Nadia Di Muzio

Combination of Adjuvant Hormonal and Radiation Therapy Significantly Prolongs Survival of Patients With pT2–4 pN+ Prostate Cancer: Results of a Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND Previous prospective randomised trials have shown a positive impact of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. However, none of these trials included patients with lymph node invasion (LNI). OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess the impact of combination adjuvant hormonal therapy (HT) and RT on the survival of patients with prostate cancer and histologically documented lymph node metastases (pN+). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Data on 703 consecutive patients with LNI treated with radical prostatectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection, and adjuvant treatments between September 1986 and November 2002 at two large academic institutions were reviewed. MEASUREMENTS For study purposes, patients treated with adjuvant HT plus RT and patients treated with adjuvant HT alone were matched for age at surgery, pathologic T stage and Gleason score, number of nodes removed, surgical margin status, and length of follow-up. Differences in cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and life table analyses. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Following the matching process, 117 pT2-4 pN1 patients of 171 (68.4%) treated with adjuvant HT plus RT (group 1) were compared with 247 pT2-4 pN1 patients of 532 (46.4%) receiving adjuvant HT alone (group 2). After matching, the two groups of patients were comparable in terms of pre- and postoperative characteristics (all p ≥ 0.07). Mean follow-up was 100.8 mo (median: 95.1 mo; range: 3.5-229.3 mo). Overall, prostate CSS and OS rates at 5, 8, and 10 yr were 90%, 82%, and 75%, and 85%, 70%, and 60%, respectively. Patients treated with adjuvant RT plus HT had significantly higher CSS and OS rates compared with patients treated with HT alone at 5, 8, and 10 yr after surgery (95%, 91%, and 86% vs 88%, 78%, and 70%, and 90%, 84%, and 74% vs 82%, 65%, and 55%, respectively; p = 0.004 and p<0.001, respectively). Similarly, higher survival rates associated with the combination of HT plus RT were found when patients were stratified according to the extent of nodal invasion (namely, two or fewer vs more than two positive nodes; all p ≤ 0.006). Lack of standardised HT and RT protocols represents the main limitations of our retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS Adjuvant RT plus HT significantly improved CSS and OS of pT2-4 pN1 patients, regardless of the extent of nodal invasion. These results reinforce the need for a multimodal approach in the treatment of node-positive prostate cancer.

Early Salvage Radiation Therapy Does Not Compromise Cancer Control in Patients with pT3N0 Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy: Results of a Match-controlled Multi-institutional Analysis

BACKGROUND Previous randomised trials demonstrated that adjuvant radiation therapy (aRT) improves cancer control in patients with pT3 prostate cancer (PCa). However, there is currently no evidence supporting early salvage radiation therapy (eSRT) as equivalent to aRT in improving freedom from biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE To evaluate BCR-free survival for aRT versus observation followed by eSRT in cases of relapse in patients undergoing RP for pT3pN0, R0-R1 PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Using a European multi-institutional cohort, 890 men with pT3pN0, R0-R1 PCa were identified. INTERVENTION All patients underwent RP. Subsequently, patients were stratified into two groups: aRT versus initial observation followed by eSRT in cases of relapse. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Propensity-matched analysis was employed, and patients were stratified into two groups: aRT versus observation and eventual eSRT, defined as RT given at a postoperative serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 0.5 ng/ml at least 6 mo after RP. BCR, defined as PSA >0.20 ng/ml and rising after administration of RT, was compared between aRT and initial observation followed by eSRT in cases of relapse using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Overall, 390 (43.8%) and 500 (56.2%) patients were treated with aRT and initial observation, respectively. Within the latter group, 225 (45.0%) patients experienced BCR and underwent eSRT. In the postpropensity-matched cohort, the 2- and 5-yr BCR-free survival rates were 91.4% and 78.4% in aRT versus 92.8% and 81.8% in patients who underwent initial observation and eSRT in cases of relapse, respectively (p=0.9). No differences in the 2- and 5-yr BCR-free survival rates were found, even when patients were stratified according to pT3 substage and surgical margin status (all p ≥ 0.4). These findings were also confirmed in multivariable analyses (p=0.6). Similar results were achieved when the cut-off to define eSRT was set at 0.3 ng/ml (all p ≥ 0.5). CONCLUSIONS The current study suggests that timely administration of eSRT is comparable to aRT in improving BCR-free survival in the majority of pT3pN0 PCa patients. Therefore, eSRT may not compromise cancer control but significantly reduces overtreatment associated with aRT.

IMRT significantly reduces acute toxicity of whole-pelvis irradiation in patients treated with post-operative adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE To investigate the role of IMRT in reducing the risk of acute genito-urinary (GU), upper gastrointestinal (uGI) and lower gastrointestinal (lGI) toxicity following whole-pelvis irradiation (WPRT) after radical prostatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS 172 consecutive patients with prostate cancer were post-operatively irradiated to the prostatic bed (PB) and pelvic lymph-nodal area with adjuvant (n=100) or salvage (n=72) intent. Eighty-one patients underwent three-dimensional conformal (3DCRT) WPRT, while the remaining 91 underwent IMRT (54/91 with helical tomotherapy (HTT); 37/91 with Linac intensity-modulated RT (LinacIMRT)). RESULTS Patients treated with IMRT experienced a decreased risk of acute toxicity. The crude incidence of grade > or =2 toxicity was GU 12.3% vs. 6.6% (p=0.19); lGI 8.6% vs. 3.2% (p=0.14); uGI 22.2% vs. 6.6% (p=0.004), for 3DCRT and IMRT, respectively. With respect to uGI and lGI, the acute toxicity profile of the HTT patients was even better when compared to that of 3DCRT patients (crude incidence:1.8% and 0.0%, respectively). Treatment interruptions due to uGI toxicity were 11/81 in the 3DCRT group vs. 2/91 in the IMRT group (p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS The risk of acute toxicity following post-operative WPRT delivered by means of IMRT was reduced compared to that of 3DCRT. The most significant reduction concerned uGI, mainly owing to better bowel sparing with IMRT.

Selecting the Optimal Candidate for Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Long-term Survival Analysis

BACKGROUND The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) after radical prostatectomy (RP) on survival of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) is still controversial. OBJECTIVE We tested the impact of ART on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) in PCa patients according to pathologic PCa features. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We evaluated 1049 PCa patients treated with RP and extended pelvic lymph node dissection alone or in combination with adjuvant treatments between 1998 and 2008. All patients had positive surgical margins and/or pT3/pT4 disease with or without positive lymph nodes. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Cox regression analyses tested the relationship between pathologic characteristics and CSM rates. Independent predictors of survival were used to develop a novel risk score based on the number of risk factors. Finally, Cox regression models tested the relationship between ART and survival according to the number of risk factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS On multivariable analyses, only pathologic Gleason score ≥ 8, pT3b/T4 stage, and presence of positive lymph nodes represented independent predictors of CSM (all p ≤ 0.02). The cumulative number of these pathologic findings was used to develop a risk score, which was 0, 1, 2, and 3 in 43.6%, 22.1%, 20.7%, and 13.6% of patients, respectively. In patients sharing more than two mentioned predictors of CSM (primarily having a risk score of 0 or 1), ART did not significantly improve survival (all p ≥ 0.4). Conversely, in patients with a risk score ≥ 2, ART was associated with lower CSM and OM rates (all p=0.006). The observational nature of the cohort represents a limitation of the study. CONCLUSIONS ART significantly improved survival only in patients with at least two of the following pathologic features at RP: Gleason score ≥ 8, pT3/pT4 disease, and positive lymph nodes. These patients represent the ideal candidates for ART after RP.

Need for High Radiation Dose (≥70 Gy) in Early Postoperative Irradiation After Radical Prostatectomy: A Single-Institution Analysis of 334 High-Risk, Node-Negative Patients

PURPOSE To determine the clinical benefit of high-dose early adjuvant radiotherapy (EART) in high-risk prostate cancer (hrCaP) patients submitted to radical retropubic prostatectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS The clinical outcome of 334 hrCaP (pT3-4 and/or positive resection margins) node-negative patients submitted to radical retropubic prostatectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy before 2004 was analyzed according to the EART dose delivered to the prostatic bed, <70.2 Gy (lower dose, median 66.6 Gy, n = 153) or >or=70.2 Gy (median 70.2 Gy, n = 181). RESULTS The two groups were comparable except for a significant difference in terms of median follow-up (10 vs. 7 years, respectively) owing to the gradual increase of EART doses over time. Nevertheless, median time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure was almost identical, 38 and 36 months, respectively. At univariate analysis, both 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were significantly higher (83% vs. 71% [p = 0.001] and 94% vs. 88% [p = 0.005], respectively) in the HD group. Multivariate analysis confirmed EART dose >or=70 Gy to be independently related to both bRFS (hazard ratio 2.5, p = 0.04) and DFS (hazard ratio 3.6, p = 0.004). Similar results were obtained after the exclusion of patients receiving any androgen deprivation. After grouping the hormone-naïve patients by postoperative PSA level the statistically significant impact of high-dose EART on both 5-year bRFS and DFS was maintained only for those with undetectable values, possibly owing to micrometastatic disease outside the irradiated area in case of detectable postoperative PSA values. CONCLUSION This series provides strong support for the use of EART doses >or=70 Gy after radical retropubic prostatectomy in hrCaP patients with undetectable postoperative PSA levels.

Evidence of Limited Motion of the Prostate by Carefully Emptying the Rectum as Assessed by Daily MVCT Image Guidance with Helical Tomotherapy

PURPOSE To assess setup and organ motion error by means of analysis of daily megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) of patients treated with hypofractionated helical tomotherapy (71.4-74.2 Gy in 28 fractions). METHODS AND MATERIALS Data from 21 patients were analyzed. Patients were instructed to empty the rectum carefully before planning CT and every morning before therapy by means of a self-applied rectal enema. The position of the prostate was assessed by means of automatic bone matching (BM) with the planning kilovoltage CT (BM, setup error) followed by a direct visualization (DV) match on the prostate. Deviations between planning and therapy positions referred to BM and BM + DV were registered for the three main axes. In case of a full rectum at MVCT with evident shift of the prostate, treatment was postponed until after additional rectal emptying procedures; in this case, additional MVCT was performed before delivering the treatment. Data for 522 fractions were available; the impact of post-MVCT procedure was investigated for 17 of 21 patients (410 fractions). RESULTS Prostate motion relative to bony anatomy was limited. Concerning posterior-anterior shifts, only 4.9% and 2.7% of fractions showed deviation of 3 mm or greater of the prostate relative to BM without and with consideration of post-MVCT procedures, respectively. Interobserver variability for BM + DV match was within 0.8 mm (1 SD). CONCLUSIONS Daily MVCT-based correction is feasible. The BM + DV matching was found to be consistent between operators. Rectal emptying using a daily enema is an efficient tool to minimize prostate motion, even for centers that have not yet implemented image-guided radiotherapy.

Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) for nasopharynx cancer with helical tomotherapy. A planning study.

Purpose:To explore the potential of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer.Patients and Methods:Six T1–4 N1–3 patients were considered. A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was planned with inversely optimized conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; dynamic multileaf collimator using the Eclipse-Helios Varian system) and HT. The prescribed (median) doses were 54 Gy, 61.5 Gy, and 64.5 Gy delivered in 30 fractions to PTV1 (planning target volume), PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The same constraints for PTV coverage and for parotids, spinal cord, mandible, optic structures, and brain stem were followed in both modalities. The planner also tried to reduce the dose to other structures (mucosae outside PTV1, larynx, esophagus, inner ear, thyroid, brain, lungs, submental connective tissue, bony structures) as much as possible.Results:The fraction of PTV receiving > 95% of the prescribed dose (V95%) increased from 97.6% and 94.3% (IMRT) to 99.6% and 97% (HT) for PTV1 and PTV3, respectively (p < 0.05); median dose to parotids decreased from 30.1 Gy for IMRT to 25.0 Gy for HT (p < 0.05). Significant gains (p < 0.05) were found for most organs at risk (OARs): mucosae (V30 decreased from 44 cm3 [IMRT] to 18 cm3 [HT]); larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3); thyroid (mean dose: 48.7 Gy vs. 41.5 Gy); esophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3); brain stem (D1%: 45.1 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy).Conclusion:HT improves the homogeneity of dose distribution within PTV and PTV coverage together with a significantly greater sparing of OARs compared to linac five-field IMRT.Ziele:Untersuchung des Potentials der helikalen Tomotherapie (HT) beim Nasopharynxkarzinom.Patienten und Methodik:Sechs T1–4 N1–3-Patienten wurden einbezogen. Eine Technik des simultanen integrierten Boost (SIB) wurde geplant mit invers optimierter konventioneller intensitätsmodulierter Radiotherapie (IMRT; dynamischer Multileaf-Kollimator des Eclipse-Helios Varian-Systems) und mit HT. Die verschriebenen (medianen) Strahlungsdosen waren 54 Gy, 61,5 Gy und 64,5 Gy, die in 30 Fraktionen auf die Planungszielvolumina PTV1, PTV2 bzw. PTV3 gegeben wurden. Bei beiden Modalitäten, HT und IMRT, wurden für die PTV-Erfassung sowie für Parotiden, Rückenmark, Kiefer, optischen Apparat und Stammhirn dieselben Begrenzungen eingehalten. Der Planer versuchte auch, die Strahlungsdosis auf andere Regionen (Mukosa außerhalb von PTV1, Larynx, Ösophagus, Innenohr, Schilddrüse, Hirn, Lunge, Bindegewebe und Knochen unterhalb des Kinns) so stark wie möglich zu reduzieren.Ergebnisse:Der PTV-Anteil, der mehr als 95% der verschriebenen Strahlungsdosis (V95%) erhielt, erhöhte sich für PTV1 und PTV3 von 97,6% bzw. 94,3% (IMRT) auf 99,6% bzw. 97% (HT) (p < 0,05); die mediane Dosis der Parotiden verminderte sich von 30,1 Gy bei IMRT auf 25,0 Gy bei HT (p < 0,05). Signifikante Vorteile (p < 0,05) zeigten sich für die meisten Risikoorgane: Mukosa (V30-Verminderung von 44 cm3 [IMRT] auf 18 cm3 [HT]), Larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3), Schilddrüse (mittlere Strahlungsdosis: 48,7 Gy vs. 41,5 Gy), Ösophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3), Stammhirn (D1%: 45,1 Gy vs. 37,7 Gy).Schlussfolgerung:Verglichen mit der Linac-5-Felder-IMRT verbessert HT die Homogenität der Dosisverteilung innerhalb des PTV und die PTV-Erfassung bei signifkant besserer Schonung von Risikoorganen.

Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) for Nasopharynx Cancer with Helical Tomotherapy

Purpose:To explore the potential of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer.Patients and Methods:Six T1–4 N1–3 patients were considered. A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was planned with inversely optimized conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; dynamic multileaf collimator using the Eclipse-Helios Varian system) and HT. The prescribed (median) doses were 54 Gy, 61.5 Gy, and 64.5 Gy delivered in 30 fractions to PTV1 (planning target volume), PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The same constraints for PTV coverage and for parotids, spinal cord, mandible, optic structures, and brain stem were followed in both modalities. The planner also tried to reduce the dose to other structures (mucosae outside PTV1, larynx, esophagus, inner ear, thyroid, brain, lungs, submental connective tissue, bony structures) as much as possible.Results:The fraction of PTV receiving > 95% of the prescribed dose (V95%) increased from 97.6% and 94.3% (IMRT) to 99.6% and 97% (HT) for PTV1 and PTV3, respectively (p < 0.05); median dose to parotids decreased from 30.1 Gy for IMRT to 25.0 Gy for HT (p < 0.05). Significant gains (p < 0.05) were found for most organs at risk (OARs): mucosae (V30 decreased from 44 cm3 [IMRT] to 18 cm3 [HT]); larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3); thyroid (mean dose: 48.7 Gy vs. 41.5 Gy); esophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3); brain stem (D1%: 45.1 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy).Conclusion:HT improves the homogeneity of dose distribution within PTV and PTV coverage together with a significantly greater sparing of OARs compared to linac five-field IMRT.Ziele:Untersuchung des Potentials der helikalen Tomotherapie (HT) beim Nasopharynxkarzinom.Patienten und Methodik:Sechs T1–4 N1–3-Patienten wurden einbezogen. Eine Technik des simultanen integrierten Boost (SIB) wurde geplant mit invers optimierter konventioneller intensitätsmodulierter Radiotherapie (IMRT; dynamischer Multileaf-Kollimator des Eclipse-Helios Varian-Systems) und mit HT. Die verschriebenen (medianen) Strahlungsdosen waren 54 Gy, 61,5 Gy und 64,5 Gy, die in 30 Fraktionen auf die Planungszielvolumina PTV1, PTV2 bzw. PTV3 gegeben wurden. Bei beiden Modalitäten, HT und IMRT, wurden für die PTV-Erfassung sowie für Parotiden, Rückenmark, Kiefer, optischen Apparat und Stammhirn dieselben Begrenzungen eingehalten. Der Planer versuchte auch, die Strahlungsdosis auf andere Regionen (Mukosa außerhalb von PTV1, Larynx, Ösophagus, Innenohr, Schilddrüse, Hirn, Lunge, Bindegewebe und Knochen unterhalb des Kinns) so stark wie möglich zu reduzieren.Ergebnisse:Der PTV-Anteil, der mehr als 95% der verschriebenen Strahlungsdosis (V95%) erhielt, erhöhte sich für PTV1 und PTV3 von 97,6% bzw. 94,3% (IMRT) auf 99,6% bzw. 97% (HT) (p < 0,05); die mediane Dosis der Parotiden verminderte sich von 30,1 Gy bei IMRT auf 25,0 Gy bei HT (p < 0,05). Signifikante Vorteile (p < 0,05) zeigten sich für die meisten Risikoorgane: Mukosa (V30-Verminderung von 44 cm3 [IMRT] auf 18 cm3 [HT]), Larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3), Schilddrüse (mittlere Strahlungsdosis: 48,7 Gy vs. 41,5 Gy), Ösophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3), Stammhirn (D1%: 45,1 Gy vs. 37,7 Gy).Schlussfolgerung:Verglichen mit der Linac-5-Felder-IMRT verbessert HT die Homogenität der Dosisverteilung innerhalb des PTV und die PTV-Erfassung bei signifkant besserer Schonung von Risikoorganen.

Clinical factors predicting late severe urinary toxicity after postoperative radiotherapy for prostate carcinoma: a single-institute analysis of 742 patients.

PURPOSE To investigate the clinical factors independently predictive of long-term severe urinary sequelae after postprostatectomy radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between 1993 and 2005, 742 consecutive patients underwent postoperative radiotherapy with either adjuvant (n = 556; median radiation dose, 70.2 Gy) or salvage (n = 186; median radiation dose, 72 Gy) intent. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 99 months, the 8-year risk of Grade 2 or greater and Grade 3 late urinary toxicity was almost identical (23.9% vs. 23.7% and 12% vs. 10%) in the adjuvant and salvage cohorts, respectively. On univariate analysis, acute toxicity was significantly predictive of late Grade 2 or greater sequelae in both subgroups (p <.0001 in both cases), and hypertension (p = .02) and whole-pelvis radiotherapy (p = .02) correlated significantly in the adjuvant cohort only. The variables predictive of late Grade 3 sequelae were acute Grade 2 or greater toxicity in both groups and whole-pelvis radiotherapy (8-year risk of Grade 3 events, 21% vs. 11%, p = .007), hypertension (8-year risk, 18% vs. 10%, p = .005), age ≤ 62 years at RT (8-year risk, 16% vs. 11%, p = .04) in the adjuvant subset, and radiation dose >72 Gy (8-year risk, 19% vs. 6%, p = .007) and age >71 years (8-year risk, 16% vs. 6%, p = .006) in the salvage subgroup. Multivariate analysis confirmed the independent predictive role of all the covariates indicated as statistically significant on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS The risk of late Grade 2 or greater and Grade 3 urinary toxicity was almost identical, regardless of the RT intent. In the salvage cohort, older age and greater radiation doses resulted in a worse toxicity profile, and younger, hypertensive patients experienced a greater rate of severe late sequelae in the adjuvant setting. The causes of this latter correlation and apparently different etiopathogenesis of chronic damage in the two subgroups were unclear and deserve additional investigation.

[11C]Choline Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography to Restage Prostate Cancer Cases With Biochemical Failure After Radical Prostatectomy and No Disease Evidence on Conventional Imaging

PURPOSE We assessed the value of [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography in patients with prostate cancer in whom biochemical failure developed after radical prostatectomy but who showed no disease evidence on conventional imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS Considered for this study were 2,124 patients treated with radical prostatectomy who underwent [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography to restage disease between December 2004 and January 2007. Study inclusion criteria were 1) previous radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection, 2) increasing prostate specific antigen beyond 0.2 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy, 3) no lymph node disease at radical prostatectomy, 4) no evidence of metastatic disease on conventional imaging, 5) no androgen deprivation therapy and 6) no adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy. These criteria were satisfied in 109 of the 2,124 patients (5%). RESULTS Median prostate specific antigen at imaging was 0.81 ng/ml (range 0.22 to 16.76 ml). Imaging suggested local recurrence in 4 patients (4%) and pelvic lymph node disease in 8 (7%). Scans were positive in 5%, 15% and 28% of patients with prostate specific antigen less than 1, between 1 and 2, and greater than 2 ng/ml, respectively (p <0.05). Prostate specific antigen was the only significant predictor of tomography results (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS Positron emission tomography/computerized tomography detected increased [11C]choline uptake, suggesting recurrent disease in 11% of patients with prostate cancer, increasing prostate specific antigen after radical prostatectomy and no evidence of disease on conventional imaging. This modality may be useful to restage disease but it cannot be used to guide therapy.