Deriving Prostate Alpha-beta Ratio Using Carefully Matched Groups, Long Follow-up and the Phoenix Definition of Biochemical Failure
Overview
Affiliations
Purpose: Prior studies have derived low values of alpha-beta ratio (a/ß) for prostate cancer of approximately 1-2 Gy. These studies used poorly matched groups, differing definitions of biochemical failure, and insufficient follow-up.
Methods And Materials: National Comprehensive Cancer Network low- or low-intermediate risk prostate cancer patients, treated with external beam radiotherapy or permanent prostate brachytherapy, were matched for prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, T-stage, percentage of positive cores, androgen deprivation therapy, and era, yielding 118 patient pairs. The Phoenix definition of biochemical failure was used. The best-fitting value for a/ß was found for up to 90-month follow-up using maximum likelihood analysis, and the 95% confidence interval using the profile likelihood method. Linear quadratic formalism was applied with the radiobiological parameters of relative biological effectiveness = 1.0, potential doubling time = 45 days, and repair half-time = 1 hour. Bootstrap analysis was performed to estimate uncertainties in outcomes, and hence in a/ß. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying the values of the radiobiological parameters to extreme values.
Results: The value of a/ß best fitting the outcomes data was >30 Gy, with lower 95% confidence limit of 5.2 Gy. This was confirmed on bootstrap analysis. Varying parameters to extreme values still yielded best-fit a/ß of >30 Gy, although the lower 95% confidence interval limit was reduced to 0.6 Gy.
Conclusions: Using carefully matched groups, long follow-up, the Phoenix definition of biochemical failure, and well-established statistical methods, the best estimate of a/ß for low and low-tier intermediate-risk prostate cancer is likely to be higher than that of normal tissues, although a low value cannot be excluded.
Pardo-Montero J, Gonzalez-Crespo I, Gomez-Caamano A, Gago-Arias A Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(14).
PMID: 37509320 PMC: 10377316. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15143659.
Boyer M, Papagikos M, Kiteley R, Vujaskovic Z, Wu J, Lee W Radiat Oncol. 2017; 12(1):14.
PMID: 28086825 PMC: 5237336. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-016-0758-8.
Boonstra P, Taylor J, Smolska-Ciszewska B, Behrendt K, Dworzecki T, Gawkowska-Suwinska M Br J Radiol. 2016; 89(1061):20150957.
PMID: 26903392 PMC: 4985475. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20150957.
Smolska-Ciszewska B, Miszczyk L, Bialas B, Fijalkowski M, Plewicki G, Gawkowska-Suwinska M Radiat Oncol. 2015; 10:60.
PMID: 25884489 PMC: 4356106. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-015-0366-z.
Behrendt K, Nowicka E, Gawkowska-Suwinska M, Plewicki G, Smolska-Ciszewska B, Giglok M Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2014; 19(5):337-42.
PMID: 25184059 PMC: 4150229. DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2014.02.006.