Advertisement

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy to the Prostate Bed: Results of a Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Trial

Published:November 13, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.11.005

      Purpose

      The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate toxicity of escalating doses of prostate bed stereotactic body radiation therapy and to provide dose recommendations for a phase 2 study.

      Methods and Materials

      Patients with organ-confined, node-negative prostate cancer who had biochemical failure (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] less than 2.0) after prostatectomy were eligible for this phase 1 dose-escalation trial. Doses delivered were 35 Gy, 40 Gy, and 45 Gy in 5 fractions, given every other day. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0) grade 3 or higher gastrointestinal or genitourinary (GU) toxicity within 90 days of treatment. Maximum tolerated dose was the highest dose to be tested where fewer than 2 of the patients experienced DLT. Patients completed quality-of-life questionnaires at regular time intervals.

      Results

      Twenty-six patients completed treatment between October 2013 and December 2017. Three patients received 35 Gy, 8 patients received 40 Gy, and 15 patients received 45 Gy. The median follow-up was 60 months for 35 Gy, 48 months for 40 Gy, and 33 months for 45 Gy. No acute DLT events were observed. Late grade ≥2 and ≥3 gastrointestinal toxicity occurred in 11% and 0%, respectively, and late grade ≥2 and ≥3 GU toxicity occurred in 38% and 15%, respectively. No difference was observed in late GU toxicity between 40 Gy and 45 Gy. Sexual function scores were significantly lower in the patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy (P < .01). In all patients, the crude rate of PSA control (<0.2 ng/mL) was 11 out of 26 (42%).

      Conclusions

      Dose escalation to 45 Gy did not result in acute DLT events, had similar rates of late grade 3 toxicity, and did not demonstrate higher rates of PSA control, compared with 40 Gy. While allowing for higher plan heterogeneity, the recommended dose for phase 2 study will be 40 Gy in 5 fractions.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      ASTRO Member Login
      ASTRO Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Use your society credentials to access all journal content and features.
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bolla M.
        • van Poppel H.
        • Tombal B.
        • et al.
        Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: Long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911).
        Lancet. 2012; 380: 2018-2027
        • Thompson I.M.
        • Tangen C.M.
        • Paradelo J.
        • et al.
        Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: Long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial.
        J Urol. 2009; 181: 956-962
        • Wiegel T.
        • Bartkowiak D.
        • Bottke D.
        • et al.
        Adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait-and-see after radical prostatectomy: 10-year follow-up of the ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95 trial.
        Eur Urol. 2014; 66: 243-250
        • Pisansky T.M.
        • Agrawal S.
        • Hamstra D.A.
        • et al.
        Salvage radiation therapy dose response for biochemical failure of prostate cancer after prostatectomy-A multi-institutional observational study.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 96: 1046-1053
        • Brenner D.J.
        • Martinez A.A.
        • Edmundson G.K.
        • et al.
        Direct evidence that prostate tumors show high sensitivity to fractionation (low alpha/beta ratio), similar to late-responding normal tissue.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002; 52: 6-13
        • Fowler J.
        • Chappell R.
        • Ritter M.
        Is alpha/beta for prostate tumors really low?.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001; 50: 1021-1031
        • Brenner D.J.
        • Hall E.J.
        Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999; 43: 1095-1101
        • Miralbell R.
        • Roberts S.A.
        • Zubizarreta E.
        • et al.
        Dose-fractionation sensitivity of prostate cancer deduced from radiotherapy outcomes of 5,969 patients in seven international institutional datasets: Alpha/beta = 1.4 (0.9-2.2) Gy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 82: e17-e24
        • Katz A.
        • Formenti S.C.
        • Kang J.
        Predicting biochemical disease-free survival after prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy: Risk-stratification and patterns of failure.
        Front Oncol. 2016; 6: 168
        • King C.R.
        • Freeman D.
        • Kaplan I.
        • et al.
        Stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: Pooled analysis from a multi-institutional consortium of prospective phase II trials.
        Radiother Oncol. 2013; 109: 217-221
        • Hannan R.
        • Tumati V.
        • Xie X.J.
        • et al.
        Stereotactic body radiation therapy for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer-Results from a multi-institutional clinical trial.
        Eur J Cancer. 2016; 59: 142-151
        • Canter D.
        • Greenberg R.E.
        • Horwitz E.M.
        • et al.
        Implantation of electromagnetic transponders following radical prostatectomy for delivery of IMRT.
        Can J Urol. 2010; 17: 5365-5369
        • Boike T.P.
        • Lotan Y.
        • Cho L.C.
        • et al.
        Phase I dose-escalation study of stereotactic body radiation therapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
        J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 2020-2026
        • Merrick G.S.
        • Butler W.M.
        • Dorsey A.T.
        • et al.
        Rectal function following prostate brachytherapy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000; 48: 667-674
        • Skolnik J.M.
        • Barrett J.S.
        • Jayaraman B.
        • et al.
        Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: The rolling six design.
        J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 190-195
        • Ballas L.K.
        • Luo C.
        • Chung E.
        • et al.
        Phase I trial of SBRT to the prostate fossa following prostatectomy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019; 104: 50-60
        • Cozzarini C.
        • Fiorino C.
        • Deantoni C.
        • et al.
        Higher-than-expected severe (grade 3-4) late urinary toxicity after postprostatectomy hypofractionated radiotherapy: A single-institution analysis of 1176 patients.
        Eur Urol. 2014; 66: 1024-1030
      1. Jensen, LJ, Yuh B, Wong JY, et al. Outcomes and toxicity of 313 prostate cancer patients receiving helical tomotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adv Radiat Oncol 2017;2:597-607.

      2. Salvage Radiotherapy Nomogram.
        (Available at:)
        • Pollack A.
        • Karrison T.G.
        • Balogh Jr., A.G.
        • et al.
        Short term androgen deprivation therapy without or with pelvic lymph node treatment added to prostate bed only salvage radiotherapy: The NRG Oncology/RTOG 0534 SPPORT trial.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018; 102: 1605
        • Normolle D.
        • Lawrence T.
        Designing dose-escalation trials with late-onset toxicities using the time-to-event continual reassessment method.
        J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 4426-4433

      Comments

      Commenting Guidelines

      To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:

      • We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
      • This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
      • We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
      • Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
      • Comments are not peer-reviewed.