Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE:To investigate predictors associated with post-treatment biopsy outcomes after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS:257 patients treated with prostate SBRT to dose levels of 32.5 Gy to >40 Gy in 5-6 fractions underwent a post-treatment biopsy performed approximately two years after treatment to evaluate local control status. 73 had% intermediate-risk disease (n = 187) and the remaining 17% (n = 43) and 10% (n = 27) had low-risk and high-risk disease, respectively. RESULTS:The incidence of positive, negative, and treatment-effect post-treatment biopsies were 15.6%, 57.6%, and 26.8%, respectively. The incidence of a positive biopsy according to dose was 37.5% (n = 9/24), 21.4% (n = 6/28), 19.4% (n = 6/31), and 10.9% (n = 19/174) for 32.5 Gy, 35 Gy, 37.5 Gy, and >40 Gy, respectively. In a multivariable model, patients treated with SBRT doses of <40 Gy and those with unfavorable-intermediate-risk or high-risk disease had higher likelihood of a positive post-treatment biopsy. A positive post-SBRT biopsy was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of subsequent PSA relapse at five years (Positive biopsy: 57%, 95% CI: 29-77% compared to negative biopsy: 7%, 95% CI: 3-14%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Based on two-year post-SBRT biopsies, excellent tumor control was achieved when dose levels of 40 Gy or higher were used. Standard SBRT dose levels of 35-37.5 Gy were associated with a higher likelihood of a positive post-treatment biopsy. Two-year positive post-treatment biopsies pre-dated the development of PSA failure in the majority of patients.

Among 84,447 radiotherapy (RT) courses for Medicare beneficiaries age ≥ 65 with prostate cancer treated with external beam RT (EBRT), brachytherapy, or both, 42,608 (51%) were delivered in hospital-affiliated and 41,695 (49%) in freestanding facilities. Freestanding centers were less likely to use EBRT + brachytherapy than EBRT (OR 0.84 [95%CI 0.84-0.84]; p < .001). Treatment was more costly in freestanding centers (mean difference $2,597 [95%CI $2,475-2,719]; p < .001). Adjusting for modality and fractionation, RT in hospital-affiliated centers was more costly (mean difference $773 [95%CI $693-853]; p < .001). Freestanding centers utilized more expensive RT delivery, but factors unrelated to RT modality or fractionation rendered RT more costly at hospital-affiliated centers.

PURPOSE:This study evaluated outcomes associated with a high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost combined with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with higher-risk localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We identified 101 patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk, unfavorable intermediate-risk, or favorable intermediate-risk with probable extra-prostatic extension treated with HDR brachytherapy (15 Gy x 1 fraction) followed by SBRT (5 Gy x 5 daily fractions to the prostate and/or seminal vesicles and/or pelvic lymph nodes). Androgen deprivation therapy was used in 55.4% of all patients (90% of high-risk, 33% of intermediate-risk). Toxicities according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0 and International Prostate Symptom Scores were prospectively documented at each followup visit. Biochemical relapse was defined as PSA nadir +2ng/mL. RESULTS:The median follow-up time after SBRT was 24.1 months. No grade ≥3 toxicities were observed. The incidence of acute and late grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicities was both 0.99%. Acute and late grade 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicities were observed in 5.9% and 9.9%, respectively. Median time to a grade 2 GU toxicity was 6 months with a 14% 2-year actuarial rate of grade 2 GU toxicity. Median International Prostate Symptom Scores at 24 months was not significantly different than baseline (6 vs. 5; p = 0.24). Inclusion of pelvic lymph nodes and absence of a rectal spacer were significantly associated with more frequent grade ≥1 GU toxicity, but not grade ≥2 GU or gastrointestinal toxicity. The 2-year biochemical relapse free survival was 97%. CONCLUSIONS:HDR brachytherapy combined with SBRT was associated with a favorable early toxicity profile and encouraging cancer control outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Radiation therapy is one of the most commonly used cancer therapeutics but genetic determinants of clinical benefit are poorly characterized. Pathogenic germline variants in ATM are known to cause ataxia-telangiectasia, a rare hereditary syndrome notable for marked radiosensitivity. In contrast, somatic inactivation of ATM is a common event in a wide variety of cancers, but its clinical actionability remains obscure. METHODS:We analyzed 20 107 consecutively treated advanced cancer patients who underwent targeted genomic sequencing as part of an institutional genomic profiling initiative and identified 1085 harboring a somatic or germline ATM mutation, including 357 who received radiotherapy (RT). Outcomes of irradiated tumors harboring ATM loss-of-function (LoF) mutations were compared with those harboring variants of unknown significance. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS:Among 357 pan-cancer patients who received 727 courses of RT, genetic inactivation of ATM was associated with improved radiotherapeutic efficacy. The 2-year cumulative incidence of irradiated tumor progression was 13.2% vs 27.5% for tumors harboring an ATM LoF vs variant of unknown significance allele, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.34 to 0.77, P = .001). The greatest clinical benefit was seen in tumors harboring biallelic ATM inactivation (HR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.06 to 0.60, P = .005), with statistically significant benefit also observed in tumors with monoallelic ATM inactivation (HR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.92, P = .02). Notably, ATM LoF was highly predictive of outcome in TP53 wild-type tumors but not among TP53-mutant tumors. CONCLUSIONS:We demonstrate that somatic ATM inactivation is associated with markedly improved tumor control following RT. The identification of a radio-sensitive tumor phenotype across multiple cancer types offers potential clinical opportunities for genomically guided RT.

BACKGROUND:Salvage partial gland ablation (sPGA) has been proposed to treat some localized radiorecurrent prostate cancer. The role of prostate biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics to identify patients eligible for sPGA is unknown. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the ability of MRI and prostate biopsy characteristics to identify an index lesion suitable for sPGA and validate this selection using detailed tumor maps created from whole-mount slides from salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) specimens. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Men who underwent sRP for recurrent prostate cancer following primary radiotherapy with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and/or brachytherapy between 2000 and 2014 at a single high-volume cancer center were eligible. Those with tumor maps, MRI and biopsy data were included in analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Primary outcome was the ability of clinicopathologic and imaging criteria to identify patients who may be eligible for sPGA based on detailed tumor map from whole-mount sRP slides. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:Of 216 men who underwent sRP following whole gland radiotherapy, tumor maps, MRI, and biopsy data were available for 77. Of these, 15 (19%) were determined to be eligible for sPGA based on biopsy-proven unilateral disease in contiguous sextant segments, a dominant lesion on MRI concordant with biopsy location or no focal region of interest, and no imaging evidence of extraprostatic disease. Review of tumor maps identified 6 additional men who would have met criteria for sPGA, resulting in sensitivity of 71% (95% C.I. 48%-89%) and specificity of 100% (lower bound of 95% C.I. 94%). None of the 15 men who met the criteria for sPGA on clinical data were identified incorrectly on tumor maps to require full gland surgery (upper bound of 95% C.I. 22%). Median tumor volume of the index lesion was 0.4 cc and recurrent cancer was noted in the apex, mid-gland, and base in 81%, 100%, and 29% of men. CONCLUSIONS:In men with recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy, biopsy findings and MRI can be used to select index lesions potentially amenable for sPGA and can guide patient evaluation for inclusion in clinical trials of sPGA following radiation failure. Larger, prospective studies are required to evaluate both the role of MRI and clinical criteria in guiding focal salvage therapy and the effectiveness of this modality for radiorecurrent prostate cancer.

PURPOSE:We investigated whether T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging findings could improve upon established prognostic indicators of metastatic disease and prostate cancer specific survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS:For a cohort of 3,406 consecutive men who underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging before prostatectomy (2,160) or radiotherapy (1,246) between 2001 and 2006, T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging exams were retrospectively interpreted and categorized as I) no focal suspicious lesion, II) organ confined focal lesion, III) focal lesion with extraprostatic extension or IV) focal lesion with seminal vesicle invasion. Clinical risk was recorded based on European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) scoring system. Survival probabilities and c-indices were estimated using Cox models and inverse probability censoring weights, respectively. RESULTS:The median followup was 10.8 years (IQR 8.6-13.0). Higher magnetic resonance imaging categories were associated with a higher likelihood of developing metastases (HR 3.5-18.1, p <0.001 for all magnetic resonance imaging categories) and prostate cancer death (HR 3.1-29.7, p <0.001-0.025); these associations were statistically independent of EAU risk categories, CAPRA scores and treatment type (surgery vs radiation). Combining EAU risk or CAPRA scores with magnetic resonance imaging categories significantly improved prognostication of metastases (c-indices: EAU: 0.798, EAU + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.872; CAPRA: 0.808, CAPRA + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.877) and prostate cancer death (c-indices: EAU 0.813, EAU + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.889; CAPRA: 0.814, CAPRA + magnetic resonance imaging: 0.892; p <0.001 for all). CONCLUSION:Magnetic resonance imaging findings of localized prostate cancer are associated with clinically relevant long-term oncologic outcomes. Combining magnetic resonance imaging and clinicopathological data results in more accurate prognostication, which could facilitate individualized patient management.

INTRODUCTION:Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) is increasingly used to treat metastatic oligorecurrence and locoregional recurrences but limited evidence/guidance exists in the setting of pelvic re-irradiation. An international Delphi study was performed to develop statements to guide practice regarding patient selection, pre-treatment investigations, treatment planning, delivery and cumulative organs at risk (OARs) constraints. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Forty-one radiation oncologists were invited to participate in three online surveys. In Round 1, information and opinion was sought regarding participants' practice. Guidance statements were developed using this information and in Round 2 participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each statement. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement. In Round 3, any statements without consensus were re-presented unmodified, alongside a summary of comments from Round 2. RESULTS:Twenty-three radiation oncologists participated in Round 1 and, of these, 21 (91%) and 22 (96%) completed Rounds 2 and 3 respectively. Twenty-nine of 44 statements (66%) achieved consensus in Round 2. The remaining 15 statements (34%) did not achieve further consensus in Round 3. Consensus was achieved for 10 of 17 statements (59%) regarding patient selection/pre-treatment investigations; 12 of 13 statements (92%) concerning treatment planning and delivery; and 7 of 14 statements (50%) relating to OARs. Lack of agreement remained regarding the minimum time interval between irradiation courses, the number/size of pelvic lesions that can be treated and the most appropriate cumulative OAR constraints. CONCLUSIONS:This study has established consensus, where possible, in areas of patient selection, pre-treatment investigations, treatment planning and delivery for pelvic SABR re-irradiation for metastatic oligorecurrence and locoregional recurrences. Further research into this technique is required, especially regarding aspects of practice where consensus was not achieved.