Dose escalation with IMRT technique versus IMRT + HDR BRT in patients with high-risk carcinoma of the prostate – comparison of acute toxicity
Authors:
Renata Soumarová; Hana Perková; Luboš Homola; Martin Bulik; Markéta Jašková; Stanislav Machala; Halina Richterová
Authors place of work:
Nový Jičín
; Komplexní onkologické centrum
Published in the journal:
Ces Urol 2010; 14(3): 164-172
Category:
Original article
Summary
Aim:
Radiotherapy (RT) in combination with hormonal therapy is standard treatment option in high-risk prostate cancer patients. Although trials of prostate plus whole pelvic RT have not improved prostate cancer outcomes in randomized trials relative to prostate RT alone in the setting of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen suppression, elective treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes might improve diseasefree survival. A dose escalation to the prostate is possible to provide intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) or high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR BRT) technique. We compared two subgroups of high-risk patients (T3, GS 8–10 or PSA > 20).
Material and method:
The both groups underwent pelvic RT using IMRT technique (45–50.4 Gy in 25–28 fractions) and HT (goserelin + flutamid), neoadjuvant 3–4 months prior RT, concomitant HT together with RT and adjuvant HT (bicalutamid). The dose escalation was performed using IMRT 26 Gy in 13 fractions in the first subgroup or 16 Gy in 2 fractions to the reference isodose in HDR BRT subgroup. Acute toxicity scores were recorded weekly during RT and in 3 month interval post-RT using RTOG (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group) acute toxicity scales.
Results:
125 patients with a histological diagnosis were enrolled, 83 in the group with IMRT, 42 in the group with HDR BRT. Follow-up median was 18 months. Patients in IMRT subgroup were older in general, median age 68 years versus 65 years in HDR BRT subgroup (p = 0.044). The prostate volume was larger in IMRT group (median 28.7 vs. 22.5 ccm, p = 0.0001). Input IPSS was higher in IMRT group (10 vs. 5). Acute GU toxicity was significantly higher in IMRT group (GU toxicity grade 0 30% vs. 37%, grade 1 56% vs. 60%, grade 2 13% vs. 3%, grade 3 1% vs. 0%, p = 0.002). The largest difference we found in grade 2 GU toxicity. The effect of pretreatment IPSS, prostate volume or the age wasn’t observed. Also acute GIT toxicity was finded as significantly higher in the group with IMRT (G0 30% vs. 60%, G1 41% vs. 37%, G2 27% vs. 3%, G3 2% vs. 0%, p < 0.01). Again the largest difference was recorded in grade 2 GIT toxicity. G3 toxicity wasn’t noted in HDR BRT arm at all, in IMRT arm was very low.
Conclusion:
We recorded a very good therapy toleration in both study arms. Pelvic IMRT with boost to the prostate was well tolerated in this series, with low rates of grade 3 or greater acute toxicity. Pelvic lymphatic nodes RT in combination with HDR BRT dose escalation caused acute toxicity of minimal degree. Longer follow-up for outcome and late toxicity is required.
Key words:
prostate carcinoma, elective irradiation pelvic nodes, technique intensity modulated radiotherapy, interstitial brachytherapy, acute toxicity.
Zdroje
1. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowitz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radioterapy, or intersticial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 28: 969–974.
2. Pollack A, Zagars GK, Starkschall G, et al. Prostate cancer radiation dose response: Results of the M.D. Anderson phase III randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 53: 1097–1105.
3. Kuban DA, Tucker SL, Dong L, et al. Long-term results of the M.D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 70: 67–74.
4. Dearnaley DP, Hall E, Lawrence D, et al. Phase III pilot study of dose escalation using conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer: PSA control and side effects. Br J Cancer 2005; 92: 488–498.
5. Zietman AL, DeSilvio ML, Slater JD, et al. Comparison of conventional-dose vs high-dose conformal radiation therapy in clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005; 294: 1233–1239.
6. Roach MIII, Bae K, Speight J, et al. Short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy and external-beam radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: Long-term results of RTOG 8610. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 585–589.
7. Pilepich MV, Winter K, Lawton C, et al. Androgen suppression adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in prostate carcinoma – Long-term results of phase III RTOG 85-31. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61: 1285–1290.
8. Hanks GE, Pajak TF, Porter A, et al. Phase III trial of long-term adjuvant androgen deprivation after neoadjuvant hormonal cytoreduction and radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protokol 92-02. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 3972–3978.
9. Bolla M, Collette L, Blank L, et al. Long-term results with immediate androgen suppression and external irradiation in patiens with locally advanced prostate cancer (an EORTC study): A phase III randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 103–106.
10. D’Amico AV, Manola J, Loffredo M, et al. 6-Month androgen suppression plus radiation therapy vs radiation therapy alone for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004; 292: 821–827.
11. Denham JW, Steigler A, Lamb DS, et al. Short-term androgen deprivation and radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: Results from the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 96.01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2005; 6: 841–850.
12. Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A, Damber JE, Angelsen A, Fransson P, Lund JA, Tasdemir I, Hoyer M, Wiklund F, Fosså SD; Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study 7; Swedish Association for Urological Oncology 3. Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an open randomised phase III trial. Lancet 2009; 373(9660): 301–308.
13. See WA, Tyrrell CJ. Casodex trade mark Early Prostate Cancer Trialists´ Group. The addition of bicalutamide 150 mg to radiotherapy significantly improves overall survival in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2006; 132: 7–13.
14. Tyrrel CJ, Payne H, See WA, et al. Bicalutamide (Casodex) 150 mg as adjuvant to radiotherapy in patients with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer: results from the randomised Early Prostate Cancer Programme. Radiother Oncol 2005; 76: 4–10.
15. Martinez AA, Gustafson G, Gonzalez J, et al. Dose escalation using conformal high dose rate brachytherapy improves outcome in unfavorable prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 53: 316–327.
16. National Comprehensive Cancer Network®, verze 1.2010
17. Lawton C, DeSilvio ML, Roach M III, et al. An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: Updated analysis of RTOG 94–13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69: 646–655.
18. Pommier P, Chabaud S, Lagrange JL, et al. Is there a role for pelvic irradiation in localized prostate adenocarcinoma? Preliminary results of GETUG-01. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 5366–5367.
19. Lawton C, DeSilvio ML, Roach M III, et al. An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: Updated analysis of RTOG 94-13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69: 646–655.
20. Kovacs G, Pötter R, Tillmann L, et al. GEC/ESTRO-EAU recommendations on temporary brachytherapy using stepping sources for localised prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2005; 74: 137–148.
21. Trotti A, Byhardt R, Stetz J, et al. Common toxicity criteria: version 2.0. an improved reference for grading the acute effects of cancer treatment: impact on radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 47(1): 13–47.
22. Al-Mamgani A, Lebesque JV, Heemsbergen WD, Tans L, Kirkels WJ, Levendag PC, Incrocci L. Controversies in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer – what is the optimal combination of hormonal therapy and radiotherapy: a review of literature. The prostate 2010; 70(7): 701–709.
23. Milecki P, Baczyk M, Skowronek J, Antczak A, Kwias Z, Martenka P. Benefit of whole pelvic radiotherapy combined with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation for the high-risk prostate cancer. J Biomed Biotechnol 2009; 2009: 625394.
24. Roach M III, DeSilvio M, Valicenti R, et al. Whole-pelvis, ”mini-pelvis“, or prostate-only external beam radiotherapy after neoadjuvant and concurrent hormonal therapy in patiens treated in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413 trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 66(3): 647–653.
25. Bittner N, Merrick GS, Wallner KE, Butler WM, Galbreath R, Adamovich E. Whole-pelvis radiotherapy in combination with interstitial brachytherapy: Does coverage of the pelvic lymph nodes improve treatment outcome in high-risk prostate cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 76(4): 1078–1084.
26. Demanes DJ, Brandt D, Schour L, Hill DR. Excellent results from high dose rate brachytherapy and external beam for prostate cancer are not improved by androgen deprivation. Am J Clin Oncol 2009; 32(4): 342–347.
27. Liauw SL, Weichselbaum RR, Rash C, Correa D, Al-Hallaq HA, Pelizzari CA, Jani AB. Biochemical control and toxicity after intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2009; 8(3): 201–206.
28. Lips IM, Dehnad H, van Gils CH, Boeken Kruger AE, van der Heide UA, van Vulpen M. High-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer using daily fiducial markerbased position verification: acute and late toxicity in 331 patients. Radiat Oncol 2008; 21(3): 15.
29. Zelefsky MJ, Fuks Z, Hunt M, Yamada Y, Marion C, Ling CC, Amols H, Venkatraman ES, Leibel SA. High dose intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: early toxicity and biochemical outcome in 772 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 53(5): 1111–1116.
30. Viani GA, Pellizzon AC, Guimarães FS, Jacinto AA, dos Santos Novaes PE, Salvajoli JV. High dose rate and external beam radiotherapy in locally advanced prostate cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2009; 32(2): 187–190.
31. Ghadjar P, Matzinger O, Isaak B, Behrensmeier F, Stroux A, Rentsch CA, Thalmann GN, Aebersold DM. Association of urethral toxicity with dose exposure in combined high-doserate brachytherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in intermediate – and high-risk prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2009; 91(2): 237–242.
32. Matzinger O, Duclos F, van den Bergh A, Carrie C, Villà S, Kitsios P, Poortmans P, Sundar S, van der Steen-Banasik EM, Gulyban A, Collette L, Bolla M; EORTC Radiation Oncology Group. Acute toxicity of curative radiotherapy for intermediate – and high-risk localised prostate cancer in the EORTC trial 22991. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45(16): 2825–2834.
33. Akimoto T, Katoh H, Noda SE, et al. Acute genitourinary toxicity after high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy combined with hypofractionated external-beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: Second analysis to determine the correlation between the urethral dose in HDR brachytherapy and the severity of acute genitourinary toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 63(2): 472–478.
Štítky
Paediatric urologist Nephrology UrologyČlánok vyšiel v časopise
Czech Urology
2010 Číslo 3
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Microsurgical varicocelectomy in children and adolescents: prospective comparison of laparoscopic and open subinguinal repair
- Our experience with shock waves therapy in patiens with Peyronie’s disease (average follow-up of 13 months)
- Position of magnetic resonance and magnetic resonance with spectroscopy in detection of prostate cancer
- Molecular characteristics of clinically significant prostate carcinoma