Paul Nguyen1, Ludovic Harzée2, Paul Retif3, Stéphane Joseph2, Guillaume Vogin4,5, Philippe Nickers4,6. 1. Department of Radiotherapy, Centre François Baclesse, Rue Emile Mayrisch, 4240, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg. paul88ng@gmail.com. 2. Department of Physics, Centre François Baclesse, Rue Emile Mayrisch, 4240, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg. 3. Department of Physics, University of Lorraine, Metz Regional Hospital, 1, Allée du Château, 57085, Metz, France. 4. Department of Radiotherapy, Centre François Baclesse, Rue Emile Mayrisch, 4240, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg. 5. CNRS UMR 7365 IMoPA, Université de Lorraine, Biopôle, Vandoeuvre-Lès-Nancy, France. 6. Department of Radiotherapy, Metz Regional Hospital, 1, Allée du Château, 57085, Metz, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There are no safety-focused trials on stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer. This prospective 3‑year phase II trial used binomial law to validate the safety and efficacy of SBRT with stringent organ at risk dose constraints that nevertheless permitted high planning target volume doses. METHODS: All consecutive ≥ 70-year-old patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma who underwent SBRT between 2014 and 2018 at the National Radiotherapy Center in Luxembourg were included. Patients with low Cancer of Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) scores (0-2) and intermediate scores (3-5) received 36.25 Gy. High-risk (6-10) patients received 37.5 Gy. Radiation was delivered in 5 fractions over 9 days with Cyberknife-M6™ (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Primary study outcome was Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 (CTCAEv4) genitourinary and rectal toxicity scores at last follow-up. Based on binomial law, SRBT was considered safe in this cohort of 110 patients if there were ≤ 2 severe toxicity (CTCAEv4 grade ≥ 3) cases. Secondary outcomes were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and patient quality of life (QOL), as determined by the IPPS and the Urinary Incontinence QOL questionnaire. RESULTS: The first 110 patients who were accrued in a total cohort of 150 patients were included in this study and had a median follow-up of 36 months. Acute grade ≥ 3 toxicity never occurred. One transient late grade 3 case was observed. Thus, our SBRT program had an estimated severe toxicity rate of < 5% and was safe at the p < 0.05 level. Overall bPFS was 90%. QOL did not change relative to baseline. CONCLUSION: The trial validated our SBRT regimen since it was both safe and effective.
PURPOSE: There are no safety-focused trials on stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer. This prospective 3‑year phase II trial used binomial law to validate the safety and efficacy of SBRT with stringent organ at risk dose constraints that nevertheless permitted high planning target volume doses. METHODS: All consecutive ≥ 70-year-old patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma who underwent SBRT between 2014 and 2018 at the National Radiotherapy Center in Luxembourg were included. Patients with low Cancer of Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) scores (0-2) and intermediate scores (3-5) received 36.25 Gy. High-risk (6-10) patients received 37.5 Gy. Radiation was delivered in 5 fractions over 9 days with Cyberknife-M6™ (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Primary study outcome was Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 (CTCAEv4) genitourinary and rectal toxicity scores at last follow-up. Based on binomial law, SRBT was considered safe in this cohort of 110 patients if there were ≤ 2 severe toxicity (CTCAEv4 grade ≥ 3) cases. Secondary outcomes were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and patient quality of life (QOL), as determined by the IPPS and the Urinary Incontinence QOL questionnaire. RESULTS: The first 110 patients who were accrued in a total cohort of 150 patients were included in this study and had a median follow-up of 36 months. Acute grade ≥ 3 toxicity never occurred. One transient late grade 3 case was observed. Thus, our SBRT program had an estimated severe toxicity rate of < 5% and was safe at the p < 0.05 level. Overall bPFS was 90%. QOL did not change relative to baseline. CONCLUSION: The trial validated our SBRT regimen since it was both safe and effective.
Authors: Anders Widmark; Adalsteinn Gunnlaugsson; Lars Beckman; Camilla Thellenberg-Karlsson; Morten Hoyer; Magnus Lagerlund; Jon Kindblom; Claes Ginman; Bengt Johansson; Kirsten Björnlinger; Mihajl Seke; Måns Agrup; Per Fransson; Björn Tavelin; David Norman; Björn Zackrisson; Harald Anderson; Elisabeth Kjellén; Lars Franzén; Per Nilsson Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Robert M Meier; Daniel A Bloch; Cristian Cotrutz; Alan C Beckman; George T Henning; Shermian A Woodhouse; Shirnett K Williamson; Najeeb Mohideen; John J Dombrowski; Robert L Hong; David G Brachman; Patrick W Linson; Irving D Kaplan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: D Jeffrey Demanes; Alvaro A Martinez; Michel Ghilezan; Dennis R Hill; Lionel Schour; David Brandt; Gary Gustafson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Charles N Catton; Himu Lukka; Chu-Shu Gu; Jarad M Martin; Stéphane Supiot; Peter W M Chung; Glenn S Bauman; Jean-Paul Bahary; Shahida Ahmed; Patrick Cheung; Keen Hun Tai; Jackson S Wu; Matthew B Parliament; Theodoros Tsakiridis; Tom B Corbett; Colin Tang; Ian S Dayes; Padraig Warde; Tim K Craig; Jim A Julian; Mark N Levine Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Maroie Barkati; Scott G Williams; Farshad Foroudi; Keen Hun Tai; Sarat Chander; Sylvia van Dyk; Andrew See; Gillian M Duchesne Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-05-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: William C Jackson; Jessica Silva; Holly E Hartman; Robert T Dess; Amar U Kishan; Whitney H Beeler; Laila A Gharzai; Elizabeth M Jaworski; Rohit Mehra; Jason W D Hearn; Todd M Morgan; Simpa S Salami; Matthew R Cooperberg; Brandon A Mahal; Payal D Soni; Samuel Kaffenberger; Paul L Nguyen; Neil Desai; Felix Y Feng; Zachary S Zumsteg; Daniel E Spratt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2019-04-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Christopher R King; Debra Freeman; Irving Kaplan; Donald Fuller; Giampaolo Bolzicco; Sean Collins; Robert Meier; Jason Wang; Patrick Kupelian; Michael Steinberg; Alan Katz Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-09-20 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: David Dearnaley; Isabel Syndikus; Helen Mossop; Vincent Khoo; Alison Birtle; David Bloomfield; John Graham; Peter Kirkbride; John Logue; Zafar Malik; Julian Money-Kyrle; Joe M O'Sullivan; Miguel Panades; Chris Parker; Helen Patterson; Christopher Scrase; John Staffurth; Andrew Stockdale; Jean Tremlett; Margaret Bidmead; Helen Mayles; Olivia Naismith; Chris South; Annie Gao; Clare Cruickshank; Shama Hassan; Julia Pugh; Clare Griffin; Emma Hall Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 41.316