Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients have excellent outcomes, with treatment modality often selected by perceived effects on quality of life. Acute urinary symptoms are common during external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), while chroni...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vainshtein Jeffrey, Abu-Isa Eyad, Olson Karin B, Ray Michael E, Sandler Howard M, Normolle Dan, Litzenberg Dale W, Masi Kathryn, Pan Charlie, Hamstra Daniel A
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2012-06-01
Series:Radiation Oncology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ro-journal.com/content/7/1/82
id doaj-79341f1db3d84b26bc5334518c86e391
record_format Article
spelling doaj-79341f1db3d84b26bc5334518c86e3912020-11-25T02:46:32ZengBMCRadiation Oncology1748-717X2012-06-01718210.1186/1748-717X-7-82Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapyVainshtein JeffreyAbu-Isa EyadOlson Karin BRay Michael ESandler Howard MNormolle DanLitzenberg Dale WMasi KathrynPan CharlieHamstra Daniel A<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients have excellent outcomes, with treatment modality often selected by perceived effects on quality of life. Acute urinary symptoms are common during external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), while chronic symptoms have been linked to urethral dose. Since most low-risk PCa occurs in the peripheral zone (PZ), we hypothesized that EBRT using urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (US-IMRT) could improve urinary health-related quality of life (HRQOL) while maintaining high rates of PCa control.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) defined low-risk PCa with no visible lesion within 5 mm of the prostatic urethra on MRI were randomized to US-IMRT or standard (S-) IMRT. Prescription dose was 75.6 Gy in 41 fractions to the PZ + 3–5 mm for US-IMRT and to the prostate + 3 mm for S-IMRT. For US-IMRT, mean proximal and distal urethral doses were limited to 65 Gy and 74 Gy, respectively. HRQOL was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index (EPIC) Quality of Life questionnaire. The primary endpoint was change in urinary HRQOL at 3 months.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>From June 2004 to November 2006, 16 patients were randomized, after which a futility analysis concluded that continued accrual was unlikely to demonstrate a difference in the primary endpoint. Mean change in EPIC urinary HRQOL at 3 months was −0.5 ± 11.2 in the US-IMRT arm and +3.9 ± 15.3 in the S-IMRT arm (p = 0.52). Median PSA nadir was higher in the US-IMRT arm (1.46 vs. 0.78, p = 0.05). At 4.7 years median follow-up, three US-IMRT and no S-IMRT patients experienced PSA failure (p = 0.06; HR 8.8, 95% CI 0.9–86). Two out of 3 patients with PSA failure had biopsy-proven local failure, both located contralateral to the original site of disease.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Compared with S-IMRT, US-IMRT failed to improve urinary HRQOL and resulted in higher PSA nadir and inferior biochemical control. The high rate of PSA failure and contralateral local failures in US-IMRT patients, despite careful selection of MRI-screened low-risk patients, serve as a cautionary tale for focal PCa treatments.</p> http://www.ro-journal.com/content/7/1/82Urethral-sparing IMRTFocal therapiesLow risk prostate cancerUrinary quality-of-life
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Vainshtein Jeffrey
Abu-Isa Eyad
Olson Karin B
Ray Michael E
Sandler Howard M
Normolle Dan
Litzenberg Dale W
Masi Kathryn
Pan Charlie
Hamstra Daniel A
spellingShingle Vainshtein Jeffrey
Abu-Isa Eyad
Olson Karin B
Ray Michael E
Sandler Howard M
Normolle Dan
Litzenberg Dale W
Masi Kathryn
Pan Charlie
Hamstra Daniel A
Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
Radiation Oncology
Urethral-sparing IMRT
Focal therapies
Low risk prostate cancer
Urinary quality-of-life
author_facet Vainshtein Jeffrey
Abu-Isa Eyad
Olson Karin B
Ray Michael E
Sandler Howard M
Normolle Dan
Litzenberg Dale W
Masi Kathryn
Pan Charlie
Hamstra Daniel A
author_sort Vainshtein Jeffrey
title Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
title_short Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
title_full Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
title_fullStr Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
title_full_unstemmed Randomized phase II trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
title_sort randomized phase ii trial of urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy in low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy
publisher BMC
series Radiation Oncology
issn 1748-717X
publishDate 2012-06-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients have excellent outcomes, with treatment modality often selected by perceived effects on quality of life. Acute urinary symptoms are common during external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), while chronic symptoms have been linked to urethral dose. Since most low-risk PCa occurs in the peripheral zone (PZ), we hypothesized that EBRT using urethral sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (US-IMRT) could improve urinary health-related quality of life (HRQOL) while maintaining high rates of PCa control.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) defined low-risk PCa with no visible lesion within 5 mm of the prostatic urethra on MRI were randomized to US-IMRT or standard (S-) IMRT. Prescription dose was 75.6 Gy in 41 fractions to the PZ + 3–5 mm for US-IMRT and to the prostate + 3 mm for S-IMRT. For US-IMRT, mean proximal and distal urethral doses were limited to 65 Gy and 74 Gy, respectively. HRQOL was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index (EPIC) Quality of Life questionnaire. The primary endpoint was change in urinary HRQOL at 3 months.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>From June 2004 to November 2006, 16 patients were randomized, after which a futility analysis concluded that continued accrual was unlikely to demonstrate a difference in the primary endpoint. Mean change in EPIC urinary HRQOL at 3 months was −0.5 ± 11.2 in the US-IMRT arm and +3.9 ± 15.3 in the S-IMRT arm (p = 0.52). Median PSA nadir was higher in the US-IMRT arm (1.46 vs. 0.78, p = 0.05). At 4.7 years median follow-up, three US-IMRT and no S-IMRT patients experienced PSA failure (p = 0.06; HR 8.8, 95% CI 0.9–86). Two out of 3 patients with PSA failure had biopsy-proven local failure, both located contralateral to the original site of disease.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Compared with S-IMRT, US-IMRT failed to improve urinary HRQOL and resulted in higher PSA nadir and inferior biochemical control. The high rate of PSA failure and contralateral local failures in US-IMRT patients, despite careful selection of MRI-screened low-risk patients, serve as a cautionary tale for focal PCa treatments.</p>
topic Urethral-sparing IMRT
Focal therapies
Low risk prostate cancer
Urinary quality-of-life
url http://www.ro-journal.com/content/7/1/82
work_keys_str_mv AT vainshteinjeffrey randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT abuisaeyad randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT olsonkarinb randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT raymichaele randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT sandlerhowardm randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT normolledan randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT litzenbergdalew randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT masikathryn randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT pancharlie randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
AT hamstradaniela randomizedphaseiitrialofurethralsparingintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyinlowriskprostatecancerimplicationsforfocaltherapy
_version_ 1724757703273742336