Nolan A Wages1, Jason C Sanders2, Amy Smith2, Songserea Wood2, Mitchell S Anscher3, Nikole Varhegyi4, Tracey L Krupski5, Timothy J Harris3, Timothy N Showalter2. 1. Division of Translational Research & Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia. Electronic address: nwages@virginia.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia. 4. Division of Translational Research & Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia. 5. Department of Urology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The phase 1 portion of this multicenter, phase 1/2 study of hypofractionated (HypoFx) prostate bed radiation therapy (RT) as salvage or adjuvant therapy aimed to identify the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity. The phase 2 portion aimed to assess the health-related quality of life (QoL) of using this HypoFx regimen. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligibility included standard adjuvant or salvage prostate bed RT indications. Patients were assigned to receive 1 of 3 daily RT schedules: 56.6 Gy in 20 Fx, 50.4 Gy in 15 Fx, or 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx. Regional nodal irradiation and androgen deprivation therapy were not allowed. Participants were followed for 2 years after treatment with outcome measures based on prostate-specific antigen levels, toxicity assessments (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v4.0), QoL measures (the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] and EuroQol EQ-5D instruments), and out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS: There were 32 evaluable participants, and median follow-up was 3.53 years. The shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity was determined to be 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx, with most patients (23) treated with this schedule. Grade 3 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities occurred in 3 patients and 1 patient, respectively. There was 1 grade 4 sepsis event. Higher dose to the hottest 25% of the rectum was associated with increased risk of grade 2+ GI toxicity; no dosimetric factors were found to predict for GU toxicity. There was a significant decrease in the mean bowel, but not bladder, QoL score at 1 year compared with baseline. Prostate-specific antigen failure occurred in 34.3% of participants, using a definition of nadir plus 2 ng/mL. Metastases were more likely to occur in regional lymph nodes (5 of 7) than in bones (2 of 7). The mean out-of-pocket cost for patients during treatment was $223.90. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 42.6 Gy in 10 fractions as the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity in this phase 1/2 study. There was a higher than expected rate of grade 2 to 3 GU and GI toxicity and a decreased EPIC bowel QoL domain with this regimen. Future studies are needed to explore alternative adjuvant/salvage HypoFx RT schedules after radical prostatectomy.
PURPOSE: The phase 1 portion of this multicenter, phase 1/2 study of hypofractionated (HypoFx) prostate bed radiation therapy (RT) as salvage or adjuvant therapy aimed to identify the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity. The phase 2 portion aimed to assess the health-related quality of life (QoL) of using this HypoFx regimen. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligibility included standard adjuvant or salvage prostate bed RT indications. Patients were assigned to receive 1 of 3 daily RT schedules: 56.6 Gy in 20 Fx, 50.4 Gy in 15 Fx, or 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx. Regional nodal irradiation and androgen deprivation therapy were not allowed. Participants were followed for 2 years after treatment with outcome measures based on prostate-specific antigen levels, toxicity assessments (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v4.0), QoL measures (the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] and EuroQol EQ-5D instruments), and out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS: There were 32 evaluable participants, and median follow-up was 3.53 years. The shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity was determined to be 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx, with most patients (23) treated with this schedule. Grade 3 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities occurred in 3 patients and 1 patient, respectively. There was 1 grade 4 sepsis event. Higher dose to the hottest 25% of the rectum was associated with increased risk of grade 2+ GI toxicity; no dosimetric factors were found to predict for GU toxicity. There was a significant decrease in the mean bowel, but not bladder, QoL score at 1 year compared with baseline. Prostate-specific antigen failure occurred in 34.3% of participants, using a definition of nadir plus 2 ng/mL. Metastases were more likely to occur in regional lymph nodes (5 of 7) than in bones (2 of 7). The mean out-of-pocket cost for patients during treatment was $223.90. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 42.6 Gy in 10 fractions as the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity in this phase 1/2 study. There was a higher than expected rate of grade 2 to 3 GU and GI toxicity and a decreased EPIC bowel QoL domain with this regimen. Future studies are needed to explore alternative adjuvant/salvage HypoFx RT schedules after radical prostatectomy.
Authors: Kevin Martell; Patrick Cheung; Gerard Morton; Hans Chung; Andrea Deabreu; Liying Zhang; Geordi Pang; Yasir Alayed; Alexandre Mamedov; Adam Gladwish; Andrew Loblaw Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-05-16
Authors: Stephen L Lewis; Pretesh Patel; Haijun Song; Stephen J Freedland; Sigrun Bynum; Daniel Oh; Manisha Palta; David Yoo; James Oleson; Joseph K Salama Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-02 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Bruce J Trock; Misop Han; Stephen J Freedland; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Theodore L DeWeese; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Richard K Valicenti; Peter Albertsen; Brian J Davis; S Larry Goldenberg; Carol Hahn; Eric Klein; Jeff Michalski; Mack Roach; Oliver Sartor; J Stuart Wolf; Martha M Faraday Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Oluwaseun A Odewole; Funmilayo I Tade; Peter T Nieh; Bital Savir-Baruch; Ashesh B Jani; Viraj A Master; Peter J Rossi; Raghuveer K Halkar; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Oladunni Akin-Akintayo; Chao Zhang; Zhengjia Chen; Mark M Goodman; David M Schuster Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gordon W Wong; Kerrin L Palazzi-Churas; David F Jarrard; David R Paolone; Andrew K Graf; Sean P Hedican; John D Wegenke; Mark A Ritter Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-09-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Catherine M Tangen; Jorge Paradelo; M Scott Lucia; Gary Miller; Dean Troyer; Edward Messing; Jeffrey Forman; Joseph Chin; Gregory Swanson; Edith Canby-Hagino; E David Crawford Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-01-23 Impact factor: 7.450