Thomas M Pisansky1, Shree Agrawal2, Daniel A Hamstra3, Bridget F Koontz4, Stanley L Liauw5, Jason A Efstathiou6, Jeff M Michalski7, Felix Y Feng3, Matthew C Abramowitz8, Alan Pollack8, Mitchell S Anscher9, Drew Moghanaki10, Robert B Den11, Kevin L Stephans12, Anthony L Zietman6, W Robert Lee4, Michael W Kattan13, Andrew J Stephenson14, Rahul D Tendulkar12. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Electronic address: pisansky.thomas@mayo.edu. 2. Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami, Miami, Florida. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 10. Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia; Hunter Holmes McGuire Veterans Administration Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia. 11. Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 12. Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 13. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 14. Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether a dose-response relationship exists for salvage radiation therapy (RT) of biochemical failure after prostatectomy for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Individual data from 1108 patients who underwent salvage RT at 10 academic centers were pooled. The cohort was enriched for selection criteria more likely associated with tumor recurrence in the prostate bed (margin positive and pre-RT prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level of ≤2.0 ng/mL) and without the confounding of planned androgen suppression. The cumulative incidence of biochemical failure and distant metastasis over time was computed, and competing risks hazard regression models were used to investigate the association between potential predictors and these outcomes. The association of radiation dose with outcomes was the primary focus. RESULTS: With a 65.2-month follow-up duration, the 5- and 10-year estimates of freedom from post-RT biochemical failure (PSA level >0.2 ng/mL and rising) was 63.5% and 49.8%, respectively, and the cumulative incidence of distant metastasis was 12.4% by 10 years. A Gleason score of ≥7, higher pre-RT PSA level, extraprostatic tumor extension, and seminal vesicle invasion were associated with worse biochemical failure and distant metastasis outcomes. A salvage radiation dose of ≥66.0 Gy was associated with a reduced cumulative incidence of biochemical failure, but not of distant metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of salvage radiation doses of ≥66.0 Gy are supported by evidence presented in the present multicenter pooled analysis of individual patient data. The observational reporting method, limited sample size, few distant metastasis events, modest follow-up duration, and elective use of salvage therapy might have diminished the opportunity to identify an association between the radiation dose and this endpoint.
PURPOSE: To determine whether a dose-response relationship exists for salvage radiation therapy (RT) of biochemical failure after prostatectomy for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Individual data from 1108 patients who underwent salvage RT at 10 academic centers were pooled. The cohort was enriched for selection criteria more likely associated with tumor recurrence in the prostate bed (margin positive and pre-RT prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level of ≤2.0 ng/mL) and without the confounding of planned androgen suppression. The cumulative incidence of biochemical failure and distant metastasis over time was computed, and competing risks hazard regression models were used to investigate the association between potential predictors and these outcomes. The association of radiation dose with outcomes was the primary focus. RESULTS: With a 65.2-month follow-up duration, the 5- and 10-year estimates of freedom from post-RT biochemical failure (PSA level >0.2 ng/mL and rising) was 63.5% and 49.8%, respectively, and the cumulative incidence of distant metastasis was 12.4% by 10 years. A Gleason score of ≥7, higher pre-RT PSA level, extraprostatic tumor extension, and seminal vesicle invasion were associated with worse biochemical failure and distant metastasis outcomes. A salvage radiation dose of ≥66.0 Gy was associated with a reduced cumulative incidence of biochemical failure, but not of distant metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of salvage radiation doses of ≥66.0 Gy are supported by evidence presented in the present multicenter pooled analysis of individual patient data. The observational reporting method, limited sample size, few distant metastasis events, modest follow-up duration, and elective use of salvage therapy might have diminished the opportunity to identify an association between the radiation dose and this endpoint.
Authors: A Hervás; A Gómez-Caamaño; M Casaña; A Gómez-Iturriaga; J Pastor; J Jove; J L Mengual; C Gónzalez-San Segundo; J Muñoz Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: William L Hwang; Rahul D Tendulkar; Andrzej Niemierko; Shree Agrawal; Kevin L Stephans; Daniel E Spratt; Jason W Hearn; Bridget F Koontz; W Robert Lee; Jeff M Michalski; Thomas M Pisansky; Stanley L Liauw; Matthew C Abramowitz; Alan Pollack; Drew Moghanaki; Mitchell S Anscher; Robert B Den; Anthony L Zietman; Andrew J Stephenson; Jason A Efstathiou Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-05-10 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Giampiero Giovacchini; Andrea Ciarmiello; Elisabetta Giovannini; Andrei Fodor; Cesare Cozzarini; Paola Mapelli; Elena Incerti; Nadia Di Muzio; Luigi Gianolli; Maria Picchio Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Carola Link; Patrick Honeck; Akiko Makabe; Frank Anton Giordano; Christian Bolenz; Joerg Schaefer; Markus Bohrer; Frank Lohr; Frederik Wenz; Daniel Buergy Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 3.481