David Pasquier1, Didier Peiffert2, Philippe Nickers3, Philippe Maingon4, Pascal Pommier5, Thomas Lacornerie3, Geoffrey Martinage3, Emmanuelle Tresch6, Eric Lartigau7. 1. Centre Oscar Lambret, Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, University Lille II, Lille, France; CRISTAL UMR CNRS 9189, Lille University, Villeneuve-d'Ascq, France. Electronic address: d-pasquier@o-lambret.fr. 2. Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine-Alexis Vautrin, Nancy, France. 3. Centre Oscar Lambret, Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, University Lille II, Lille, France. 4. La Pitié Salpêtrière Charles Foix,UPMC, Paris, France. 5. Centre Leon Berard, Department of Radiation Oncology, Lyon, France. 6. Department of Biostatistics, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France. 7. Centre Oscar Lambret, Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, University Lille II, Lille, France; CRISTAL UMR CNRS 9189, Lille University, Villeneuve-d'Ascq, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this analysis was to assess the 5-year tolerance and survival in patients undergoing hypofractionated stereotactic boost after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between August 2010 and April 2013, 76 patients with intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma were included in the study. A first course delivered 46 Gy using conventional fractionation. The second course delivered a boost of 18 Gy (3 × 6 Gy) within 10 days using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were assessed according to the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. Secondary outcome measures were overall, biochemical relapse-free, and relapse-free survival; prostate-specific antigen kinetics; and patient functional status (urinary and sexual) according to the International Index of Erectile Function and International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaires. RESULTS: Sixty patients (79%) were treated by CyberKnife and 16 (21%) by linear accelerator. Median follow-up was 62 months (range, 29-69). The cumulative incidence of genitourinary and gastrointestinal grade ≥2 toxicities at month 60 after the end of radiation therapy was 1.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1%-6.6%) and 9.3% (95% CI, 4.1%-17.1%), respectively. Biochemical relapse-free and relapse-free survival rates at 5 years were 87.4% (95% CI, 77.1%-93.2%) and 86.2% (95% CI, 75.8-92.3), respectively. The mean (standard deviation) prostate-specific antigen variation within 3 months and 5 years post-radiation therapy was -1.20 ng/mL/mo (0.79) and -1.30 ng/mL/y (1.05), respectively. There was no significant difference between the International Prostate Symptom quality of life score between inclusion and month 60. For the International Index of Erectile Function, there was a significant difference between inclusion and month 60 (P = .005), with a higher proportion of severe/noninterpretable disorders at 60 months. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the trial demonstrate that the EBRT and SBRT combination is well tolerated and yields good efficacy results. These data provide a good basis for comparing EBRT and brachytherapy boost to EBRT and SBRT boost in future prospective studies.
PURPOSE: The aim of this analysis was to assess the 5-year tolerance and survival in patients undergoing hypofractionated stereotactic boost after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between August 2010 and April 2013, 76 patients with intermediate-risk prostate carcinoma were included in the study. A first course delivered 46 Gy using conventional fractionation. The second course delivered a boost of 18 Gy (3 × 6 Gy) within 10 days using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities were assessed according to the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. Secondary outcome measures were overall, biochemical relapse-free, and relapse-free survival; prostate-specific antigen kinetics; and patient functional status (urinary and sexual) according to the International Index of Erectile Function and International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaires. RESULTS: Sixty patients (79%) were treated by CyberKnife and 16 (21%) by linear accelerator. Median follow-up was 62 months (range, 29-69). The cumulative incidence of genitourinary and gastrointestinal grade ≥2 toxicities at month 60 after the end of radiation therapy was 1.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1%-6.6%) and 9.3% (95% CI, 4.1%-17.1%), respectively. Biochemical relapse-free and relapse-free survival rates at 5 years were 87.4% (95% CI, 77.1%-93.2%) and 86.2% (95% CI, 75.8-92.3), respectively. The mean (standard deviation) prostate-specific antigen variation within 3 months and 5 years post-radiation therapy was -1.20 ng/mL/mo (0.79) and -1.30 ng/mL/y (1.05), respectively. There was no significant difference between the International Prostate Symptom quality of life score between inclusion and month 60. For the International Index of Erectile Function, there was a significant difference between inclusion and month 60 (P = .005), with a higher proportion of severe/noninterpretable disorders at 60 months. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the trial demonstrate that the EBRT and SBRT combination is well tolerated and yields good efficacy results. These data provide a good basis for comparing EBRT and brachytherapy boost to EBRT and SBRT boost in future prospective studies.