Alayed Yasir, Loblaw Andrew, McGuffin Merrylee, Chung Hans T, Tseng Chia-Lin, D'Alimonte Laura, Cheung Patrick, Liu Stanley, Chu William, Szumacher Ewa, Helou Joelle, Ravi Ananth, Haider Masoom, Mamedov Alexandre, Zhang Liying, Morton Gerard
Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada; Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.
Radiother Oncol. 2021 Jan;154:29-35. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.09.007. Epub 2020 Sep 10.
Single-fraction HDR monotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer is appealing, but published outcomes are discouraging. An approach to improve local control is MRI-guided focal dose-escalation to the dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL). Here we report a comparison of outcomes from two phase II clinical trials with and without a focal boost.
Patients had low or intermediate-risk disease. Patients in Trial1 received a single 19 Gy HDR implant to the whole prostate. Trial2 incorporated an additional MRI-guided focal DIL boost to at least 23 Gy. ADT was not allowed. Toxicities (CTCAEv4.0) and quality of life (EPIC) were collected. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined as nadir +2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to search for predictors of BF.
Trial1 had 87 patients with a median follow-up of 62 months, while Trial2 had 60 patients with a median follow-up of 50 months. The five-year cumulative BF rate was 32.6% and 31.3%, respectively (p = 0.9). 77.5% of failures were biopsy-confirmed local failures, all of which underwent local salvage therapy. The addition of a DIL boost was not associated with worse toxicity or QOL. Baseline PSA and Gleason score correlated with BF, but none of the dosimetric parameters was a significant predictor of BF.
MRI-guided focal boost was safe and well tolerated, but did not improve local control after 19 Gy single-fraction HDR monotherapy, and the control rates were unacceptable. Single-fraction HDR monotherapy for prostate cancer should not be offered outside of clinical trials.
单次高剂量率近距离放射治疗(HDR)单药治疗局限性前列腺癌颇具吸引力,但已发表的结果却令人沮丧。一种改善局部控制的方法是在磁共振成像(MRI)引导下对前列腺内主要病灶(DIL)进行局部剂量递增。在此,我们报告两项有或无局部加量的II期临床试验结果的比较。
患者患有低危或中危疾病。试验1中的患者接受了单次19Gy HDR植入整个前列腺。试验2纳入了额外的MRI引导下对DIL的局部加量,剂量至少为23Gy。不允许进行雄激素剥夺治疗(ADT)。收集毒性反应(采用美国国立癌症研究所不良事件通用术语标准第4.0版[CTCAE v4.0])和生活质量(采用前列腺癌指数综合测定量表[EPIC])。生化复发(BF)定义为最低点值+2。进行单因素和多因素逻辑回归分析以寻找BF的预测因素。
试验1有87例患者,中位随访时间为62个月,而试验2有60例患者,中位随访时间为50个月。五年累积BF率分别为32.6%和31.3%(p = 0.9)。77.5%的复发经活检证实为局部复发,所有这些患者均接受了局部挽救治疗。增加DIL加量与更差的毒性反应或生活质量无关。基线前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)和 Gleason评分与BF相关,但没有剂量学参数是BF的显著预测因素。
MRI引导下的局部加量是安全的且耐受性良好,但在单次19Gy HDR单药治疗后并未改善局部控制,且控制率不可接受。前列腺癌的单次HDR单药治疗不应在临床试验之外提供。