20081205153243_uploadsck study by dr king rob-s-08-00651
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
1/29
Elsevier Editorial System(tm) for International Journal of Radiation
Oncology*Biology*Physics
Manuscript Draft
Manuscript Number:
Title: Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: PSA Results and Toxicity of a Phase II
Clinical Trial
Article Type: Full Length Article
Section/Category: Clinical Investigation
Keywords: Prostate cancer; Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy; Hypofractionation
Corresponding Author: Dr. Christopher R. King, MD, PhD
Corresponding Author's Institution: Stanford University School of Medicine
First Author: Christopher R. King, MD, PhD
Order of Authors: Christopher R. King, MD, PhD; James D Brooks, MD; Harcharan Gill, MD; Todd Pawlicki,
PhD; Cristian Cotrutz, PhD; Joseph C Presti, MD
Manuscript Region of Origin:
Abstract: Purpose: The radiobiology of prostate cancer favors a hypofractionated dose regimen. We report
results of a prospective Phase II clinical trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate
cancer.
Methods and Materials: 41 low-risk prostate cancer patients with 6 months minimum follow-up received
36.25 Gy in five fractions of 7.25 Gy with image-guided SBRT alone using the Cyberknife. The early (6 months) urinary and rectal toxicities were assessed using validated quality of life
questionnaires (EPIC and IPSS) and the RTOG toxicity criteria. Patterns of PSA response are analyzed.
Results: The median follow-up was 33 months. There were no RTOG grade 4 acute or late rectal/urinary
complications. There were 2 patients with RTOG grade 3 late urinary toxicity and none with RTOG grade 3
rectal complications. A reduced rate of severe rectal toxicities were observed with QOD vs. QD regimen
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
2/29
(0% vs. 38%, p=0.0035). A benign PSA bounce (median 0.4 ng/mL) was observed in 12 patients (29%)
occurring at 18 months (median) after treatment. At last follow-up no patient has had a PSA failure
regardless of biochemical failure definition. Of 32 patients with 12 months minimum follow-up, 25 patients
(78%) achieved a PSA nadir
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
3/29
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
4/29
1
Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer:
PSA Results and Toxicity of a Phase II Clinical Trial
Christopher R. King, PhD, MD1, James D. Brooks, MD
2, Harcharan Gill, MD
2,
Todd Pawlicki, PhD1, Cristian Cotrutz, PhD
1, and Joseph C. Presti Jr, MD
2
1Department of Radiation Oncology
2Department of UrologyDivision of Urologic Oncology
Stanford University School of Medicine
Stanford, CA
Corresponding author: Christopher R King, PhD, MDDepartment of Radiation Oncology
Stanford University School of MedicineStanford Cancer Center
875 Blake Wilbur Drive
Stanford, CA 94305
Phone: (650) 736-0698
FAX: (650) 725-8231E-mail: [email protected]
Running Title: Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer
Key Words: prostate cancer; stereotactic body radiotherapy; PSA; Hypofractionation
anuscript
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
5/29
2
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT: none of the authors have any conflict of
interest regarding the content, treatment, drugs or technology associated with this report.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors thank Dr. Deep Patel and Dr. Wendy Hara for
their help with data collection while residents in the early phases of this trial, Dr. John
Adler for his exuberant encouragement over the years, and Dr. Jack Fowler and Dr. Dan
Kapp for discussions on radiobiology.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
6/29
3
ABSTRACT
Purpose: The radiobiology of prostate cancer favors a hypofractionated dose regimen.
We report results of a prospective Phase II clinical trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy
(SBRT) for localized prostate cancer.
Methods and Materials: 41 low-risk prostate cancer patients with 6 months minimum
follow-up received 36.25 Gy in five fractions of 7.25 Gy with image-guided SBRT alone
using the Cyberknife. The early (6 months) urinary and rectal
toxicities were assessed using validated quality of life questionnaires (EPIC and IPSS)
and the RTOG toxicity criteria. Patterns of PSA response are analyzed.
Results: The median follow-up was 33 months. There were no RTOG grade 4 acute or
late rectal/urinary complications. There were 2 patients with RTOG grade 3 late urinary
toxicity and none with RTOG grade 3 rectal complications. A reduced rate of severe
rectal toxicities were observed with QOD vs. QD regimen (0% vs. 38%, p=0.0035). A
benign PSA bounce (median 0.4 ng/mL) was observed in 12 patients (29%) occurring at
18 months (median) after treatment. At last follow-up no patient has had a PSA failure
regardless of biochemical failure definition. Of 32 patients with 12 months minimum
follow-up, 25 patients (78%) achieved a PSA nadir0.4 ng/mL. A PSA decline to
progressively lower nadirs up to 3 years after treatment was observed.
Conclusions: The early and late toxicity profile and PSA response for prostate SBRT are
highly encouraging. Continued accrual and follow-up will be necessary to confirm
durable biochemical control rates and low toxicity profiles.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
7/29
4
INTRODUCTION
In the late 1960s through early 1980s, motivated primarily by economy of
resources, a clinical program was open in the UK delivering hypofractionated
radiotherapy for prostate cancer (36 Gy in 6 fractions over three weeks). Although
staging was limited (this was the pre-PSA era), radiotherapy techniques were simple (this
was the pre-CT era) and many of these patients had high-risk features by todays criteria
(eg. bulky palpable disease or high grade), the update of that clinical experience with 22
years follow-up confirmed the long-term safety and potential effectiveness of this
treatment (1).
Modern understanding of the radiobiology of prostate cancer now offers a
biologic rationale in favor of such a hypofractionated radiotherapy course (ie. large dose
per fraction) over a conventionally fractionated one (ie. 1.8-2 Gy). The first study to
suggest that prostate cancer possesses a radiobiology uniquely different from other
cancers showed that one could quantify the sensitivity of prostate cancer to dose per
fraction by comparing the dose response with permanent low dose-rate brachytherapy to
that from fractionated external beam (2). Using a standard radiobiological model of dose
response (the linear quadratic model) this study showed that prostate cancer possessed an
unusually low ratio of ~1.5 Gy (ie. a high sensitivity to dose-per-fraction). This
ratio is low compared with the value of ~10 Gy for other cancers, and is also remarkably
lower than that of late effects for normal tissues, where it is ~3-5 Gy (3). The
implications of such a high sensitivity to dose per fraction were immediately recognized,
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
8/29
5
being that hypofractionation would be a more effective dose regimen for prostate cancer
(4).
Numerous studies have since followed the initial report of a low ratio for
prostate cancer. A recent review of 17 such studies estimated a mean ratio of 1.85
Gy (5). There are four contemporary clinical series using external beam hypofractionated
regimens, with dose per fraction ranging from 2.5 to 3.1 Gy (6-9) and one using a linac-
based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) technique delivering 5 daily fractions of 6.7
Gy (10). There are also several series using HDR brachytherapy combined with
conventionally fractionated external beam with dose-per-fraction ranging from 5.5 Gy to
11.5 Gy (11, 12) and one with HDR brachytherapy monotherapy delivering 8-9 fractions
of 6 Gy each (13). These clinical series have uniformly demonstrated excellent
biochemical control rates and low rectal and bladder toxicities with the use of
hypofractionated radiotherapy.
Fowler et al. (14) proposed several hypofractionated dose regimens for prostate
cancer based on the assumption of a low ratio. They showed that a significantly
higher therapeutic ratio (ie. simultaneous higher rates of tumor control rates and lower
incidence of toxicities) could be achieved with these dose regimens. Although none are
proposed as optimal, the gain in therapeutic ratio is proportional to the dose-per-fraction
size. In this report we present our experience with an ongoing prospective phase II
clinical trial using SBRT for localized low-risk prostate cancer that delivers 36.25 Gy in
5 fractions of 7.25 Gy, focusing on the early and late rectal/bladder toxicities as well as
the patterns of PSA response.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
9/29
6
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Patient eligibility
In December 2003 we began an IRB-approved phase II clinical trial of
hypofractionated SBRT for low-risk prostate cancer. Eligible patients were newly
diagnosed with biopsy proven prostate cancer presenting with low-risk features. The
criteria for low-risk were pre-biopsy PSA of 10 ng/mL or less, biopsy Gleason grade of
3+3 or lower, and clinical T-stage T1c or T2a/b based on the AJCC 6
th
ed. (15). We
allowed a Gleason grade of 3+4 if present in fewer than 2 out of a 10-12 core biopsy and
involving less than 5 mm in aggregate tumor length. All biopsy grading was obtained at
our institution. Patients with prior treatment (hormone therapy or TURP) were excluded.
As of 3/08 there were 53 patients enrolled in this trial, with 41 having a minimum of 6
months of follow-up who form the study population of this report. The median age was
66 years (range 48-83 years). The median initial PSA was 5.6 ng/mL (range 0.7-10, and
a single patient enrolled with a PSA of 15.6 with stage T1c, Gleason grade 3+3 involving
2 mm in 1/12 cores). There were 30 patients with clinical stage T1c, 10 were T2a and
one T2b. Biopsy Gleason grade was 3+3 in 29 patients and 3+4 in 12 patients.
Treatment specifics
The Cyberknife (Accuray, Inc., Sunnyvale CA) was used to deliver image-guided
SBRT. Three gold fiducials were placed in the prostate via trans-rectal ultrasound
guidance. A same-day CT scan was obtained with patients in the supine position and in
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
10/29
7
an alpha cradle, at 1.25 mm slice thickness and indexing. Anatomical contouring of the
prostate, seminal vesicles, rectum, bladder, penile bulb and femoral heads were done.
Dose was prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV) that consisted of a volumetric
expansion the prostate by 5 mm, reduced to 3 mm in the posterior direction. In order for
the prescription dose to cover 95% of the PTV, normalization was required to the 89-90
% isodose line (ie. the resulting dose heterogeneity was 10-11 %). In Figure 1 we show a
typical dose-volume histogram (DVH). In arriving at an optimal treatment plan great
care was made to respect the rectal tolerance, which is particularly important when
delivering hypofractionated radiotherapy. Our rectal DVH goals were
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
11/29
8
Follow-up and Toxicity scoring
Patients were followed every 3 months with PSA and quality of life (QOL)
questionnaires. All patients have baseline QOL data. The International Prostate
Symptom Score (IPSS) (16) and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) (17)
validated questionnaires were used. Toxicity was also scored on the Radiation Therapy
Oncology Group (RTOG) urinary and rectal toxicity scale (18). Available data are at
baseline and are categorized as early (at 3 months) and as late (6 months and later).
RESULTS
PSA response
The median follow-up was 33 months (range 6 to 45 months). The patterns of
PSA response after completion of SBRT show a gradual decline. Figure 2 shows the
median PSA as a function of time after RT. To date no patient has experienced a PSA
failure regardless of the biochemical failure definition used. The median PSA nadir was
0.32 ng/mL (range 0.03 to 2.65). We present in Table 1 the proportion of patients
achieving a given PSA nadir threshold at 1, 2 and 3 years after RT. We note that 25 out
of 32 patients (78%) with 12 months minimum follow-up achieved a PSA nadir0.4
ng/mL. It is also worth noting that a greater proportion of patients continue to achieve a
given nadir threshold as a function of time up to 3 years. A benign PSA bounce (defined
here as a PSA rise of 0.2 ng/mL or more above its previous nadir with a subsequent
decline to that nadir or lower) was observed in 12 patients (29%). The median time to
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
12/29
9
PSA bounce was 18 months (range 12 to 33 months) after RT and the median bounce
height was 0.39 ng/mL (range 0.2 to 2.47). We present in Figure 3 the typical pattern of
PSA for three patients experiencing a benign bounce. Note that 2 to 3 bounces occur
during the follow-up time.
Urinary/Rectal Toxicity and QOL
In Table 2 we summarize the patient self-reported urinary and rectal QOL score at
baseline, and 3 months, 1 year and 2 years after completion of SBRT. Two patients
reported terrible (QOL score 6) urinary symptoms at 3 months and were those patients
who reported mostly dissatisfied/unhappy (QOL score 4-5) at baseline. We note that
although the urinary QOL scores deteriorated somewhat at 3 months, they recovered and
in fact improved over baseline at 1 and 2 years, with over 90% of patients reporting QOL
scores below 3. The rectal QOL became worse at 3 months but never reached the big
problem QOL score. With 89% of patients reporting no problem (QOL score 1) at
baseline, about half were still reporting very small/small problem (QOL score 2-3) at 1
and 2 years, suggesting a residual of long-term low-level rectal symptoms.
In Table 3 we report the late urinary and rectal toxicities on the RTOG scale, and
compared them with the crude incidence of late toxicities from the high-dose arm of
Univ. of Texas MD Anderson (MDA) dose-escalation trial (78 Gy prescribed at the
isocenter in 2 Gy fractions using 3D conformal techniques) (19). We note that no patient
suffered any grade 4 urinary toxicity and that the incidence of grade 2/3 urinary toxicities
is higher compared with the MDA trial. There were no grade 3 or 4 rectal toxicities and
the incidence of grade 2/3 rectal toxicity is lower than seen with the MDA trial.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
13/29
10
Finally, we compare the late urinary and rectal QOL among patients treated QD
with those treated QOD in Table 4. While there were no significant differences in low-
level urinary or rectal QOL at baseline, we note that the QD group had more patients who
scored small problems compared with the QOD group. A significant improvement in
high-grade rectal toxicities was noted in the QOD group. No patient in the QOD group
reported a QOL score 4-5, for either any individual rectal symptom or for the overall
QOL, whereas in the QD group 8 patients (38%) reported a score of 4-5 for any
individual rectal symptom (p=0.0035) and 5 patients (24%) reported a score of 4-5 for the
overall QOL (p=0.048). For the urinary QOL there was no significant difference
between the QD and QOD groups (p=0.34) although 4 patients reported a score of 4-6 for
the QD group compared with 1 for the QOD group.
DISCUSSION
Urinary/Rectal Toxicity and QOL
The outcomes from this clinical trial demonstrate that a hypofractionated course
of stereotactic radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer is associated with urinary and
rectal toxicities that are of the expected nature and severity as those experienced with
conventionally fractionated courses of external beam radiotherapy. There was no severe
urinary toxicity (RTOG grade 4), and the two patients who experienced the worst
problems were those who at baseline had described their urinary QOL as mostly
dissatisfied/unhappy. Interestingly, after peaking at around 3 months, most patients
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
14/29
11
returned to near baseline levels of urinary satisfaction, and many have in fact improved
above baseline levels at two years. An increase in the use of medications (eg. alpha
blockers) is likely to be the explanation for this observation. Although the incidence of
low-grade (RTOG grade 1 and 2) late urinary toxicity is about double that observed from
the MDA dose-escalation trial, it has not resulted in a significant degradation of patients
urinary QOL. An evolving refinement of our technique to improve the dosimetry with
the Cyberknife by using a urethral tuning structure to limit the dose heterogeneity from
encroaching on the urethra will likely lessen this toxicity in the future.
In comparing our results we note that the MDA data are of a much longer median
follow-up time of 8.7 years. In addition, their study showed an actuarial increase in
toxicity with time achieving a plateau at around 5 years (19). Since our follow-up is
much shorter we must remain cautious about the interpretation of our late urinary and
rectal toxicities since it is fully expected that these will continue to appear at least up to 5
years after treatment. We also note that comparison with the MDA results assumes that
our patients had a similar baseline QOL profile as theirs.
There were no severe rectal toxicities (RTOG grade 3 or 4) observed. A decline
in patients rectal QOL score appears to plateau around 3 months after RT, persisting at
the very small/small problem up to 2 years after RT. No significant difference in the
incidence of low-grade rectal toxicity (RTOG grade 1 and 2) was observed when
compared with the MDA dose-escalation trial.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
15/29
12
QD vs. QOD
Our data allowed us to study differences in late toxicities between patients treated
over 5 consecutive days (QD) and those treated every other day (QOD). A significant
improvement was observed for late rectal problems when treatment was given QOD,
where 0/20 patients reported a score of 4 or 5 compared with 8/21 patients when treated
QD (p=0.0035) for any rectal symptom, and 0/20 vs. 5/21, respectively, for overall rectal
QOL (p=0.048). Although fewer patients experienced a QOL score 4-6 for late urinary
problems with QOD vs. QD treatment, 1/20 vs. 4/21, it was not significant (p=0.34). The
apparent improvement in rectal toxicity with QOD vs. QD regimen, if real, is interesting
for what it suggests about the repair kinetics of hypofractionated radiation damage to the
rectum. The data for late bladder and rectal toxicity suggests a repair half-life of ~1 hour
(eg. 20). Thus after 24 hours the repair of sublethal damage is complete (it should be
nearly complete after 5 half-lives) and no further gain (or reduced toxicity) would be
observed with a longer interval between dose fractions. One possible explanation of our
observations is for a much longer repair half-life, on the order of at least ~8 hours, since
repair is incomplete by 24 hours but approximately complete by 48 hours. This seems
unlikely since it is inconsistent with previous data on repair kinetics. Other possible
explanations are that either we are seeing the effects of normal tissue repopulation of
rectal mucosa, or that late damage actually results from vascular injury. Although these
are only hypotheses, it is possible that either a separate mechanism of repair for late rectal
effects or a different nature of radiation damage is present with hypofractionation. We
are cautious about over-interpreting this data, but given our observations we favor
treating with a longer interval between fractions for hypofractionated dose regimens.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
16/29
13
PSA response
The patterns of PSA response from our trial are highly encouraging. It is
interesting to note the high proportion of patients (78%) with 12 or more months of
follow-up achieving a low PSA nadir of 0.4 ng/mL. It is also worth noting that the PSA
nadir achieved is progressively lower as time goes by, up to 3 years. This continued late
PSA response after RT for prostate cancer is well-known and is consistent with the
radiation biology of prostate cancer behaving similarly to that of late effects in normal
tissues. What if our radiobiological hypothesis for prostate cancer is wrong and that it in
fact possesses an ratio that is similar to other tumors (ie. ~10 Gy)? In that case the
tumor dose from our hypofractionated regimen, EQD2 = 52 Gy, would be seriously
inadequate. An estimate of the 5-year biochemical control rate based on the dose-
response for low-risk prostate cancer is predicted to be only ~40% for 52 Gy, as opposed
to ~90% for 78 Gy. Although our follow-up time is relatively brief, we have not
observed a biochemical failure so far.
We have also shown that a benign PSA bounce was present after hypofractionated
RT at roughly the same frequency, timing and magnitude as has been described after
permanent brachytherapy (21) or after external beam radiotherapy (22).
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
17/29
14
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that hypofractionated radiotherapy for localized prostate
cancer has an early and late toxicity profile no worse than with dose-escalated
radiotherapy delivered at conventional fractionation. The favorable biochemical response
observed supports the radiobiological assumption upon which the rationale for prostate
cancer hypofractionation is based. Continued pursuit of this trial seems warranted but
with reasonable caution however, as longer follow-up will be necessary to confirm
durable biochemical control rates and low late toxicity profiles.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
18/29
15
FIGURE CAPTIONS
Figure 1. Dose volume histogram achieved with the Cyberknife for a typical prostate
cancer patient. Dose is normalized to cover the 95% of the PTV.
Figure 2. PSA response plotted as median PSA as a function of time after SBRT. The
error bar is +/- one standard deviation from the mean (SEM).
Figure 3. Benign PSA bounce as seen in three representative patients. Note that a PSA
bounce can occur several times during the available follow-up.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
19/29
16
REFERENCES
1. Lloyd-Davies RW, Collins CD, Swan AV. Carcinoma of prostate treated by radical
external beam radiotherapy using hypofractionation. Twenty-two years' experience
(1962-1984). Urology 1990;36:107-11.
2. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate
carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;43:1095-101.
3. Brenner DJ. Fractionation and late rectal toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
2004;60:1013-15.
4. Duchesne GM, Peters LJ. What is the ratio for prostate cancer? Rationale for
hypofractionated high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
1999;44:747-8.
5. Dasu A. Is the value for prostate tumours low enough to be safely used in clinical
trials? Clinical Oncology 2007;19:289-301.
6. Yeoh EE, Holloway RH, Fraser RJ, et al. Hypofractionated vs. conventionally
fractionated radiation therapy for prostate carcinoma: updated results of a phase III
randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66:1072-83.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
20/29
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
21/29
18
13. Yoshioka Y, Nose T, Yoshida K, et al. High-dose rate brachytherapy as monotherapy
for localized prostate cancer: a retrospective analysis with special focus on tolerance and
chronic toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:213-220.
14. Fowler JF, Ritter MA, Chappell RJ, and Brenner DJ. What hypofractionated
protocols should be tested for prostate cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.
2003;56:1093-104.
15. Greene FL, Page DL, Flemming ID, et al. AJCC Manual for staging cancer. 6th ed.
New York: Springer Verlag 2002;309-13.
16. Barry MJ, Fowler FJ Jr, OLeary MP, et al. The American Urological Association
symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Measurement Committee of the
American Urological Association. J Urol 1992;148:1549-64.
17. Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS, et al. Development and validation of the expanded
prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related
quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology 2000;56:899-905.
18. Common toxicity criteria. National Institutes of Health publication (Version 2.0)
1998.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
22/29
19
19. 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.
20. Guerrero M, Li XA. Halftime for repair of sublethal damage in normal bladder and
rectum: an analysis of clinical data from cervix brachytherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2006
Aug 21;51(16):4063-71.
21. Crook J, Gillan C, Yeung I, et al. PSA kinetics and PSA bounce following permanent
seed prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;69:426-33.
22. Horwitz EM, Levy LB, Thames HD, et al. Biochemical and clinical significance of
the posttreatment prostate-specific antigen bounce for prostate cancer patients treated
with external beam radiation therapy alone: a multiinstitutional pooled analysis. Cancer
2006;107:1496-502.
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
23/29
100
80
%Volume
Bladder
Rectum
Lt femur
Rt femur
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80
% Normalized Dose
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
24/29
10
0
2
4
6
8
MedianPSA
SEM
0 6 12 18 24 30
Months after RT
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
25/29
0
2
4
6
8
0 6 12 18 24 30 3
PSA
(ng/mL)
Months after RT
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
26/29
Table 1: Proportion of patients achieving a given PSA nadir threshold as a function of
time after radiotherapy
% achieving PSA nadir by follow-up time
PSA nadir At 1 year
(32 pts)
At 2 years
(17 pts)
At 3 years
(15 pts)
1 ng/mL 53% 70% 93%
0.6 ng/mL 31% 70% 87%
0.4 ng/mL 19% 53% 67%
0.2 ng/mL 9% 6% 40%
PSA: prostate specific antigen
SBRT: stereotactic body radiotherapy
le
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
27/29
Table 2: Urinary QOL from IPSS and rectal QOL from EPIC, as a function of time after
SBRT
% with given QOL score, Urinary*
QOL score (IPSS) Baseline 3 months 1 year 2 years
0-1 51% 37% 44% 92%
2-3 41% 58% 52% 8%
4-5 8% - 4% -
6 - 5% - -
*Urinary QOL (IPSS) scale: 0-1 (delighted/pleased); 2-3 (mostly satisfied/mixed);
4-5 (mostly dissatisfied/unhappy); 6 (terrible)
% with given QOL score, Rectal**
QOL score (EPIC) Baseline 3 months 1 year 2 years
1 89% 37% 46% 45%
2-3 11% 48% 50% 45%
4 - 16% 4% 9%
5 - - - -
**Rectal QOL (EPIC) scale:1 (no problem); 2-3 (very small/small problem);
4 (moderate problem); 5 (big problem)
QOL: quality of life
IPSS: international prostate symptom scoreEPIC: expanded prostate cancer index composite
SBRT: stereotactic body radiotherapy
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
28/29
Table 3: Late urinary and rectal toxicity on the RTOG scale, compared with results from
the Univ. of Texas MD Anderson (MDA) dose-escalation trial (78 Gy at 2 Gy per
fraction group)
RTOG gradeUrinary 0 I II III IV
This trial, % (no. pts) 30% (11) 41% (15) 24% (9) 5% (2) -
MDA dose-escalation trial,
% (no. pts)
76% (114) 14% (21) 7% (11) 3% (5) -
RTOG grade
Rectal 0 I II III IV
This trial, % (no. pts) 51% (20) 33% (13) 15% (6) - -
MDA dose-escalation trial,
% (no. pts)
47% (71) 28% (42) 19% (28) 7% (10) -
RTOG: Radiation therapy Oncology Group
-
8/14/2019 20081205153243_uploadsCK Study by Dr King ROB-S-08-00651
29/29
Table 4: Comparison of late urinary and late rectal toxicity from EPIC between
consecutive daily treatments (QD) and those delivered three times a week (QOD)
URINARY
QD QOD p-value***
Overall urinary QOL
score 4-6 (Mostly
Dissatisfied orUnhappy or Terrible)
19% (4/21) 5% (1/20) p=0.34
Baseline urinary QOLscore 3 (Mixed)
38% (8/21) 15% (3/20) p=0.16
RECTAL
Any item* score 4-5
(Moderate or Big
problem)
38% (8/21) 0% (0/20) p=0.0035
Overall rectal QOL**
score 4-5 (Moderate orBig problem)
24% (5/21) 0% (0/20) p=0.048
Baseline rectal QOLscore 2 (Very small
problem)
19% (4/21) 0% (0/20) p=0.11
*urgency, frequency, control, bloody stool, pain
**bowel habits (at 6 months or later)***Fishers exact test (two-tailed)
QOL: quality of life
EPIC: expanded prostate cancer index composite