, New Zealand, and Canada compared immediate with delayed androgen-deprivation therapy in men with PSA-only relapse after definitive treatment, or de-novo non-curable disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a database-embedded, dynamically balanced algorithm to immediate androgen-deprivation therapy (immediate therapy group) or to delayed androgen-deprivation therapy (delayed therapy group). Any type of androgen-deprivation therapy was permitted, as were intermittent or continuous schedules. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality-of-life questionnaires QLQ-C30 and PR25 were completed before randomisation, every 6 months for 2 years, and annually for a further 3 years. The primary outcome of the trial, reported previously, was overall survival, with global health-related quality of life at 2 years as a secondary endpoint. Here we report prespecified secondary objectives of the quality-of-life endpoint. Analysis was by intention to treat. Statistical significance was set at p=0·0036. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12606000301561, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00110162. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2004, and July 13, 2012, 293 men were recruited and randomly assigned; 151 to the delayed therapy group and 142 to the immediate therapy group. There was no difference between the two groups in global health-related quality of life over 2 years from randomisation. There were no statistically significant differences in global quality of life, physical functioning, role functioning, or emotional functioning, fatigue, dyspnoea, insomnia, or feeling less masculine over the entire 5 years after randomisation. Sexual activity was lower in the immediate therapy group than in the delayed group at 6 and 12 months (at 6 months mean score 29·20 [95% CI 24·59-33·80] in the delayed group vs 10·40 [6·87-13·93] in the immediate group, difference 18·80 [95% CI 13·00-24·59], p<0·0001; at 12 months 28·63 [24·07-33·18] vs 13·76 [9·94-17·59], 14·86 [8·95-20·78], p<0·0001), with the differences exceeding the clinically significant threshold of 10 points until beyond 2 years. The immediate therapy group also had more hormone-treatment-related symptoms at 6 and 12 months (at 6 months mean score 8·48 [95% CI 6·89-10·07] in the delayed group vs 15·97 [13·92-18·02] in the immediate group, difference -7·49 [-10·06 to -4·93], p<0·0001; at 12 months 9·32 [7·59-11·05] vs 17·07 [14·75-19·39], -7·75 [-10·62 to -4·89], p<0·0001), but with differences below the threshold of clinical significance. For the individual symptoms, hot flushes were clinically significantly higher in the immediate group (adjusted proportion 0·31 for delayed therapy vs 0·55 for immediate therapy, adjusted odds ratio 2·87 [1·96-4·21], p<0·0001) over the 5-year period, as were nipple or breast symptoms (0·06 vs 0·14, 2·64 [1·61-4·34], p=0·00013). INTERPRETATION: Immediate use of androgen-deprivation therapy was associated with early detriments in specific hormone-treatment-related symptoms, but with no other demonstrable effect on overall functioning or health-related quality of life. This evidence can be used to help decision making about treatment initiation for men at this disease stage. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Cancer Councils, The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Mayne Pharma Australia, Tolmar Australia.

Patterns of health services utilization in the last two weeks of life among cancer patients: Experience in an Australian academic cancer center.

AIM: To report the trend in end-of-life health services (HS) utilization among cancer patients treated in a large Australian academic cancer center over a 12-year period. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of cancer patients treated at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (PMCC), who had documented death between January 2002 and December 2013. Using administrative and billing database, we report on the utilization of different categories of HS within two weeks of death: diagnostic investigations (pathology and radiology), inpatient and outpatient services, and potentially futile interventions (PFI, which include radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery). RESULTS: Of the 27 926 "active" cancer patients in the study (i.e. those with medical contact at PMCC in the last year of life), 6368 (23%) had documented HS utilization within two weeks of death. 11% and 9% had pathology and radiology investigations respectively, 14% had outpatient clinic appointments, and 7% had hospital admissions. There were 2654 patients (10%) who had PFI within two weeks of death - 2198 (8%) had radiotherapy, 287 (1%) chemotherapy and 267 (1%) surgery. We observed peak HS and PFI utilization in 2004, which then dropped to its lowest in 2009/2010. CONCLUSION: Experience in an Australian cancer center suggests approximately one in four "active" cancer patients had HS utilization, and one in ten had PFI, within two weeks of death. The implementation of palliative care guidelines may reduce some of these potentially wasteful and futile interventions.

Support for the use of objective comorbidity indices in the assessment of noncancer death risk in prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer management involves a balance between the risks of cancer death against those from other causes. To evaluate the performance of several comorbidity indices in predicting comorbid death in a prostate cancer radiotherapy cohort. METHODS: 2,131 men with localised prostate cancer treated with radical radiotherapy between 1999 and 2007 were studied. Tumour features, androgen deprivation usage, age, number of prescription medications (PMN) and Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 Index (ACE-27) were recorded. Death from prostate cancer (DPC) and death from other causes (DOC) were analysed as competing causes of death using a competing risks model, with discrimination assessed using the concordance index. RESULTS: ACE-27 scores correlated with patient's PMN (median PMN = 2). Tumour features were independent of ACE-27 scores. Estimated cumulative incidences of DOC and DPC at 10 years were 16.4% and 7.7% respectively. In the low/intermediate risk group (n = 1026) there was a 3.4-fold predominance of DOC inside 10 years (cumulative incidence: 15.8% DOC vs 3.4% DPC). High-risk men had approximately equal rates of DPC and DOC at 10 years. Multivariable analysis showed age, ACE-27 score ≥ 1 and PMN to have significant associations with DOC (P < 0.002 for all). A multivariable model incorporating all 3 variables resulted in C-Index = 0.646. CONCLUSION: Age, ACE-27 score and PMN act as independent prognostic factors for DOC in prostate cancer patients and can improve patient's life expectancy prediction.

Randomized Trial of a Hypofractionated Radiation Regimen for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer.

Purpose Men with localized prostate cancer often are treated with external radiotherapy (RT) over 8 to 9 weeks. Hypofractionated RT is given over a shorter time with larger doses per treatment than standard RT. We hypothesized that hypofractionation versus conventional fractionation is similar in efficacy without increased toxicity. Patients and Methods We conducted a multicenter randomized noninferiority trial in intermediate-risk prostate cancer (T1 to 2a, Gleason score ≤ 6, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] 10.1 to 20 ng/mL; T2b to 2c, Gleason ≤ 6, and PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL; or T1 to 2, Gleason = 7, and PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL). Patients were allocated to conventional RT of 78 Gy in 39 fractions over 8 weeks or to hypofractionated RT of 60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks. Androgen deprivation was not permitted with therapy. The primary outcome was biochemical-clinical failure (BCF) defined by any of the following: PSA failure (nadir + 2), hormonal intervention, clinical local or distant failure, or death as a result of prostate cancer. The noninferiority margin was 7.5% (hazard ratio, < 1.32). Results Median follow-up was 6.0 years. One hundred nine of 608 patients in the hypofractionated arm versus 117 of 598 in the standard arm experienced BCF. Most of the events were PSA failures. The 5-year BCF disease-free survival was 85% in both arms (hazard ratio [short v standard], 0.96; 90% CI, 0.77 to 1.2). Ten deaths as a result of prostate cancer occurred in the short arm and 12 in the standard arm. No significant differences were detected between arms for grade ≥ 3 late genitourinary and GI toxicity. Conclusion The hypofractionated RT regimen used in this trial was not inferior to conventional RT and was not associated with increased late toxicity. Hypofractionated RT is more convenient for patients and should be considered for intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Nurse-led group consultation intervention reduces depressive symptoms in men with localised prostate cancer: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer has many known and distressing side effects. The efficacy of group interventions for reducing psychological morbidity is lacking. This study investigated the relative benefits of a group nurse-led intervention on psychological morbidity, unmet needs, treatment-related concerns and prostate cancer-specific quality of life in men receiving curative intent radiotherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: This phase III, two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial included 331 men (consent rate: 72 %; attrition: 5 %) randomised to the intervention (n = 166) or usual care (n = 165). The intervention comprised four group and one individual consultation all delivered by specialist uro-oncology nurses. Primary outcomes were anxious and depressive symptoms as assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Unmet needs were assessed with the Supportive Care Needs Survey-SF34 Revised, treatment-related concerns with the Cancer Treatment Scale and quality of life with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index -26. Assessments occurred before, at the end of and 6 months post-radiotherapy. Primary outcome analysis was by intention-to-treat and performed by fitting a linear mixed model to each outcome separately using all observed data. RESULTS: Mixed models analysis indicated that group consultations had a significant beneficial effect on one of two primary endpoints, depressive symptoms (p = 0.009), and one of twelve secondary endpoints, procedural concerns related to cancer treatment (p = 0.049). Group consultations did not have a significant beneficial effect on generalised anxiety, unmet needs and prostate cancer-specific quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with individual consultations offered as part of usual care, the intervention provides a means of delivering patient education and is associated with modest reductions in depressive symptoms and procedural concerns. Future work should seek to confirm the clinical feasibility and cost-effectiveness of group interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTRN012606000184572 . 1 March 2006.

Oligometastatic bone disease in prostate cancer patients treated on the TROG 03.04 RADAR trial.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether eradication of oligometastases by stereotactic body radiation therapy or other means will result in cure or prolongation of survival in some cases, or merely provide palliation. We address this issue with prospectively collected progression and treatment data from the TROG 03.04 RADAR randomised controlled trial for men with locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: Three Fine and Gray competing risk survival models with time-dependent covariates were used to determine whether metastatic progression status at first diagnosis of bony metastases, i.e. number of bony sites involved and presence of prior or simultaneous other sites of progression, impacts on prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) when adjusted for baseline prognostic factors and allocated primary treatment. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2014, 176 of the 1071 subjects developed bone metastases, 152 developed other sites of progression and 91 died of PC. All subjects received secondary treatment using androgen suppression but none received extirpative treatments. The three models found evidence: 1 - of a clear prognostic gradient according to number of bony metastatic sites; 2 - that other sites of progression contributed to PCSM to a lesser extent than bone progression; and 3 - that further bony metastatic progression in men with up to 3 bony metastases had a major impact on PCSM. CONCLUSION: Randomised trials are essential to determine the value of extirpative treatment for oligometastatic bony metastases due to PC.

Timing of androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer with a rising PSA (TROG 03.06 and VCOG PR 01-03 [TOAD]): a randomised, multicentre, non-blinded, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Androgen-deprivation therapy is offered to men with prostate cancer who have a rising prostate-specific antigen after curative therapy (PSA relapse) or who are considered not suitable for curative treatment; however, the optimal timing for its introduction is uncertain. We aimed to assess whether immediate androgen-deprivation therapy improves overall survival compared with delayed therapy. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, phase 3, non-blinded trial, we recruited men through 29 oncology centres in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. Men with prostate cancer were eligible if they had a PSA relapse after previous attempted curative therapy (radiotherapy or surgery, with or without postoperative radiotherapy) or if they were not considered suitable for curative treatment (because of age, comorbidity, or locally advanced disease). We used a database-embedded, dynamically balanced, randomisation algorithm, coordinated by the Cancer Council Victoria, to randomly assign participants (1:1) to immediate androgen-deprivation therapy (immediate therapy arm) or to delayed androgen-deprivation therapy (delayed therapy arm) with a recommended interval of at least 2 years unless clinically contraindicated. Randomisation for participants with PSA relapse was stratified by type of previous therapy, relapse-free interval, and PSA doubling time; randomisation for those with non-curative disease was stratified by metastatic status; and randomisation in both groups was stratified by planned treatment schedule (continuous or intermittent) and treatment centre. Clinicians could prescribe any form and schedule of androgen-deprivation therapy and group assignment was not masked. The primary outcome was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial closed to accrual in 2012 after review by the independent data monitoring committee, but data collection continued for 18 months until Feb 26, 2014. It is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12606000301561) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00110162). FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2004, and July 13, 2012, we recruited 293 men (261 with PSA relapse and 32 with non-curable disease). We randomly assigned 142 men to the immediate therapy arm and 151 to the delayed therapy arm. Median follow-up was 5 years (IQR 3·3-6·2) from the date of randomisation. 16 (11%) men died in the immediate therapy arm and 30 (20%) died in the delayed therapy arm. 5-year overall survival was 86·4% (95% CI 78·5-91·5) in the delayed therapy arm versus 91·2% (84·2-95·2) in the immediate therapy arm (log-rank p=0·047). After Cox regression, the unadjusted HR for overall survival for immediate versus delayed arm assignment was 0·55 (95% CI 0·30-1·00; p=0·050). 23 patients had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events. 105 (36%) men had adverse events requiring hospital admission; none of these events were attributable to treatment or differed between treatment-timing groups. The most common serious adverse events were cardiovascular, which occurred in nine (6%) patients in the delayed therapy arm and 13 (9%) in the immediate therapy arm. INTERPRETATION: Immediate receipt of androgen-deprivation therapy significantly improved overall survival compared with delayed intervention in men with PSA-relapsed or non-curable prostate cancer. The results provide benchmark evidence of survival rates and morbidity to discuss with men when considering their treatment options. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Cancer Councils, The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Mayne Pharma Australia.

A prospective study of nomogram-based adaptation of prostate radiotherapy target volumes.

BACKGROUND: A prospective clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of a novel approach to the treatment of patients with high risk prostate cancer (HRPC) through the use of a nomogram to tailor radiotherapy target volumes. METHODS: Twenty seven subjects with HRPC were treated with a mildly hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen using image-guided IMRT technique between Jun/2013-Jan/2015. A set of validated prognostic factors were inputted into the Memorial-Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) prostate cancer nomogram to estimate risk of loco-regional spread (LRS). The nomogram risk estimates for extra-capsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicles involvement (SVI), and pelvic lymph nodes involvement (LNI) were used to adapt radiotherapy treatment volumes based on a risk threshold of ≥15 % in all cases. A planning guide was used to delineate target volumes and organs at risk (OAR). Up to three dose levels were administered over 28 fractions; 70Gy for gross disease in the prostate +/- seminal vesicles (2.5Gy/fraction), 61.6Gy for subclinical peri-prostatic disease (2.2Gy/fraction) and 50.4Gy to pelvic nodes (1.8Gy/fraction). Data regarding protocol adherence, nomogram use, radiotherapy dose distribution, and acute toxicity were collected. RESULTS: Nomogram use 100 % of patients were treated for ECE, 88.9 % for SVI, and 70.4 % for LNI. The three areas at risk of LRS were appropriately treated according to the study protocol in 98.8 % cases. The MSKCC nomogram estimates for LRS differed significantly between the time of recruitment and analysis. Contouring protocol compliance Compliance with the trial contouring protocol for up to seven target volumes was 93.0 % (159/171). Compliance with protocol for small bowel contouring was poor (59.3 %). Dose constraints compliance Compliance with dose constraints for target volumes was 97.4 % (191/196). Compliance with dose constraints for OAR was 88.2 % (285/323). Acute toxicity There were no grade 3 acute toxicities observed. 20/27 (74.1 %) and 6/27 (22.2 %) patients experienced a grade 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated the feasibility of this novel risk-adapted radiation treatment protocol for HRPC. This study has identified key learning points regarding this approach, including the importance of standardization and updating of risk quantification tools, and the utility of an observer to verify their correct use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincialTrials.gov identifier NCT01418040 . Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (HNEHREC) reference number 12/08/15/4.02.

Radiation dose escalation or longer androgen suppression for locally advanced prostate cancer? Data from the TROG 03.04 RADAR trial.

BACKGROUND: The relative effects of radiation dose escalation (RDE) and androgen suppression (AS) duration on local prostatic progression (LP) remain unclear. METHODS: We addressed this in the TROG 03.04 RADAR trial by incorporating a RDE programme by stratification at randomisation. Men were allocated 6 or 18 months AS±18 months zoledronate (Z). The main endpoint was a composite of clinically diagnosed LP or PSA progression with a PSA doubling time ⩾6 months. Fine and Gray competing risk modelling with adjustment for site clustering produced cumulative incidence estimates at 6.5 years for each RDE group. RESULTS: Composite LP declined coherently in the 66, 70 and 74 Gy external beam dosing groups and was lowest in the high dose rate brachytherapy boost (HDRB) group. At 6.5 years, adjusted cumulative incidences were 22%, 15%, 13% and 7% respectively. Compared to 6 months AS, 18 months AS also significantly reduced LP (p<0.001). Post-radiation urethral strictures were documented in 45 subjects and increased incrementally in the dosing groups. Crude incidences were 0.8%, 0.9%, 3.8% and 12.7% respectively. CONCLUSION: RDE and increasing AS independently reduce LP and increase urethral strictures. The risks and benefits to the individual must be balanced when selecting radiation dose and AS duration.