» Articles » PMID: 22537541

Updated Results and Patterns of Failure in a Randomized Hypofractionation Trial for High-risk Prostate Cancer

Overview
Specialties Oncology
Radiology
Date 2012 Apr 28
PMID 22537541
Citations 71
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To report long-term results and patterns of failure after conventional and hypofractionated radiation therapy in high-risk prostate cancer.

Methods And Materials: This randomized phase III trial compared conventional fractionation (80 Gy at 2 Gy per fraction in 8 weeks) vs hypofractionation (62 Gy at 3.1 Gy per fraction in 5 weeks) in combination with 9-month androgen deprivation therapy in 168 patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), freedom from local failure (FFLF), and freedom from distant failure (FFDF) were analyzed.

Results: In a median follow-up of 70 months, biochemical failure (BF) occurred in 35 of the 168 patients (21%) in the study. Among these 35 patients, local failure (LF) only was detected in 11 (31%), distant failure (DF) only in 16 (46%), and both LF and DF in 6 (17%). In 2 patients (6%) BF has not yet been clinically detected. The risk reduction by hypofractionation was significant in BF (10.3%) but not in LF and DF. We found that hypofractionation, with respect to conventional fractionation, determined only an insignificant increase in the actuarial FFBF but no difference in FFLF and FFDF, when considering the entire group of patients. However, an increase in the 5-year rates in all 3 endpoints-FFBF, FFLF, and FFDF-was observed in the subgroup of patients with a pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) level of 20 ng/mL or less. On multivariate analysis, the type of fractionation, iPSA level, Gleason score of 4+3 or higher, and T stage of 2c or higher have been confirmed as independent prognostic factors for BF. High iPSA levels and Gleason score of 4+3 or higher were also significantly associated with an increased risk of DF, whereas T stage of 2c or higher was the only independent variable for LF.

Conclusion: Our results confirm the isoeffectiveness of the 2 fractionation schedules used in this study, although a benefit in favor of hypofractionation cannot be excluded in the subgroup of patients with an iPSA level of 20 ng/mL or less. The α/β ratio might be more appropriately evaluated by FFLF than FFBF results, at least in high-risk disease.

Citing Articles

Image-guided Hypofractionated Radiotherapy as an Alternative to Radical Prostatectomy in Localized Prostate Cancer in Elderly Patients with Low Life Expectancy.

Jain N, Jain A, Sharma R, Sachdeva K, Kaur A, Sudan M Ann Afr Med. 2024; 23(4):680-683.

PMID: 39279173 PMC: 11556477. DOI: 10.4103/aam.aam_216_23.


Radiobiological Meta-Analysis of the Response of Prostate Cancer to Different Fractionations: Evaluation of the Linear-Quadratic Response at Large Doses and the Effect of Risk and ADT.

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.


Linac-based versus MR-guided SBRT for localized prostate cancer: a comparative evaluation of acute tolerability.

Nicosia L, Mazzola R, Rigo M, Giaj-Levra N, Pastorello E, Ricchetti F Radiol Med. 2023; 128(5):612-618.

PMID: 37055672 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-023-01624-7.


Preliminary Analysis of a Phase II Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer With High-Risk Features After Radical Prostatectomy.

Laughlin B, Voss M, Toesca D, Daniels T, Golafshar M, Keole S Adv Radiat Oncol. 2023; 8(2):101143.

PMID: 36845611 PMC: 9943785. DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.101143.


Prostate Cancer Treatment-Related Toxicity: Comparison between 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D-CRT) and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) Techniques.

Tonetto F, Magli A, Moretti E, Guerini A, Tullio A, Reverberi C J Clin Med. 2022; 11(23).

PMID: 36498488 PMC: 9737605. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11236913.